GAGGED !

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XLIX, Issue 12657, 20 November 1905, Page 2

GAGGED !

(Christchurch "Truth.") I The compromise on the Slander Bill at the end of a, long stonewall was the compromise of m'Sn worn out in body and mentally fatigued, who accepted because they were unable to hold out longer. The Opposition is only human, and Mr. Massey is not a piece of machinery, capable of going on for ever. Ho has worked steadily through a long and arduous session, doing singlehanded the work of a. Leader of a Party, organising his forces through the colony, and attending untiringly to las legislative, duties. On- the top of this he has been compelled to take part in a great fight for tree speech, which has exhausted the remaining energies of the faithful band who follow him, and neither he nor the Opposition Avas in a condition to continue the struggle indefinitely. Mr. Massey declared that the compromise was still far from meeting with his approval, but it was better than the Government's original proposal, and as such he would be compelled to accept it. While Mr. Massey was, of course, convinced that the amendment was an improvement on the original, we imagine that there is no doubt as to what would have been his attitude had the Party been physically capable of further obstructing the Bill. As •it stands, the measure is a disgraceful scandal upon the colony. It is evidently aimed at two men in particular, Mr. Meiklo and Mr. Braund, and at tho critics of the Government generally. Under this atrocious Bill anyone who speaks words that are likely to bring his political opponents into contempt, or to injure him in his profession is liable to a criminal prosecution, and a long term of imprisonment, Erovided he utters the words in the earing of twenty persons at a public meeting. The petty slanderer who is tho ourse of society, who whispers slanderous mis-statsments about his friends or rivals, gets off scot free, but tho politician who, on the public platform, denounces the £40 steal, or the Mapo'urika travelling expenses scandal, or pours ridicule or contempt upon the weaklings of the Ministry is liable to heavy penalties. It is a crime to injure the Hon. Charles' Mills in his profession of polities in this country, or to bring him ; into contempt by a reference to the pocketing ot £75 travelling expenses which lie didn't incur. It is a crime to asjsei"t from the public platform that the Premier had no right to pocket a similar sum in connection with his Hinemoa trip. It is a crime to accuse tho Ministry jointly and severally of corruption or dishonesty. By this Bill, which the Government has *just passed into law, the statutes which have been in force in England for centuries, and which have always been entirely adequate in that country, are declared to bo utterly insufficient to.meet tho case in New Zealand. It was quite evident from the tone of the debate that Ministers' personal grievances ware the mainspring of the Bill. Its object was avowedly for the purpose of gagging thoso audacious critics who have > not hesitated to impeach the Government from the public plaTlbrm. The compromisa which was arrived at does not affedfc this result, and it_is a pity that tho Opposition, which liacl so courageously fought for the maintenance of-a cherished public right, should have beenjiforced to accept a modification whion leaves the Bili entirely effective for tho purpose for which it was intended by its disingenuous and autocratic promoters. The private slanderer can wag his malicious tongue unre-

strained, but the public man who from th>a public platform airs a public grievance to a public meeting as the only ireans of obtaining redress for a great wrong, will invite the brand of felony iijxm nis brow in addition to the vicil liability he already risks. There is a new terror to public speakers, a new risk to politicians who oppose or impeach tho Government. Let the political candidate beware. The BiJl has been specially passed to gag him. it will bo freely used for that purpose. Every man who criticises Tammany 01 dares dispute the Administration of Seddon and Co. is liable to a punishment as severe and more drastic -than any penalty for lose majeste imposed in Germany or Russia. There a man may speak the truth; here the truth is no mitigation of the offence. Indeed, tho more true the criticism the heavier the penalty the critic will have to pay under Mr. Seddon's new law.