Labour and Military Service

Press, Volume LII, Issue 15604, 31 May 1916, Page 6

Labour and Military Service

The hostility of the Federation of Labour to the Military Service Bill is not likely to causo the Government any concern, nor is it at all likely to i ,n press tho public. The officials of the Federation have hitherto pretended that their opposition is based upon a refusal to belicro that tho voluntary system has been thoroughly tested, and they have declared that if their own policv of confiscation and the destruction of capital is carried out, there will be no occasion to depart from voluntaryism. In their latest communi cation to the Prime Minister, however, they tako no trouble to conceal the fact that their opposition to compulsory service is absolute. "Tho introduction of "conscription/' they say, "means that "tho Prussians hav c obtained, to say ' " the least, a moral victory." What thev aro opposed to is. not the prema-

ture introduction '>; compulsion, but the introduction of compulsion ... any They already passed resolutions calling on the Empire t 0 abandon its struggle for freedom and civilisation, and in so they have shown that thev are not in favour of the war, and arc not really desirous or a victory for the Allies. This fact alone should be sufficient to cause their protests to !>j treated with contempt. They have no right even to bo heard in a community which is doin- all in its power to bring about the defeat of the enemy, with whom we are at death-grips. Least of all have they auv right to -: ; !)oak on beha'.f of the working men of this country. They do not represent the working men: they represent only themselves and a very small section of organised La bour. They have not uttered a word

to encourage recruiting! they have g been active only in t-tirring hostility i to recruiting. Their chief orator de- t clarcd at their Congress, amidst cheers, that it was no credit to a unionist to be willing to ioin the forces. While j thev have thus been setting themselves ] against the discharge by this country i o; its duty to itself, to the Empire, and t.) humanity, the workers have been volunteering in the'.r tens of thousands. The trade unionists have ( volunteered in their thousands. Tho Red Feds, and Social Democrats have failed miserably to check the patriotic ardour of the men in whose name they arc shameless enough to pretend that they are speaking. It is not because of, but in spite of, the Federation's doctrines, that unionists have gone to the front, as the Rev. I. Sarginson pointed out in the striking address which is reported in another part of to-dr.y's paper And while they pret -.d to have at heart the interests or those unionists who have gone to tho war, thev are anxious to do what thev can to secure that those men shall be unsupported by fresh reinforcements. In its unlovely career the Federation has never adopted a more disgraceful attitude than that which it adopts now. If the Federation leaders were concerned only to secure that the pay and allowances and pensions of soldiers should be lavish, they would Tiave adopted a different attitude. But this io not their aim. They name, as the terms v.oon which they would agree that voluntaryism was thoroughly tested. tcrm 3 which are meant to bo, and which thev and everybody else know to be, quite impossible ones. They desire, in short, that New Zealand shall cease to take part in the war, just as they desired that she should not begin to send soldiers to the front. This is not the attitude of the workers of New Zealand, who arc 95 j>er cent, of adult population. It is not even the attitude of organised working men, who are as loyal and patriotic as their b-ethren in Groat Britain, where, despito some formal protests, based on doubts and misunderstanding, organised Labour, nnder conscription, has thrown itself heartily into the war. Tho j question that many people aro beginning to ask themselves is whether organised Labour will any longer tolerate the impudent misrepresentation of their real feelings by those who still claim to speak in their name. We liavo over and over again pointed out to trade unionists that they cannot expect to escape being judged by tho activities of tho leaders they follow. We ask them again to consider this point, . which is emphasised by Mr Sarginson in tho address wo have referred to. , "While Labour organisations," ho said, , " included a largo proportion of men I " who were tho very salt of tho com- , " munity, those excellent moil were "silent while others brought rnproach ; " upon their organisations."