THE SECOND DIVISION

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3141, 20 July 1917, Page 7

THE SECOND DIVISION

■ AND' THEIR'DEPENDANTS. Sir,—As another reservist of tho Second Division permit mo space in your columns. to comment on. he selfish, and uncharitable remarks of "Thirty-six." 1 am not conversant with tho ciroumstauoes surrounding the inception of tho .Second Division League, nor doos it concern me, but. 1 do think that your correspondent is somewhat narrow: in his wholesale condemnation of its objects and administration. It is inconceivablo that any but a email minority of Second Division vesorvists "soorn tho sordid bargaining for money," and undoubtedly that small, minority comprises chiefly those whose financial positions are assured or whose oblig;>(iom; do not weigh upon them. Door "Thirty-six" expect a woman with, one or more children, lo pay rent and find food and clothing on the miserable pittance .now obtainable, while many -who are not reservists £io living in comfort -and affluonco on tho property which the efforts and gallantry of our soldiors havo preserved for them? Siilely tbo attempt of tlio married ir.au to obtain a fair allowance for his dependants—and also tho dependants of men iilready at the front—is not lo be 'construed as "sordid . bargaining" when it cannot;but bo admitted that thero is and will bo ample money and iwealth in the country to provide everything 1 that is necessary and more. It is an honourable attempt to. obtain right and justice, not for themselves but .for those who cannot, do more than tako what; is meted out to them. Why are our -women compared with those o£ countries who aro dependent on the gratuitous sugport forthcoming from their Allies and others? The position .is vastly different. So long as our country will stand the financial strain why Bhould our -wiyes and children havo fo subsist on "bread and wator" 'rations, or humbly 'beg tho nssistarico of a. patriotio'sooioty ? -The tamo attitudo of most of our representatives in-Parliament towards the present autocratic Administration almost makes ono wonder why we put them there. It. is in mo'st cases the man in a comfortable position and safe from -military service who is reluctant to have the war inlerfero with his comfort or stylo of living. Suroly your correspondent overlooks tho first principles of "equality of sacrifice." His • loiter sounds more like a special .attack on Mr. Armstrong than a fair-minded criticism of tho league's policy. Mothinks ho has considered only his own case, and is conipla-conllv satisfied I hat he and his will be aJI right. Ho does not consider Ihe vast number who have very little savings, and from sickness and other causes havo had a hard struggle to make ends meet. There are few cases of real hardship in Now Zealand at present (and whyshould there be?), but wait and see what happens lo oS'iuy P<?or devils whoso turn has yet to come. .1 and many others disapprove of tho .methods of the Second Division .League (Wellington Branch), in . that- thc-y aro wasting timo with miuor questions whilo the vital question of making adequate allowances for tho women and children is sliding gradually into the background. I am indeed glad .to seo that most of tho branches'of the league (and they live many) aro making this their main'platform, so that the Government may yet seo tho.forco of a- "quid pro quo," not for tho "reservist himself, but for those who will suffer from his performunce of duly. "Please understand me, Sir, I am not a cold-footed "squealer." I am prepared to do my duty- when I am tola by (ho proper authority it is my (urn—until thou my, duty is to stay' with my wil'o and ehildron. Wo are all proud of tho fact that our little country has so well answered tho call of kith and kin, as well as tho causo of humanity. Tho manner :j.nd extent of our participation iu tho great war must bo left to cur moinhors of Parliament, who liavo so facetiously delivered lis into the hands of an autocratic Ministry, but (whatever my opinions on this point may be), with mauy others of a like opinion, T will loyally follow and support the splendid example of those who havo gone before. I wish it understood that my only grievance is against tho niggardly allowances at present payable to dependants of soldiers.

I am not thinking so much of my own case, but of the. cases of other reservists who are in moro difficult circumstances, when I urge that it ii| tho duly ol' the wealth of this country to provide fcr tho dependants of all reservists that reasonable financial provision which the largo majority of them will urgently require. The question is nol "preferential treatment," but fair and just troatmont. Aleo, I do not wish to attack any section of the community, as I firmly believe that a large majority of the coiu-fort.ibly-ofl' citizens of this Dominion aro broad-minded enough to realise the fairness and juslieo of tho claim on behalf of women and children. I cannot close without a reference to the wholly justified and obviously relevant statements mado by Mr. H. T'\ von Haast in your issue, of the 16th instant.. He hafl put his finger on tho propor principle to bo applied when ho refora to tho "principle of general average," and I. liopo when ho does deal with that subject fully that ha will "rub it in." ■ Consoription of wealth, however, is un-

doubtediy a fallacy, and must, of course, bo distinguished, from thu principlo of "equality of Isacrificn."

1 ast your correspondent, if lio lias tho courage of his convictions, to put any Jurthor remarks above his vnual signature.—l mu, etc..

!•'. J, CItRISTiINSKN, July 18.