A QUESTION OF STAMINA

Evening Post, Volume XCIV, Issue 38, 14 August 1917, Page 3

A QUESTION OF STAMINA

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—l have read with great interest the various letters and resolutions in your paper with reference to the reduction of the age for service, but so far have not Been put forward a, single logical reason why we should not be allowed to go. The matter would appear to be entirely one of sentiment, as the Second Division League, who have been most active in passing resolutions, would be in no way affected by the proposed alteration save that their own conscription would be delayed a few months. If, then, these gentlemen are so eager for the fray, why nave .they not long since enlisted? . . The average youth of nineteen is in many ways better fitted to go to the front than a married man. He, has had several years' Territorial training, and has attended at least one annual camp, and he also takes an active part in sport, whereas the married man has j probably not handled a rifle or kicked | a football for many years. Then, again, the great majoiity of young men are willing and eager to go. . The right to fight for one's country is one of the greatest privileges, of citizenship, and, though we have no j share in the government of the country, we will form its future citizens, and . this privilege should not now be denied us.—l am, etc., . . NINETEEN. 13th August. '■■.'■ TO IHB BDITOIS. Sir,—As a mother of a boy of nineteen, who just two years ago sailed from our shores with the Sixths, I am quite sure that it is amove in the right direction to lower the age limit. Mothers talk ■of their baby boys. Sir, the baby boys of to-day are proving themselves men, and the mothers of to-day have not the dread of the evils of Cairo, nor have their boys to face that death-trap Gallipoli, on which my own boy fought until the evacuation, and he stood the strain as well as men of more mature age. So, ■why not send the nineteen-year boys? Surely our hoys have as much or more stamina' than the boys of England who are conscripted at seventeen, and are in the firing-line at eighteen. Surely the men who have families are more needed here, and must be -of more commercial value to the Dominion than those who practically have had no training. There is one thing I should like, that those mothers who have two or more sons at the war be left their remaining boys until the full twenty years, as in some cases all the boys of twenty and over have, gone and just left one behind. Mothers, one word to you: As our schoolboys say, "Be sports." Don't grouse; give the boys your blessing, wish them God-speed, but let them go. The training will do them good, and they will make better men for their experience than they would without it.—l am, etc., A NINETEEN-YEAR-OLD SOLDIER BOY'S MOTHER. TO THK EDITOR. Sir, —The proposal to reduce the age limit, for mililJii-y service has, as one would expect, met with hot opposition. This scheme, while many balloted men have not conic forward, while members i-f the .vSocond DiviVjon, many of whom hays no family, are yet imtoudieil. i» deprecated by all true citizens of the

Dominion- And yet we find a few, happily only a few, who counsel such a proceeding. They tell us that thes» children are fit in every way to stand the strain of war; they would herd thesa lads, pitiful in their immaturity, upon a vortex of murder and blackest crime. And what shall be said of the Government- that will introduce such a proposal? It .would seem as though it were making one more feeble effort to i gain public favour. I But> we need not go to the members to find out whether boys of 19 axe capable of enduring the hardships of war. We need go no farther than our own returned brave soldiers. If anyone is in a position to form an opinion on a question so vital it is surely they. And what is their reply ? It is this : That these youths, unable to bear sights that cause even the oldest to shudder, overshadowed by the constant expectation of dea.th, become wrecked both in mind and body, after even the shortest period of service. Lacking that stamina that is the characteristic of men, or possessing that impetuosity associated with youth, they make very poor soldiers indeed, and are more of an encumbrance than a help. .< Hoping that all will give this new scheme their deepest consideration, and feeling confident that most of the men of the Second Division will play their part and oppose any movement which will tend to the sending .away of youths of 18 or 19. —I am. etc., >SENEX 10 THE EDITOR. Sir,—As I see by papers that the Government, is thinking of calling up the boys of 19, I very strongly protest, as I think it is a disgrace to send lads who are not matured, and not physically fit for the severe strain of the battlefield. Surely it is now time for the majority of our members of Parliament to come forward and protest emphatically against the intention of reducing the age limit from 20.' —I am, etc., SOLDIER'S MOTHER. 13th August, TO THB EDITOR. Sir, —Kindly allow me to say a few words in regard to mere boys being sent to the front. What about the •married, men without children? A great many people consider they ought to be called up and sent to the. front before any more of our single men go. In the first place, these young men have not had t a chance to marry and settle down, and many j have that purpose in *iew now;' in. the second place, most of these boys have never given a moment's thought to their future. The men who have been married two , years or more, and are without children, can in most cases leave their wives well provided for, also are more able to stand the strain of war. Another thing that is most unjust is ithe intention of the authorities to send children's only remaining parent to the front.—l am, etc., PHOEBE CHATSWORTH.

11th August.