"JUNGLE LAW"

Evening Post, Volume CXXXI, Issue 31, 6 February 1941, Page 13

"JUNGLE LAW"

DEFINITION OF WAR

EXEMPTION CLAIM FAILS

Basing his appeal on moral and humanitarian grounds, Charles Stewart, assurance agent, appeared before the Armed Forces Appeal Board yesterday and read a statement in which he said that all his life he had felt that war was a return to jungle law that annihilated, but never cured, the underlying causes. "Killing is never justifiable, no matter if legal, as in war, and I cannot get over the feeling that some time, somewhere, each individual connected with war, directly or indirectly, will have to make restitution," the statement continued. "To me there are no nationalities; it is merely an accident of birth whether one is British or nonBritish." The appellant said that his horror of killing applied also to the animal kingdom, and for that reason he was a vegetarian. In the animal and human kingdoms all had the right to live; he could not interfere with their destinies. In reply to Mr. C, O. Bell, the Crown representative, the appellant said that he was not a member of any Christian organisation. He based his moral appeal on the "small, still voice" inside him which told him what was right and what was wrong. He would rather starve than kill for sport or food. If attacked, he would regard it as an error on his part; if he had no time for reflection, he would do nothing to defend himself. The appellant added that he did not wish to depart from the present standard of life in New Zealand, but. would take only peaceful steps to retain it. The appeal was dismissed.