... in one easy lesson

Rev. Frank Hartley (Methodist, one of the five Victoria clergymen who accompanied the protest delegation to Canberra on April 27):

"I know there are people of all shades of opinion alive to the fact that it is the Communists today, and after they are suppressed, tomorrow it is the Jews, and then the trade unions will be split in two and then it will be the Church—and then war." Freethought Society, Melbourne University:

"We protest emphatically against the threatened ban on the Australian Communist Party. Such action is an infringement of the basic liberties which are essential to the development and progress of society..."—(Farrago, 22/3/50.)

Professor Wright (Physiology, Melbourne) :

Referring to the clause in the Bill which makes a branded "Communist" responsible for proving his innocence) :

"When you abolish an organisation and accuse a person of being a member of it, how on earth can anyone prove that one is not a member? The only person who can show the accused to be innocent is the recording officer of that organisation. But the organisation having been abolished, the accused's only way of proving his innocence is abolished."—(To the M.U. Political Science Society, 11/5/50.)

Professor Maxwell (English, Melbourne) :

"The only way to combat an ideogy you don't like is to practise its best ideals. The bad ones will fade away."—(Ibid.)—(The Labour, Labour Party and Liberal Clubs of M.U. have come out in opposition.)

Mrs. Jessie Street (graduate of Sydney University, wife of the Chief Justice and Lieut-Governor of New South Wales, former Labour Parliamentary candidate, president of N.S.W. Peace Council):

"I have been asked to comment on the Bill

"I wish to recall the great bravery and self-sacrifice displayed by the men and women of all races in World War II, waged by the United Nations against the Axis Powers of the Anti-Comintern Pact.

"I also recall the democratic enthusiasm aroused among all peoples of the United Nations by the promise that after the war they would enjoy liberty, equality, independence, selfgovernment and rising standards of living.

"How many lives were gladly given that these great liberties should be enjoyed by all peoples! When the U.N. was formed, these promises—all of them—were included in the U.N. Charter.

"What happened? Those who claim equality for men and women, or equal treatment for white and coloured races are called Communists! Those who support Independence and equality for the peoples of all countries are called Communists!

"Those who work for rising living standards for the people are called Communists! Those who seek to guard our precious heritage of democratic rights and civil liberties are called Communists!

" ... Is the U.N. Charter a Communist document?

"A Bill is before the Commonwealth Partliament which aims to deprive Australians of the democratic liberties and civil rights which have been won in countless bloody struggles since the time of Magna Carta.

"Furthermore the foundation principle of British justice, that a person is innocent till he is proved guilty, is to be sacrificed."—(Tribune, 6/5/50.)

Mrs. E. Madeleine Wood, B.A. (widow of the late Professor G. Arnold Wood, History, Sydney; her son is well-known to many V.U.C. students):

"I wish to support the statements of Mrs. Jessie Street about the Anti-Communist Bill. . . .

"The Bill violates not only the individual clauses, but the whole spirit of the United Nations Charter which all members of Parliament are pledged to support. . . .

"How can any man or women have freedom from fear' when, 'on information received,' he may at any time, with no reason being given, be denounced as a Communist?

"Some of us have worked actively for peace. . . . Are we to be denounced and jailed for subversive activity if we venture to criticise our leaders for not strenuously seeking the greatest common measure of agreement with the leaders of other nations, rather than exaggerating differences of opinion, and thus stirring up suspicion and hatred?"—(Tribune, 13/5/50.)

Mr. A. E. Monk (president of the Australian Council of Trade Unions):

"It is obvious that this Bill is designed to pave the way for attacks on the whole trade union movement.

. . . It is the first step to fascism."—(Tribune, 17/5/50.)

Mr. J. Healy (secretary, Australian Waterside Workers' Federation):

"Whatever one's opinions of the Communist Party or of Communists, this Bill provides no boundaries; its boundaries of action depend entirely upon the whims of the administrators."—(Circular to his unions, May, 1950.)