MILITARY TRAINING.

Evening Star, Issue 23326, 24 July 1939, Page 10

MILITARY TRAINING.

TO IKB .EDITOR. Sir, —Those countries that are trying to retain democratic principles are themselves most unequal as regards " equality of sacrifice." Let us take the lot of the well trained, patriotic French, conscript who is willing to sacrifice even his very life in the defence of "La Belle France." Let us remember his pay of one halfpenny a day and compare it with that of New Zealand soldiers of Mr F. Jones's creation who pays his troops 12s w.hen in camp. That is merely 288 times as much as the French poilu gets, yet both are willing to do an equal share in defence of democracy, with this difference: the conscript of France may be a trained man, the New Zealander may be untrained; he would receive his big daily pay while becoming efficient. \ 7 'our readers may ask why I draw these comparisons with France. I merely take the New Zealander and French soldiers as the extremes in military pay, and I intend no reflection whatever as to the fighting qualities of either, for I know too much about both. Some may say the volunteer is worth the great difference, since volunteers are more spirited and enthusiastic than those pressed into service. To this I would reply, show me men. considering the attractions of pay and all other circumstances, comparable to the French soldiers; they are incomparable, and are certainly not " soldiers of fortune." The finances of New Zealand do not permit such high rates of pay. The needs of New Zealand do not permit such a scheme.to operate. This business is too grim, too dangerous to dangle before the eyes of our young men these attractive rates of pny. New Zealanders, one and all. should be ready to defend this beautiful country for the love of it. Who wants to see it ko down? The last war to end war obtained foi mo the princely sum of Is 6d a day after 14 years' service. My niece in London, working in a munition factory, received £8 a week making shells for the same objective—to win the war. Munition workers and armament factories are marking huge fortunes when the State should be the only profiteer in its endeavour to retain the fcsedom of what we term democracy. The Hon. Mr F. Jones is to my mind quite at variance with the wishes ofthe general public, regardless of political views, which beside this urgent problem of defence disappear totally. If the truth is known, considering the danger and humiliation and troubles that the Empire is passig through, for each man volunteering the pay is sufficient for at least four men. If the thinking public really believe there is danger it is up to each one to act accordingly by vehemently protesting now, and not wait till a General Election and the ballot box. It may mean the end of this form

of box for that of longer dimension—coffins—which, would be preferable to Nazidom and the tender mercies of our Japanese friends. My conception of equality of sacrifice is not to " spout " about conscription of wealth first, for that is already earmarked. Party politics and the fancy whims and brainwaves of those responsible for our very existence by adequate defence matter not one iota. If we go down there will bo no politics at all, and the sooner we realise this the better. The next war may be " finis " if we do not kick ourselves in the back and copy the patriotic French soldiers. One thing stands out in great prominence: we must all think alike in these matters unless we would prefer a dictator to do the thinking for us. We cannot afford a small expensive army; wc need every man available to make New Zealand unassailable.—l am, etc., B. E. Kite. July 24,