THE DEFENCE QUESTION.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 522, 1 June 1909, Page 8

THE DEFENCE QUESTION.

"A NEW SCHEME." REPLY TO MR. FISHER. (To ths Editor.) Sir,—ln your issue of 29th fast., Mr. F. M. B. Fisher, M.P., writes upon defence matters, and raises several points which I would' like to disenss. 1. Without going into the question of whether or no tho volunteer system in Now Zealand has been "murdered," iwo find food for serious thought in the fact thafe J all European nations have abandoned such system. It is too costly, and is inefficient. 2. A misapprehension evidently exists as to. the cost of the compulsory training scheme. Tho scheme of tho present Federal Government is to cost £1,200,000 in the first year, rising to a maximum of £1,407,000 in the sixth year. ' ' 3. Taking the population of tho Commonwealth at three and a half millions and that of-New Zealand at one million, the cost of such a scheme here, if proportioned to the population, would be two-sevenths of the Australian scheme, that is, about £342,000 in the frst year and a maximum of about £402,000 in tho sixth year. ■ ' _ 4. That cost would on the Australian basis provide physical training from 10 to - 14, cadet training 14 to 18, and military training 18 to 20, with an extra year, ,20 to 21, in special corps. It also includes, as I under-1 stand it, an ammunition and small arms factory. ■■' .-.••.'••• ' , ' 5. Tho cost of . defence in New Zealand in ! last'year's appropriations'is about £217',000 (which includes cadets, volunteers, and permanent artillery). The new expenditure—on the Australian basis—would thus be nearly, double the. present ,expenditure. 6. We then have to compare what' we would get with what we do got. We'may leave out of the comparison for tho present tho garrison artillery. They have special 'work to do and do it well even without whole day continuous training, as the reports show. ' ' 7. But a mobile force cannot bo made efficient for war without whole day continuous training. Our mobile force gets. practically ■no such training. Wo owe a great deal to the enthusiasm and self-sacrifico of the volunteers, and it is no fault of thoir3 that the mobile branch is unable to get the necessary training. But on tho Australian basis they would get 18 whole days' continuous training oaon, year for three years./ Thus the cost would bo only doubled,. whilst the efficiency for war would ,be very many times increased. V > '. ■ . • . 8. But before, condemning compulsory military training—on acoount of its costrHsno must bear carefully in mind the suggestions made in. Mr. Fishers letter for making "the .volunteer system attractive." They are:— i •■•! (i.) "National gymnasia," including training and medical examination;: ' (ii.) "Plenty of ammunition." . . ' (iii.) Bisley team to become an fasti- '■ tution, riot a spasm. , (iv) "Perfecting our coastal defences ■ - and-building up our ordnance corps, transport, and ambulance services.'' (v.) At least one more field ■ battery and one more engineer corps in eacn provincial-district, possibly two or three irioTo, as tho present "one" in each dist tnct is described; as "absurd." _ .' ■ (vi.) "Many of our guns" (i.e., bk guns in the forts) must be "'replaced. (Probably this ' should bo included " ■ t in "ooastal defenoos", in clause , iv." : .. above.)• ■ ■ . ...! . .. (vu.) Ofiicers must constantly bo sent , ' "aoroad to acquire a knowledge of -diaciplino and oommaad.". . " (viii.) "Officors and non-commissioned ofljeers must,'be imported from Home in ■ considerable 'numbers." . i (ix.) "The Government must breed horsea for military purposes." (x.). "We : must nave an ammunition .-factory in the., South jlsland." li! : (xi.) And last', but' not; loast, .Iwe ■ ought, to be 'able to put 150,000. fullyarmed'men in the field in time of war.

9. It does riot appear how these suggestions can be carried out ''without ✓unduly increasing the cost" of.the present systeml 10. Broadly speaking,. if Mr. Fisher's suggestions were carried out, there is no doubt but "that the present system would be improved. But one who makes such suggestions can hardly condemn the compulsory system on account of its oost. - 11. But; after all, though, the . question of cost . is. of .importance, yet tho cost of defence' can never bo an argument against • defence. Wo' aro determined to defend the country,! and. wb have to do it whatever it may' cost. It is not the cost that ii the real 1 ' question, ..but it is "the' obtaining of efficiency for what is: spent. 12.' It will' be, noted that, in Mr. Fjsher's new scheme, the whole .day continuous training is left as it! is in the present syi<tem. . That .is the : -weak! spot in this.new scheme. As indicated above, the mobile force must have whole day continuous train? ing,; and, in, my opinion, at least 30 days of it in the year.' This is the'principle underlying the Swiss, scheme—also embodied in the Bill—introduced by Lord Roberts into tho House.of Lords, a; few days ago. /

13. Curiously enough, the provision made in this new scheme for the "unwilling," 'is far more attractive for'the man who is keen to fit himself to defond the country than is that for the "willing." The "unwilling"• is to 18 whole days, continuous training.in camp. each : year, for three years. Whilst the . willing'' man has at most only four days, and it is not clear, whether those four are to he consecutive.' No volunteer would hesitate a moment as to which course of training he would choose. Tho "unwilling" would have to do it, and "willing" would certainly, choose it,, and we thus reach the result aimed at by those who advocate compulsory military training—namely that all citizens would bo under compulsory military training, and we find that Mr. Fisher is really on our side after all, and that he should be roioicing with us' in the good' work that Mr. M'Nab is doing, instead of ■ generally criticising him, and suggesting that :he "is urging the country to adopt;a scheme which ho must know is a financial impossibility." "To destroy is," indeed, '"easier'-than [to create."'

14. Wo are ilow Bearing the end, and we come appropriately to tho question,' "Who dug the grave?" . The volunteer system itself.' For it lays the butfden of the defence of all upon some, tho "willing," and allows tho remainder, the "unwilling," to escape. "Some sounder principle of defence .is required," and the system of compulsory military training will be found to supply it, and to be the true complement of our naval defence.—! am! - etc.. ■ ' ■ 8. A. ATKINSON. May 30.