REPRISALS.

Press, Volume LIII, Issue 15932, 20 June 1917, Page 2

REPRISALS.

| TO THE EDITOR OF "THE TRESS." Sir, —"What is beet to be dono to meet tho Germans' air-raiding policy ? Britain wants to fight a clean fight, but she has had to give way to some extent already in her ideals. The first use by the Germans of gas in warfare was loarned with horror, but Britain and her Allies have since adopted the use of gas. Bombardment of defenceless towns by sea or air is worse than the uso of gas upon an actual fighting force, but I sometimes wonder howmany poor defenceless French are killed in tho British and French bombardments of towns and villages occupied by Germans. There must have been thousands, but wo do not hear of it. The French aro not now troubled by air "raids on Paris, partly because oi reprisals, and by threats of a continuation of them. But Paris is now in a different position from London. Paris can be defended by the French airmen who aro-engaged in the actual fighting line, and therefore there is no need to keep a largo defensive force locked up in Paris. Britain wants to conn- out of'the war with a good name, yut if care is not taken she is going to put a premium on ruthless warfare instead of checking it. In future wars —and no doubt there will be some more yet— tho lessons of the present war will be carefully studied. 'l'ho nation that adopts the most effective methods will have tho best of it, and woo betide the country that is attacked through the air if in its defence it follows the example of Britain and adopts a policy of no retaliation. The Germans have learned that war at sea can best be carried on under the surface, and we may thank our stars that they did not realise this a fow years sooner —and apparently the Americans have realised that war on land has now reached a point when further success can only be attained in a reasonably short time, by carrying it on through tho air. i takp it that that is the meaning of their decision to equip and send to tho front ono thousand airmen per month. Such a fighting force will have a great effect upon the struggle, but will these airmen confine their attention only to tho German Army in Franco and Belgium? I can quite imagine that large fleets of fighting aeroplanes will knock tho German Army about, but, at the same time, I can also imagine that thousands of French and Belgian men, women and children, still living in the neighbourhood of tho occupying forces, will also be decimated. I will put it more strongly still. If tho Germans persist in fighting every mile of country through France and Belgium back to their own border —and they will hold on to Belgium for the sake of the sea coast to the very last —it means, as a friend of mine remarked the other day, literally blasting them out of the occupied country. If this goes on, what becomes of the native population ? one may be sure tho Germans will do nothing to save them, but, on the other hand, will glory in their decimation. Why should these unfortunate people, who have suffered all the horrors at the hands of {heir barbarous oppressors, bo finally v/ijied off the faco of the earth by those who aro earnestly seeking to relieve them, but will be going the wrong way about it? Germany will have to bo directly attacked, and it can only bo done through the air, and if it can. bo done even at the loss of German men, women and children, it comes to a question whether'this will bo worso than allowing air raids upon practically defenceless people in England, or decimating the population of the occupied territory in France and Belgium. The German towns could first be warned, so that women and children! could be moved. I am quito certain of this, that cnco Germany herself is attacked, not in a spasmodic

way, as has been done, by British and French airmen, but determinedly and continuously, and for 60 long as the war lasts, we can rest assured that it will then be possible to end the war sooner than appears likely at present. It is not a question of reprisals altogether, but ending the war in the most practical and humane way.—Yours, etc., _ . E. HARDCASTLE. Christchurch, Juno 19th. 1917. TO •THE EDITOR OP "THE PRESS." Sir, —Reading your issue of jesterday, i saw therein several letters under the heading "Reprisals," all of them being protests, moro or less emphatic, against even tho thought that we should _ "tarnish the ancient chivalry of cur Britain, our most glorious heritage from aucieut times, by retaliating in kind so foul, so damnable" (quoted from one of your correspondents). Unfortunately, I did not see tho letter of Mr Lawrence, which called forth the epistles of your correspondents, but I gather from the screeds of Messrs "D.H.," Miles, and Chrystall, that Mr Lawrence advocated reprisals on our detested enemies as a deterrent to future awful raids. With Mr Lawrence | I heartily agree, though (unfortunately, no doubt, for children still in the 4 and of the living) my small voice docs i«ot carry much, if any, weight with the powers that, owing to their position, can decide if any more of their children are to bo murdc-rod. One of jour correspondents suggests that reprisals would be unavailing, as the Germans do not value the lives of their women and children sufficiently to make them stop it. Did not "D.H." read some good timo ago that the French authorities instituted reprisals on German towns because some Paris women and children had been killed? Luneville, I believe, was the town attacked, and since then, I believe that Paris has enjoyed immunity from Zeppelin visitations. Mr Miles suggests that we would be lowering our flying men to the Huns F level by doing what common sense demands. Do we regard the gallant and chivalrous French with abhorrence because th6y had more common sense than us? Do we think of them as being no better than the hellish Huns? He suggests also that our airmen would refuse to do this thing. On the contrary, I do not believe one couid be found who, after reading the pathetic details of the murder of little London children, would hesitate to retaliate, if by so doing a recurrence could 00 avoided. I myself do not like the idea of killing Hun children because our countrymen's children .have been killed, but we have iooked too long in vain f or a spark of decency in the enemy, and it is time to act. Some bombs dropped on prominent public buildings containing important officials and citizens may be .sufficient in itself to make it needless to avenge our children in kind, hut reprisals must be commenced to eneuro the safety of children who otherwise may fill a* thousand tiny graves.— curs, etc., H. v WOOLF. 16G Rossall street, Merivale.

TO THE EDITOR OF "THE PRESS." Sir.—For good common sense and manliness, J. W. K. Lawrenco's letter on is worthy of the highest commendation. Why should we in New Zealand read of women and children being ruthlessly murdered in London by air raids and only sigh orer what has happened? The Huns, from tho beginning of the war, have traded on British chivalry and honour, and will continue to do so until reprisals teach them better. We ought to bo done by this time with that sickly sentiment of not dropping to the level of the Huns in this respect; they have challenged us with that diabolical phase of warfare, and to cut it short aud orotect cur people wo should accept their challenge. Let us put aside those | apathctic. phlegmatic people who op- j pose reprisals—their women and children -have not been ruthclessly murdered, and that makes all the difference to them. Had reprisals been taken at the beginning of the war, there would not have been the counties. atrocities at present to the Huns' account. Men and women of Christchurch, think of the internment camps in Germany, what our soldiers have suffered and are suffering; think of i;he murders of Nurse Cavell and Captain Fryatt, and the diabojical sinking of the Lusitania, also the numerous air raids, and if you are good citizens and loyal patriots, you will clamour for the Mayor to call a public meeting to protest against the Huns' latest outrage. —Yours, etc., C.S. TO THE EDITOR OF "TIIE TRESS." Sir, —I i\m sorry my letter On the question of "Reprisals" disturbed your corespondent "D.H." to such an extent that he jumped to the conclusion I wished to dictate to the Home Govenment on the matter. My t letter made it clear I did not. Tho nature of such reprisals is immaterial, so long as it has tho desired effect on the, German. I, like every other Britisher, abhor tho<■ idea of killing women and children, but if in our reprisals a hundred or so German noncombatants suffer, I think nought of that, if it means insurance against further butchery of our own women aiul children. I notice in this morning's paper a meeting in London presided over bv the Lord Major advocated the severest reprisals Yours, etc.. .T. W. K. TAWP.ENCE. Christchurch, June 19th.