NATIONAL DEFENCE

Evening Star, Issue 17326, 14 April 1920, Page 3

NATIONAL DEFENCE

Further criticising General Russell's statement, Mr A. S. ilalcolm, M.P., says :'■

Since tho war officers and men, with few exception?, have told me that the Territorial training was useless, or nearly so, and thai the money spent upon it was wasted. There is one thing I can say for it, and that is that the groat majrity of the "boys"' enjoyed the training—at any rate, the cam)), life part of it. That apart, I regretfully came to the conclusion that the country was not geting value for the time and money, it devoted to military training. It is only fair to recognise that General Russell, though he insists on compulsory (raining, does not commit himself definitely to the Territorial system. In fact, if with courtesy I may say so, one of the disappointments of his statement is its vagueness. "The actual plan of defence," he says, " does not come within the province of the league. That necessarily is a matter for the experts." Heaven protect New Z'.-aland from any defence plan prepared 'by the experts! I heard one of the public s,oy the experts would drill everyone from 6 to 60. It shows how very easy it is to drift into extreme positions when the league seriously propose to leave the actual plan of defence to the experts! That is giving a blank cheque with a vengeance. Apparently that is what every member of the league will be committed to. Another reason why I should like to sea niilitary training and expenditure suspended is that it is the course that has for centuries been successfully followed by Britain herself. Almost as soon as a war was over it has been Britain's almost invariable practice drastically to reduce her military establishment and expenditure, and often"enough her naval expenditure too. On such occasions there have seldom been wanting able nnd patriotic mc:i who have declaimed against the folly of such a course, and once or twice it has proved very inconvenient to Britain. But what has been the result of centuries of such praciie? The result is that iingland has besn extraordinarily successful in war, that she has grown stronger and stronger, and that to-clav she is stronger than ever, she was. I believe it is a case of cause and effect. The suspension of military effort and expenditure has given her after each war tho rest she needed, and has enabled her to build up her industrial and financial resources, and when all is 6aid and done, it is financial resources that win most wars. It wa.s Britain's money, perhaps even more than her men. and ships, that won the late war. A nation, like a man, who keeps up a strain the whole time generally breaks down. Britain has saved herself bv keepim: great efforts for great emergencies, and" by relaxing after the emergency was over. I think General Russell will w'th me when I say that I think rt is imbecile to suppose that the world can experience the frightful destruction of wealth and the enormous waste of labor that it has during the war without suffering economically vvj suffering intensely. All other great" war« have been followed bv such suffering. Ka-'i time history has repeated itself. *T)uriir' the war inflation, high prices; after th" war depression, low prices, and, v.orst of ail dearth of employment. This ha* ffcrcerallv set in some 18 months or two years aft'e'--the, close of the war. It may be possih'e to do more than has ever been done' before to sustain credit and enconra™ industry and production. It may also' be true that New Zealand, being a producing country, with ' enormous resources and vr» sparsely settled, will suffer less ihun almost any other part of the world; and vet I am sorry to think that suffering of a" verv acute kind must come. How the poor live now with prices as high as they are is a mystery. What will hapnen if want of employment becomes general, as lias always been the case previously? Here and now the Government must economise They must husband the resources that are likely to be so sorely needed. How, then, can they afford' to spend half a mill,on a vear for a ha-porth of tar? Tin's is the aspect of the question which first led me to think that for the present our military defence system must go just now. We simply cannot afford to spend over half a milifon a year on the Territorial system. Nor can we afford just now, while it is in =uch demand and of such value In production, to lose tho labor devoted to military trainingIt 13 necessary to defend on«'s country'-' it is even more necessary to have a country to defend. New Zealand wants rest and especially rest from everything military' She cannot continue to spend on military training £500,000 yearly, „ she did l" t year—a year m which there were no camps and in witch, therefore, the expenditure should have been comparatively low Now Zealand has had to take on very heavy burdens. Let us give her a chance 'to carry them by casing her of all that we possibly