The Dominion. MONDAY, JULY 4, 1938. COUNTRY FIRST

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 237, 4 July 1938, Page 8

The Dominion. MONDAY, JULY 4, 1938. COUNTRY FIRST

4 Four senior officers of the New Zealand Defence Forces—-men of high rank and distinguished active service—have been disciplined for doing what they deemed to be their duty, both as citizens ami soldiers. In effect their services have been dispensed with—they have been placed on the retired list. Their offending lay in their publication, after mature consideration, of their views concerning the inadequacy of the measures Ibeing taken for the defence of. then country. They may have committed a technical breach of military regulations —their opinions, dispassionately and moderately expressed as they were, may have offended those in control of the Defence policy of the Dominion. But the question which will concern the people of New Zealand, and which calls for an answer, is: Were the views they expressed justified by the facts? It is desirable to recall that the officers in question, four colonels in charge of brigades in different parts of the Dominion, did not act hastily or without first interviewing the Minister of Defence. Their action was the outcome of an exchange of views with other senior officers which disclosed “unanimity of opinion ,on matteis affecting the Territorial force. This exchange of opinions occuired at Trentham during a course for senior officers held some two or three months ago. On May 6 they had an intervievv with the Minister of Defence, and placed their views before him, setting out “ways and means by which this grave state of affairs could be remedied..’ It will be noted that they went openly to headquarters to assist the Minister with a frank statement of their views as experienced officers, and offering suggestions to remedy the unsatisfactory state of affairs in relation to the Territorial Forces. A promise was given by the Minister that he would make a statement; presumably one outlining the Government’s intentions. As the public know, this Ministerial statement was made some ten. days later, and so far as the policy in connection with the Territorial I‘orces is concerned, was considered inadequate. It was only then, because of the apparent failure of the Minister to realise the seriousness of the position from a defence point of view, that the four senior officers took the step of making their views public. They stated their views with great moderation of language; they put forward the reasons foi their opinions most dispassionately; but they declared definitely and without equivocation “that the present organisation and establishment of the [Territorial land] force is insufficient for the defence of New Zealand.” It is not necessary at this stage to recite, the grounds on 'which the officers based their judgment. It is sufficient to state that the blame was not laid,on the shoulders of any particular Government or party, but was attributed to the neglect of active support of the volunteer movement since the inception of the voluntary system. To most people the first consideration will be, are the views of these four officers justified by the facts? They are trained and experienced officers with distinguished war service; therefore, citizens holding responsible positions in the community as well as soldiers. If then what they say is true and justified by the facts, if they acted only after their representations to those in authority had been rejected or ignored, why should the country.be deprived of their services ? Why should they and the country be penalised while those who failed to remedy or recognise the inadequacy of the present Territorial defence organisation and establishment sit in judgment on them? The answer presumably is that in doing their, duty as patriotic soldier-citizens, they committed a breach of the military regulations. Possibly they did. The public, however, will be less concerned with the technicalities of military law than with the facts of the position disclosed—a position deemed to be so serious as to impel four senior officers of distinguished war service and long experience to take the extreme step of risking their military status in an endeavour to remedy it. The matter cannot be allowed to rest where it is.