Untitled

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume VI, Issue 271, 1 November 1916, Page 4

In the course of an article published in the “Sydney Morning Herald” last week, revealing the spirit of true democracy and emphasising the responsibilities of citizenship, Mr. T. Rolin, K.C., said that every nation stands for two things mainly. Within the nation for justice to all; that is the meaning of onr laws ; but against the world the nation stands for self defence. In the long vears of peace we have a little forgotten this last, yet it is the primarv duty. Other* nations have not be*en allowed to forget. Equally in democratic France and. in the kingdom of Japan, the faith that every man holds his life at the service of his country, and must give it without question when his country demands, is the root of citizenship. We are asked to say whether we are of the same mind towards our country. It is impossible to suppose that any answer but one could be made by the men and women of our race if thev rightly apprehended the question ; and if any doubt what their answer should be, it can only’ be because they have not fully understood what they are called upon to decide. Let us fairly admit that our rulers have thrown on us a heavy burden. We are a democracy, attempting a task not often tried in the history of the world —to govern ourselves ;*to say directly or indirectly by the votes of the men and women of the community what our laws and national conduct shall be. Everyone, and this is our democracy, is called upon for his and her opinion. But to succeed in such a task, rightly to answer every question put to us, we must understand. And to understand we must have considered, educated ourselves, learnt and been taught something at lea,st on the subject we are asked to decide. And here is the point: In the long years of peace our minds have been almost wholly turned t'o other things; questions, at bottom, of justice within the State, never of our duty as against the world. On all the questions we have been used to consider, we have had time to take thought; speakers and writers address us for months or years before the question finally takes shape and on most questions we vote indirectly, saying that we prefer the guidance of this or that politician, and so leave the matter to be worked out by people better instructed. But here, on a question different in quality, in a sense suddenly, in spite of two years of war, with little time to learn or understand, we are asked directly to say of ourselves what is it we regard as the duty of a citizen to his nation hi war ? Truly there can be but one answer: That every citizen owes a life to his country, and must be ready to give it when called upon. But this seems a hard saying, and we are bewildered with every sort of false issue ; and time, that helps so much to clear our minds, is wanting. “Would you send another woman’s son to death?” our women voters are asked. But to answei* “No” to that question is to say that the nation must- never go to war, not even to defend itself. Consider, if an enemy landed on our shores, and the question were put to our electors : Defend your selves or not ? Tn answer “Yes ? ’ would equally be to send another womans son to possible death. Must we then never defend ourselves? If not, we will be, and deserve to be, the slaves of more virile nations. The women of Sparta sent their warriors out with the message, “Return with your shield, or on itmeaning return in honour or not at all. And the women of Japan to-day give their departing soldiers a leaf of the cherry tree,

meaning nothing else. Are our women and our men less inspired with devotion to their country Can we not say, with the great Athenian “How fortunate are the dead who die in battle ; and how fortunate are .von to whom sorrow comes m so uloriljus a shape.’’ To answer “No ’ on Saturday next, to proclaim tn the world tlial'v. e i<-gard ourselves as owing anything less than the highest duty to onr country, is to cover ourrehcs wi'h '-■hame. 1« that a small thing 1 The British Ambassador announced to the Russian Minister that England would not help Denmark against Prussia. ’ Then I am to understand," said Gostzehakoff. that England will never go to war on a. question of honour? That England would not go to war was the belief of (lorniany in August. 1914. So with us ; to declare that we owe no duty to our country is to invite aggression. But. to show th<’ world that we arc ready I<> make the supreme sacrifice in our defence is our surest shield against attack.