CABARET BAN.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVIII, Issue 29, 4 February 1937, Page 16

CABARET BAN.

SAILORS IN SYDNEY.

OTHER RESTRICTIONS, TOO. MINISTER ISSUES AN EDICT. , (Prom Our Own Correspondent.) SYDNEY, January 29.

The other day two naval men—an A.B. and a petty officer—called in at a Sydney cabaret, -and were refused admission because they were not in evening drese. The petty officer pointed out that they were wearing "undress uniform," which is usually acceptable at such places, but the manager was obdurate, and they had to go.

Naturally there has been some newspaper correspondence about this, and several people have expressed their regret that the Navy and its uniform should have been slighted here in this contemptuous way. But it appears that the Federal authorities are not prepared to give the people of Australia a lead in • impressing on everybody the desirability of showing a proper degree of respect and consideration for the Navy, and its representatives. For a Ministerial edict has been issued by the Minister of the Interior (that same Mr. Paterson whose name will go down in history inseparably linked with the name of Mrs. Freer) announcing that when in future His Majesty's ships are at Jervis Bay—one of the recognised naval training stations on the New South Wales coast —"officers and ratings shall not use the tennis courts, the golf links nor the swimming pool at any time." Out of Bounds. All these areas are to be regarded as "out of bounds," and the reason is that the Commonwealth Government has been trying to organise Jervis Bay as a tourist resort, and therefore wishes all the available forms of sport and relaxation to be reserved for the use and enjoyment of visitors. Quite apart from the question of respect for the naval uniform to which I have already adverted, this edict i raises practical problems which the authorities must face almost immediately. Next month the ships of the Australian naval squadron will vieit Jervis Bay for manoeuvres. This annual training is a period of heavy and intensive work in which the whole personnel of the Navy, officers and men alike, must participate. This means that for about a fortnight some 2400 men arid 200 officers will make Jervis Bay their home; and if Mr. Paterson's new decree is carried into effect they will be bottled up on shipboard even during the short periods allowed them for recreation. It is true that they will have the use of a small area attached to the old Naval College, which will accommodate two cricket teams at once—less than fifty members out of 2600. But they will not be allowed to play on the tennis courts or ewim in the very commodious bathing pool, or use -the golf links—which, ironically enough, were laid out and formed by cadete at the Naval College in "fatigue," without costing the Federal Government a penny. What these 2600 men, more or less, are to do with their spare time is not yet evident. Jervis Bay Sharks. Apparently Mr. Paterson does not care, and he seems to be equally oblivious of the fact that if the men may not swim in the bathing pool they must take their daily dip in the waters of Jervis Bay, which is, as "Smith's Weekly" reminds us, "renowned for the quantity and quality of its sharks." From past experience of Mr. Paterson and his eccentricities, it is fair tc assume that he had not attempted tc acquaint himself with all the facts o< the case when he made his announcement, and that "he had not troubled tc reflect seriously on the probable consequences of his action. But this highhanded and irresponsible utterance indicates clearly enough that the Federal Government has not yet realised tht necessity for treating the men of the Navy with proper regard and consideration. Efforts are constantly being made tc attract our young men to a naval career; but treatment of this sort is not likely to work up a boom in recruiting for our warships. But apart from this it is high time that the uniforms of tht national services should be recognised as an honourable distinction, and should not be treated as a reproach to tht wearer. Kipling's Plea. It is nearly half a century sine* Kipling stirred the nation's heart by his plea for the common soldier— It's Tommy this and Tommy that ant chuck him out, the brute ! But its savour of his country when th< guns begin to shoot. Does Australia need a new Kiplin< to teach us to respect the , nava uniform ?