MILITARY TRAINING

Evening Post, Volume C, Issue 36, 11 August 1920, Page 8

MILITARY TRAINING

SIR JAMES ALLEN'S SCHEME

DISCUSSION BY PRESBYTERY.

The proposals made by Sir James Allen, late Minister of Defence, for four months' and later for two months' training in camp for Territorials were discussed, by the Wellington Presbytery last night. There were ten members present.

The Rev. _W. J. Comrie moved : "The Presbytery is strongly opposed to the proposals which havo been made by the Government for military training, and urges that they should either be dropped or greatly modified. The Presbytery respectfully submits : (1) That militarism is contrary to the spirit of Jesus Christ and to the growing sentiment of AntrloSaxon peoples; (2) that preparation =for war is no prevention of it, but rather the reverse. In 1914 Germany was the best-prepared nation for war, and she deliberately forced war upon the other nations. (3) Preparation for war, even in a hi^h degree, doe 6 not ensure success in it. Germany • again beino; witness. (4) Character, intelligence, and sound health are the essential qualifications of a soldier. Technical knowledge of drill and of the munitions of war can be acquired in a comparatively short space of time. The late war was the grave of nothing so much as of great military reputations. (5) The basis of physical and of moral health must be laid at an earlier period than that of youne manhood. Defects can best be remedied, rieht habits of living be formed, and general fitness be attained by training and care in childhood and boyhood, and loss through neglect in these earlier stages can never be wholly removed. (6.) No proposals that have beeh made adequately meet the grave moral dangers involved in segregating our young men for lengthy periods at the most critical stages of their lives. Thai conies of the?e resolutions be sent to the Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence."

Mr. Comrie explained that his motion had reference to Sir James Allen's proposals, which had never been withdrawn. He submitted that in view of the agitation being carried on in certain quarters and the formation of Leagues of Defence, it was only right that those who held contrary views to the system of military training should express* themselves. He specially objected to the proposal that the youth of the country should be made to undergo military training, not "merely physical training. What ths country needed in case of war was a. "body of intelligent men. whose minds and bodies were sound and who could easily be trained and converted into fighting soldiers if required. Physique and intelligence, he maintained; were the winning factors, an,d not technical training given beforehand. It had been emphasised that during the late war a large* proportion of men had to be rejected on account of defective physique. ' In order to promote an improvement he 'urged that the. Government should devote its attention to bettering of housing and the general conditions under which the people lived. He was not altogether opposed ,tt> camp-training, but he could not conceive the provision of sufficient moral influences to counteract .the evils that had prevailed. They might have cheap sneers thrown at them—that they were "wowsers" and "pacifists," and had not the safety of the nation at heart; but such charges coftld not be fairly levelled at them, and he did not think they should allow themselves to be influenced by such expressions as that. The Rev. B. Hutson seconded the motion. , He said he thought the resolutions were a step in the right direction. In the late war it was the capitalist who had been? -fought for. The new defence proposals, would really promote further warfare, and there was only one power on earth that could prevent it—the church. He submitted that if the church failed to support the forces that were now making for peace in the world io. would not be doing its duty.

Mr. J. Duff said he ; was unable to agree with the remarks of the last speaker to tho effect that the late war was fought for the capitalist. He agreed with what had been said regarding the evil influences of camp training in the past. He thought, however, that the. training should be carried out under proper moral influences, particularly if a lengthy period of camp segregation Were gone in for. In his opinion, the Presbytery should let it be known that it was in favour of some system of defence training, and he suggested that the proposed resolutions should be amended accordingly. , .

The Rev. D. A. Shaw suggested that if they carried the resolution they might look rather ridiculous. There were actually no definite military proposals before the country. It was not a. representative meeting of the Presbytery, and he suggested that the proposals should go out in full to all members. None of the chaplains, for instance, was there that night, and the Presbytery, he held, should have the benefit of their views. He moved that consideration be postponed until nest month. This was seconded. ■ .

Mr. W. 6. Clarke read the aims and objects of the National Defence League, and submitted that there was nothing in them that any reasonable man could object to. The programme was certainly constructive.

Mr. Comrie agreed to the postponement of the motion until a month hence, and this course was adopted.