The Press. Saturday, June 16, 1917. The Duty of Sacrifice.

Press, Volume LIII, Issue 15929, 16 June 1917, Page 8

The Press. Saturday, June 16, 1917. The Duty of Sacrifice.

The latest devilry of the Huns in London supplies fresh.evidence, if any ■were required, that tie nation seeking to dominate the world is a nation tff fiends rather than of human beings. At the same timo, our very gratifying success at Mossing must not blind us to the fact that the war is not yet won —indeed, if Russia fails Us. it is obvi- . 011s that the end is not nearly in sight. Tho German newspapers aro still insisting that it is Germany who will dictate the torms of pence. Wo have said this sort of thing before, but it is only too elenr that it requires to bo said again and Again. If it were not so, we fihonld not find the question being raised as to whether it is really necessary for New Zealand to send away any of the Second IKvision to tho front. TVo do not blame tho public altogether for this; tho Government Jiave been altogether too slow in giving the people a lead. We hope that as foon as Mr Massey and Sir Joseph Ward return we shall sen moro energy displayed in the administration—moro evidence that tho Government realise the seriousness of tho .Dosition. "Wo presume that the Efficiency Board have not been at work all this timo without having made moro recommendations than those which have been made public, and it is time that effcct was given to such of these recommendations as niny reasonably be expected, if actod np;in, to assist in winning tho war.

\Vlien we say more sacrifices ar© required from New Zealand, wo do not for ono moment consider that such sacrifices should be confined to men in the Second Division of military age who

■will shortly bo called upon to join the men of the First Division -who have done so gloriously in the field. Thoso to whom this privilege is denied will, i we fool sure, themselves Ijc the first to ! wish that they should be called upon ' to take their sharo of duty. Tho most j obvious way of helping is to contribute. J a larger proportion of tho cost of the i war, and this can be dono by increased taxation all round—taxation which should bo stiffly graduated as regards the higher incomes—but taxation to which all shall contribute. On what ground can any man bo allowed to insist that lie will neither fight in tho war, work in the war, nor pay for tha war? And a liberal proportion of this increased taxation should be devoted to making more generous provision for tho dependants of those who aro fighting on our behalf. The men of tho Second 3>ivision who will be leaving wives and \ families in New Zealand aro especially worthy of our consideration. Wo must SB© that, wherever possible, their businesses aro kept alive for them, and that their dear ones do not suffer from anything approaching privation in addition to tho pangs and anxieties caused by separation. It would be monstrous if those who do the fighting aro permitted to suffer tho most from a pecuniary point of view, and if thoso who remain behind aro not only spared any persona] sacrifice, but in somo cases even benefit by tho war.