CORRESPONDENCE.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 16 October 1924, Page 9

CORRESPONDENCE.

“THAT IS THE; LIBERAL LEAGUE FOR YOU.” (la the Editor.) Sir,—The above. sentence by Mr. D. J. Hughes at a meeting of his creditors before the Deputy-Official Assignee and appeared in your issue of the Star on Saturday. Now, Sir, a-s a member of the Liberal League and one of tbe 500 executive under the leadership of the late R,t. Hon. R. J. Seddon. 1 never saw the name of D. J. Hughes a.s a subscriber to our funds, neither could I expect it, while [ knew he supported Mr. B. Dive to win the Egmont seat against the Liberal candidate. As proof of this assertion, when addressing a large meeting of electors, Mr. Dive is reported to have said “that having Mr. James Oonagfeu at Pihama, Mr. M. J. Brennan of Opunake. and Mr. Dan Hughes at Manaia as nominators and supporters of the Reform Government, he was quite sure of being returned against anyone the Liberal Party could put up against him.’’ It is quite true Mr. Hughes stood in the Liberal interest for the New Plymouth seat against the late Harry Okey. Personally 1 offer Air Hughes my sympathy in his financial troubles and trust lie will at the next, meeting of his creditors withdraw the sentence whi'-h adorns the headlines of this letter and offer an apology to the true Liberals whom lie has maligned.. Thanking yon in anticipation,—l am. etc., A. MeTvEOWX. Pihama. October 13. 1924. AIR HOBBS AND AIR HORNER, (To the Editor.)' Sir, —If nothing more convincing can be said in defence of the Scout movement than the platitudinous selections of time-honoured stock phrases and hoary old copy-book maxims published by Mr Horner, I am at a loss to understand why he rushed into print at all. In his excitement he apparently quite overlooks the fact that 'my letter was first and foremost a challenge to Air T. C. Hobbs to substantiate a statement made at a recent meeting. Air Hobbs has remained eloquently silent, thereby acknowledging that he has no reply, and Mr Horner must know that his ’copy-book maxims do not constitute a reply. Air Horner argues that the tone of my letter is sufficient proof of the accuracy of Air Hobbs’ statement, but he can hardly he impressed with his own logic when he argues thus. Nor can Air Horner expect to be taken seriously in his assertions that the Scout movement is “entirely,-- a peace organisation” and not “in any way” recognised by the Defence authorities. Before he can hone for us to accept his confident assurance he might explain the following: (1) AVhy did Ernest Thompson Seton, founder of the ‘ ‘Woodcraft League” of America, which was certainly free from any military element, and on which Baden-Powell modelled his Scout organisation, complain that “BadenPowell introduced a military element, which he disliked, and in other ways altered his plans”? (2) Why did Baden-Powell relate with pride that the Kaiser was introducing into the Prussian military system certain features of this so-called “peace organisation”? See his “Yarns for Boy Scouts” (The Scout Librarv, 1909, No. 2) at ■n. 20: “The Kaiser is reported in a newspaper which has been sent to me to have advised his soldiers to carry out .the training of the Boy Scouts of Britain, and to ‘he prepared’ for carrying out their duty by making themselves fit and capable in every way. So you see, Scouts, that you are being held up as an example to follow in other countries.” (3) AVhy did the British National Service League, the out-and-out conscription body, under whose auspices Lord Roberts used to advocate compulsory military training for the youth of Britain, hand over its funds to the Boy Scouts Association when it recentlv disbanded? See Glasgow Herald for Alarch 1(5, 1923. (4) If the movement is not “in any way” recognised by the Defence authorities, why does Baden-Powell in his “Scouting for Boys” at p. 319 say : “The curious result of their training is that we are continually being asked by officers in the services* co send them recruits who have been trained as Boy Scouts. They prefer them to any other for soldiering.” Does Mr Horner consider this result a “curious” one? (5) How came it about that Boy Scouts were used “in conjunction with the troops” for strike-breaking purposes in Melbourne in November last® (6) AVhy did Lord Methuen, as recently reported in the Glasgow Herald, state: “As the country did not choose to have compulsory training for youth, they must do all they could to encourage voluntary organisations such as the Boy Scouts”? (7) AVhy did the Dominion Council of the Scout Association of New Zealand last year resolve to request the Government “to raise the age limit of Boy Scouts liable to military training from 14 to 16”? Does not this almost amount to a request for more official recognition ? (8) AA T hat means the following cable from Poland, dated October 5, 1920: “Polish Boy Scouts took part in the battle of Grodno, being accompanied by Girl Guides doing Red Cross work. One company of 140, of ages from 15 to 19 years, lost half its number in killed and wounded”? Did it participate as a “peace organisation” ? (9) Can it he claimed that the movement is not “in any way” recognised by the Defence authorities when we have statements like the following from a paragraph on Bov Scouts appearing in the Hawera Star of May 31, 1923: “A plea for the formation of a Sea Scout Troop in New Plymouth as advocated by Brigadier-General Andrew was made by Sergeant-Major Alahoney (Hawera), who quoted the old naval saying ‘catch ’em young’ in support of his contention. These bovs could later 'take their places in the navy and mercantile m'arine fleets.” Has the Scout movement ever repudiated this “recognition” ? (10) If the Scout movement is “entirely a peace organisation,” etc., why did the Allies in disarming Germanv in accordance with the Treatv of ATersailles compel her to disband' her Bov Scouts ? If Mr Horner can provide satisfactory answers to the above 10 questions I will undertake, at his option, either to provide another 10 questions' (and I warn him they will become harder as we proceed) or else to answer the irrelevant and rather impertinent question contained in the last sentence of his letter. —I am, etc., AV. A. SHEAT. Hawera, Oct. 11, 1924.