NEW ZEALAND DEFENCE ACT

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 75, 25 September 1914, Page 8

NEW ZEALAND DEFENCE ACT

PROFESSORS WHO DIFFER. (PHOU OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.) LONDON, 6th August. Mr. Coulson Kernaham calls the attention of The Spectator to two statements in regard to the military training of lads in l\ew Zealand and Australia. Both are by distinguished Free Church ministers and scholars — Professor James Hope Moulton and Professor W. F. Adeney. Professor Moulton wrote :—"ls: — "Is it too unkind to recall what his fellow-believ-ers are doing now in our colonies, Australia and New Zealand? Is Mr. M'Kenna proud of the refinements of cruelty with which our conscriptionist cousins are trying to bully mere boys? Does Lord Roberts's plan involve fining and imprisoning me when I solemnly declare I will nob allow my boy to be trained as a soldier, so long as he is under age and cannot take the responsibility himself ? Very well ; I shall take it as an honour, but it will not convince me or change my action / another time. Or will they, like the 'brave Australian, get at me through my laddie, and torture him into obedience in order to punish me? I think they will have their hands full. They will have to commandeer Free Church places of worship to serve as prisons, unless they open the existing prisons to supply the gaps we shall make in their conscript army." Professor Adeney wrote : " The other is the universal military service now required by law. I have received two deputations from Peace Societies denouncing the system. But I am bound to say that to my surprise I have found nearly all our ministers and Church members to whom I spoke on the subject approving of it. They said that the drilling was having a good effect on the undisciplined youth of the Dominion, and they saw no tendency towards the cultivation of a war spirit. On the other hand, a sense of the duty of public service was engendered. The Act allows of alternative forms of public service—ambulance, fire brigade, afforestation, etc., for conscientious objectors." The article by Professor Adeney, say 3 Mr. Kernahan, was written in New Zealand (it bears a New Zealand address), and from personal enquiry into the facts. Since one testimony directly contradicts the other, perhaps Professor Moulton will be so kind as to inform your readers whether he has visited New Zealand since the passing of the Defence Act. If he has not done so — and since, in the passage I have quoted, he makes in effect what seems to me «% very grave and serious statement about our kinsmen over sea, or at all events, about the Government they have put into power — perhaps Professor Moulton will be so courteous as to refer your readers to the authorities upon which he bases his statement. "