THE H.B. TRIBUNE. SATURDAY, NOV. 4th 1916. NEARLY A MILLION.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume VI, Issue 274, 4 November 1916, Page 4

THE H.B. TRIBUNE. SATURDAY, NOV. 4th 1916. NEARLY A MILLION.

It seems to us almost impossible 10 exaggerate the importance and significance of the heavy vote cast in Australia against the introduction of a measure of compulsory military service, which, it is always to be remembered, is specifically designed for the sole purpose of aiding the Allies to win this present war, and which, that end once attained, ceases automatically to be. operative. Our associations with the Commonwealth are so intimate that the decision of close on a million — probably, when the final figures appear, more than a million —of its adult population can scarcely fail to have an influence in our own Dominion. In fact, as has already been pointed out in this column, a small coterie of would-be leaders of political and social thought among us has assumed the responsibility of giving assurance in advance, and wholly without authority, that “organiser Labour,” by which is presumably meant the Trade Unionists of New Zealand, is entirely in sympathy with the Australian opposition to compulsory service. There need therefore be no apology offered for again adverting to the subject, which we are pleased to see is engaging attention and provoking discussion pretty xVell throughout the Dominion. Notable among the journals whose columns have been opened to the debate is the Auckland “Star,” in which have appeared both articles and letters that arc worthy of more than passing notice. The paper itself has spoken editorially with no uncertain voice of what may be taken as “the first surrender” on the part of a British community—for whatever may be the ultimate tally of the figures, quite sufficient has already been disclosed to show that the all-essential unity that would give vital force to Australia’s determination is wanting. No narrow majority, such as is yet possible in favour of the proposal. can give anything like confidence that it will be capable, of-being brought into practical operation without stirring up internal strife that will be wholly gratifying to Berlin. It may be, of course, that the heavy vote cast against the ministerial proposals is to a great extent the outcome of a desire to give expression to purely political and class antipathies. More especially may there have been a purpose to establish still more firmly the' domination which the irresponsible caucus of a strong political league has for long exercised over the Cabinet that has been clothed with ostensible authority, as the result, even if not wholly direct, of an election in which all had a voice. But this explanation can carry but little comfort, for it infers that the real political power in Australia lies in the hands of men who are prepared to prostitute it to their own personal ends, even at the risk of endangering the foundations of our own national life. And, as has been said, there are among ourselves those who would, in the name of the wage-earners of New Zealand, cheer them on to that end. The under-currents that are at work not only in Australia, but in New Zealand, may be guessed from the concluding words of one of the letters written to the “Star” by one of the most militant of the Auckland Trade Unionists—one who is really so fond of compulsion that he would, probably deny the right to earn a living, and therefore the right to lire, to anyone who did not enrol in the Army of Trade Unionism. After a lengthy dissertation on the principles of democracy which dictated the heavy opposition vote in Australia, he winds up thus:—“One result of the referendum should be an inclination on the part of the Allies to discuss terms of peace. The last man and the last shilling idea may suit- politicians, but it should be apparent to even them now that when they use that phrase they are not speaking for the people they are supposed to represent.” There can be but the one interpretation of the sentiment thus expressed—that this writer would be pleased to see the Allies driven, for lack of men, to seek a peace that would be a virtual triumph for the enemy—an eneipy who, but for the protection afforded by the Allies’ fisrhting men, would long ere this have had Australia and its democracy under the heel of a militarist autocracy. There may be nothing of technical treason in such expressions, but there is surely much that comes so perilously near it as to be disguishable merely in name. And it is to be greatly feared that in Australia there has been much of this influence at work, from whatever source it may have flowed. Most readers who have been paying any heed to industrial developments there, and have noted whence have come the noisy agitators to whom Labour is so prone to listen, will be able to make a fair guess as to where lies the fountain-head. No one_ can believe that the cult of the I.W.W. is the natural growth of Australia’s wholesome soil. It is the product of seed that have been sown for a purpose by those whose interests lie in the downfall of the Empire to which Australia owes so much, and to which, willy-nilly, she will yet for many years have to look not only for protection, but for the means of peaceful developnn nt—unless, indeed, the agents oi our foes get their way and bring tins most desirable possession under tl c all-envying rule of Prussia. So far. we in New Zealand have managed to keep fairly free from these influences, but it is plain to all who care to read the signs of the times that the typhus inoculation in Germany’s prison camps is not the only process of the kind that is going on.