EMPIRE SERVICE

Evening Star, Issue 16582, 15 November 1917, Page 6

EMPIRE SERVICE

A NATIONAL CRUSADE. RESPONSIBILITY IN INDIVIDUAL AND NATIONAL LIFE. Branches of the Empire Service League have been formed in various parts of New Zealand. Mr Percival Witherby, the general secretary of the league, is at present in Dunedin with the object of promoting interest in the movement here. In the course of an interview Mr Witherbv said:— This league and ihe new movement which it seeks to promote, has been started, it is well to remember, in New Zealand—indeed, it seems to me that New Zealand is first in starting many things. But it will not be confined to New Zealand, and I believe it is likely to spread all over the Empire. I am already in communication with friends in Canada and Australia, to start it there, and I have little doubt it will spread rapidly through all the Dominions, and in England as well. I hold there is a great, silent, inexorable purpose behind the war—and, because I hold that, I am forced to the conclusion the war won't end until that purpose has been attained. In other words, we shan't win peace until we deserve it. Our soldiers and sailors deserve peace to-day. They have sacrificed their all, even'to their lives. " But what is your organisation doing?" For one thing, we are gambling as much as ever, and it is indisputable that a large section of the population is really but little affected and sobered by the fearful ravages of the war. So long as we get our pleasures and excitements, many of us are still perfectly content, and do not realise in. the least the great danger that still threatens us. It is awful; but true. But apart and beyond these points, look round you to-day, and what do you see? You see class' set against class; misunderstanding still rampant; Labor and Capital continually in violent opposition. Do we who continue to follow our ordinary occupations in safety deserve peace? If my postulate is sound, if the purpose of the war is to make us a soberer, less selfish, more thoughtful, and a more united people, then it follows that every man and woman should now seek to be more in touch and sympathy with their fellows, and should strive to serve them in some capacity or wav to a greater extent than hitherto—so that the war may not be prolonged, and the lives of those we hold most dear unnecessarily endangered. I am. of course, quite pre*pared to admit that" all this is something which cannot be proved. But it is what I, personally, instinctively feel." Asked to refer to the "pamphlet 'What Freedom Means.' which he has written, Mr Witherby said : " One thing 1 have tried to point out in tins paper is that if an individual, a nation, or an empire embarks on a wholly selfish and aggressive policy of ' get'; if he, she, or it sticks to that policy regardless of the rights of othe,r individuals or other States, "then that individual, or nation, or empire stands in the long run to lose, and not to gain." " From a moral point of view?'' "No, not only from a moral or ethical viewpoint, but from a physical or material viewpoint as well. The moral question in this matter, as I see things, is overwhelmingly the most important; but the same reasoning applies with equal certaintv to the material side of it. Sometimes* the process is quick, sometimes it is slow, but the end, believe me, is always the same. Take the case, let us say, of a wealthy man or a capita'ist of moderate means. If he works wholly and entirely simply to | make money and to benefit himself "onlv through his wealth, if he icnores the re"sponsibilities of his position and rigidly adheres to a selfish policy of ' get' a"t all cost, public opinion will to a certainty grow against him, and his wealth will eventually, in large measure, be ' conscripted ' or taken from him bv Act of Parliament, which, under the British system of government, always sooner or later reflects public opinion. Take the case, if you like, of a ' worker' or wage-earner. If lie thinks and acts only for himself, regardless of other sections in the commuif he adopts a wholly selfish policv of 'get' and refuses to serve his fellows as well as himself, public opinion will grow steadily against him also, until through public opinion he loses what he had, his wages, the respect of others, in fact, his all. And precisely the same reasoning which applies ro the individual applies to the State and to the Empire, which, in the case of the British Empire, is not an empire at all in :he German or military sense, hut simply a community of free States—a Commonwealth. What do you suppose would have been the position of the British Empire now if, m August, 1914. it had refused to stand by its principles, if it had thrown aside the compacts it had made, if it had refused to fight for the rights of smaller States, if, in a word, it had adopted not an honest but a wholly selfish policy, and. in order to save it's own skin and benefit itself, while other nations were being violated and robbed, it had thrown overboard all its obligations, and had assisted Germany by- passively standing aside while Germany (whose policy was simply and solely a' policy of 'get") worked her will in Europe? 'Can any mar, who has realised the critical nature of the present struggle, assisted as we are by powerful Allies—can anv man doubt to-day that if this policv had been adopted bv us in 1914 we should sooner or later, and at any rate for a time, have been crushed by a triumphant and remorse- ; less Germany? No! The principles I have emphasised in * What Freedom Means' apply nith equal truth from a material viewpoint, which is a temporary matter. Indeed, from whatever viewpoint they are regarded they apply. It is sim- '■ ply impossible in the'long run and order ] of things to keep a thing by seeking to keep it only for oneself and one's "own benefit. This is the law of progress or evolution. In order to keep and under- ; stand and really appreciate the worth of a ; benefit one must ' serve,' or give out. in j thought and act. lam convinced the in- I exorable purpose of the war is to bring I this fundamental truth borne to us all. If I we as a poonle will only take the lesson of I the war to heart, nothing i> more certain than that not rnly will the British Commonwealth become an enormously greater ! power for good in the world than it has! ever been before, but that slowlv. but \ steadily and surely, other nations will follow our example until at last all mankind is knit together in sympathy and understanding. When that time comes, but not before, wars- will be impossible and will cease. "I am sometimes told that this is 'wowser' talk; that to speak in this way necessitates a long face and a lugubrious outlook; that in order to practise what one j feels and thinks regarding this subject one ' must never crack a joke, and certainly ; never drink a whiskv and soda. Whatawful ' tosh ' this is ! As a matter of fact, the very reverse is the case. The greatest power m the world is not the battleship or the submarine, the telegraph or the telephone, but thought. We can all think and act—if wo will. This war is making us think. It remains for us now to speak and act. I, for one, propose to try and do this in the way expressed in ' What Freedom Means.' But I would not if I could, j and I could not if I would, enter into such a pledge with myself if it necessitated a sad outlook and a depressed attitude. The Empire Service League is not a society of ' kill-joys,' but the opposite. It expresses opinions publiciy now, as well as privately. , because it seeks to create opinion. It seeks to create a great bodv politic of those who fell as it" does bv Asking them I to pledge themselves as members of it. It j is a ' linking-up' movement, a holding-out of hands, a brotherhood of all those who recognise that the freedom we have inherited does not mean we con all do as we jolly well like, but necessarily implies that active individual responsibility from which experience and greater knowledge spring."