Untitled

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16473, 17 March 1919, Page 6

Many people share the opinion of the correspondent who writes to us today to suggest that as winter is approaching the authorities should take active measures of protection against a recurrence of the influenza cpidemic. "Wo shall certainly be far better ablo to cope with an outbreak than we were last spring, but what is required is that the authorities should omit no possible precaution. Nothing would give the people more confidence than a knowledge that preparations for wholesale "vaccination" were well in hand, for the evidence continues to accumulate in favour of the vaccine treatment. Such experiments as those mentioned in one of to-day's cable messages appear to be conclusive as to the value of inoculation, and we hope to hear that the Health Department is ready for action. Ono point ought to bo emphasised. and it is this: That while

those who expect a second •ware of plague expect it to come in winter, it may easily come at any time before tlien. During the coalescence of the Coalition at Home, if we may so put it, the by-elcctions were not of much interest and importance, excepting those in Ireland. But the byelections are of interest once more, for the Liberal Partv is by no means content to accept the verdict of December as more than temporary. To-day it is recorded that in one of the Leyton divisions, where the death of the sitting member has caused a vacancy, the Liberal candidate has substantially defeated the Coalition's man. In December Colonel Wrightson, a Unionist supporter of the Coalition, defeated Mr A. E. Xewbould, the Liberal candidate, by over two to one —10.956 to 52SS. At the by-election the Coalition has lost the seat to Mr Newbould. One may not infer much from a single contest of this sort, but it would appear as if this constituency, at any rate, considers that the necessity for returning a Coalition supporter hgs ended.

"What is an Anzac? The question borrows fresh interest from the arrival in Christchurch yesterday of a number of returned soldiers, veterans jf the war, who are certainly entitled to the honoured name. Popular definition of the term varies from its limitation to the men who gave Arizac Cove its name to the inclusion of all Australian and New Zealand soldiers. The latter is the interpretation placed on it by mnny English, and some colonial writers, but it is not warranted. The word "Anzac," as everybody ought to know, is formed of the initials of the Australian and New Zealand Armv Corps which was constituted under General Birdwood on the Peninsula. The combined army corps was broken up after the Australasian troops readied France in April, 1916. Strictly speaking, the term can only be applied to tho men who comprised that body.

j Tn Australia, it appears, an imprcsj sion has gained ground lately that only j those Australians and Now Zealanders who embarked before the end of 1914 aro entitled to rank as Anzacs. That, however, is too narrow an application. It is pointed out that General Birdwood on May 17th. 1916, issued nn order which should havo settled the disputed point. He approved of the letter "A" being worn by men who had taken part in certain historic engagements on Gallipoli, and he then defined an Anzao as "one who took part in the flighting on the peninsula, either at the landing, or at the operations during April, or in the early part of August, 1915, or who was present at tho evacuation." Tho Australian military authorities some time later cancelled General Birdwood's order, anct gave permission to wear the "A" to "all members of the Australian Imperial Force who served on Gallipoli, or the islands of Lemnos. Imbros, and Tenedos, or who have served on transports or hospital ships, at or off Gallipoli or the islands mentioned, or in A.I.F. lines of communication units m Egypt." This wide permission makes it possible for a man who never went nearer to Anzac Cove than Suez to claim to be an Anzac, a cheapening of tho title which certainly cannot please the men who fought on Gallipoli.