LABOUR AND MILITARY TRAINING.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXII, Issue 62, 11 September 1911, Page 3

LABOUR AND MILITARY TRAINING.

*6 SHE B&ttOft. Sir,— ln your columns of tho 2nd inst. an article is published purporting to con- j vey certain business transacted by the local, Trades Council at its meeting on the 31st ultimo, also with reference to certain, business transacted by the Labour Congress of 1909 on tho subject of defence, with a passing reference to tho patriotic views of individual Labour candidates contesting Parliamentary seats at tho forthcoming elections. The artinle in question is just about as incorrect and misleading as anything I have yet road in your papefi The council secretary affirms that he merely furnished your representative with tho actual resolution carried on the 31st ultimo, without any comment whatsoever, and T am at a loss to understand tho quarter from which you obtain- j ed tho misleading information. _ j The letter embodying the application ! of tho Anti-Conscription League was be- | fore the council two meetings prior to the deputation attending on the 61st ultimo. With such applications it is not customary to notify affiliated unions of the subject j to be brought forward, but it is expected ! that men appointed by thcif unions as delegates to the council hp.ro sufficient interest for ths wplfate of their fellow* workoi'3 ant 1 tke Labour movement to at- ' tend each meeting. The resolution car- ' ried on the 31sv ultimo was:-— "That this | council protests against compulsory military training, and. that all unions con- I nectod with the council be asked to assist , in getting this Act wiped off the Statute Book." At the time of carrying this there were 31 delegates present, not 25 a3 re» j ported in youi paper ; as A matter of fact, j it was carried by 30 votes to 1, which may be safely regarded as a substantial expression of opinion on the question. In addition to that tho local council forwarded this remit to tho Labour Congress of 1909 : —"That conf efenco affirms tho principle of a Citizens' Voluntary Defence Jforce^ and the establishment of an Australasian Navy, as proposed by the Federal Labour Party." On behalf of the Council I moved that remit ot the congress. It was discussed at some length. Ah amendment in favour of comptilsory military training was moved by a Gisborne delegate. Your report says this amendment was "struck out." As a matter of fact, it wap put to the vote and defeated by 14 to 11. A further amendment was ruled out of order by the chair* man, after which my motion was put and carried by 15 to 10, not defeated _ as stated in the article under consideration. It 'is true that in each Case the question j <Vas determined by tfiosq present. But your argument on this point might safely be applied to tho Legislature, City Coun- I oil, or any other constituted body of persons, as it is usually thoso present who i decide a question. The foregoing facts do not suggest, but sro conclusivp cvi- I dence, that tho Labour tendency is distinctly antagonistic to compulsory military training, and I have yet to learn that patriotism to one's country Consists of killing a fnan, woman, of child for any cause. My idea of patriotism is to help improve the lot of the men, wotnen, and children who are being driven to the door of 'starvation and degradation by j bad government. If \vo paid as much attention to the breeding oi good men and women physically, morally, and mentally as is paid to the building of Warships, ahd the creation of ' a military system generally, wo would havo betler men and women, and would, lo that extent, attain nearer to national greatness. —I am, etc., W, T. YOUNG, President Trades and Labour Council. Bth September, 1911. [The information published was, as given to Tho Post. The Trades Council secretary (Mr. Reyling) supplied without comment both tho copy of tho resolution end tho voting figures— -tho latter 24 to 1. Other particulars regarding the deputation wero obtained from a trustworthy authority, who stated "that tho notice was too «hort to allow of all tho unions being notified," and that the resolution ■syas "distinctly only ah expression of opinion of delegates present," and not that of the Trades and Labour Council. Tho mattoi 1 referring to the Labour Congress of 1909 also was supplied by one who was thei"o; ?3ttfc reference to the printed records of that conference show that, tho voting was ps our correspondent states.]