MILITARY SERVICE

Evening Post, Volume XCV, Issue 50, 27 February 1918, Page 8

MILITARY SERVICE

QUESTION OF EXEMPTION STATEMENT BY THE PRIME MINISTER. In last nights Post, in a letter written by Professor Hugh Mackenzie, there were three questions, which he suggested the Prime Minister should answer in his address at the Town Hall. Following are the questions and the Prime Minister's replies, given to a Post representative to-day :—> Question.—l. Seeing that the Government deemed it necessary, to pass a Bill to exempt the clergy and Slarist Brothers from military service, and seeing that Parliament .refused • to pass such a Bill, how came it that the .Military Boards have acquired power and authority to exempt clergymen and Marist Brothers, and thus defeat the express intention of Parliament? Mi-. Massey's Reply.—"Professor-Mac-kenzie should make sure of his facts. The Bill introduced by the Government did 1 not include or refer to the Marist ■ Brothers, but when in Committee . an amendment was moved . which would have included all teachers, whether in public or private schools. This amendment was carried by a small majority and referred to the Legislative Council in_ the usual way, but the council declined to pass it; consequently a deadlock occurred, which was solved by the Government dropping the Bill. Question 2.—Why have not the Military, Medical, and Efficiency Boards been sworn in to discharge their duties faithfully and conscientiously (as is the case of magistrates, judges, and all who are called upon to act in a judicial capacity)? Mr. Massey's reply :—"As to Military Service Boards, they are in exactly the same position to-day yiat they were on the first day that the Military Ser- | vice Aot came into operation. The boards consist of strong,'unbiased and impartial men, carefully selected. They have, full power and authority to allow appeals or to reject them, just as in their judgment they think right and proper,, and I would no more think of interfering with a • Military Service Board in connection with its duties than I would think of interfering with the Supreme Court. As to Military Service Boards being compelled to take oath in the same way as magistrates, this is not provided for in the Act which appoints them, nor do I think there is any necessity for it. Quest'on 3.—Why have boys of 19 been conscripted and ep not afforded any opportunity of'enlisting voluntarily on attaining their twentieth year? [I am prepared to furnish names of such conscripts.] . . Mr. Massey's reply:—"l understand that a 6mall number of young men, in filling up the forms which are required by statute, omitted'to give the month and date of their birth. In such cases the Registrar-General had no option but to class them as being twenty years of age; but there is no difficulty in the matter. They can neither appeal to the Military Service Board in the ordinary course, when their appeal will be allowed, as being under the ago fixed by law for compulsory service, or they can call the attention of the military authorities when they are: notified to go into camp, and they will be at once released. . "I want to make it perfectly' clear that the Government has no intention of applying the principle of compulsory service'to young men under twenty years of age, nor would the law allow anything of the sort, even if the Government desired it." ■ ■ .