MILITARY TRAINING.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXXII, Issue 15632, 2 June 1911, Page 2

MILITARY TRAINING.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —I consider compulsory military j training merely a- side issue of miliI tarism. and, 6uch being the case, I will confine my remarks to the latter only. The Socialist party have passed, a resolution repeatedly stating from their platform that in the event of war they, as a. body of men, would refuse to fight. But have my Socialist friends j ever studied the Question ? I think not. They say that they hate war and refuse to be paid murderers, but who does not hate war? Our hatred, howI ever, will not keep it from coming. It ' has been stated also that in the event of war our Socialist friends would deI clare a. general strike, but as the workers are not organised, and not likely to I bo for some time, this oft-repeated j phrase is foolish. Then, what can wo j do? Will wo stand still, as our Socialist friends would like us to do, and. lie shot down ? This is a question my anti-militarist, friends will have to answer sooner or later. One of my Socialist friends will not fight for a country which ho does not own. In other words, in the event j of Britain being invaded bv Germany my anti-militarist friend would remain I in his snug little job, draw his wages, I and let the other fellows do nil the fighting; and, if Britain should be doI fsated, he would be just as well off under German rule as ho was under British. I can remember not so many years ago in Lancashire (England* thousands of people were starving. Women with children in their arms were begging in the streets for bread. The poverty was awful, and yet there was no war. The simple cause was the stoppage of raw material for one particular commodity. Now. my antimilitarist friend, what would happen m the event of Britain being invaded by Germany ? Would it* not cause a stoppage of raw material, not only in one commodity, but all over the country? What about my anti-militarist friend s snug little job? I think if such, a state of affairs ns I have predicted came to pass mv anti-militarist friends and revolutionary Socialists would prefer fighting to being shot down luce dogs in their own homes and by their own countrymen.—l ani, etc., ‘MILITANT SOCIALIST.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir—l appreciate the spirit of the letter from “ Defence, not Defiance., for the ono reason that tlio writer is man enough to own up to responsibilities, and to the difficulties which he knows to exist concerning this matter. He feels this responsibility, and would therefore like to bridge over the gulf that exists between the conscientious objector and the individual of a. different stage of evolution who does not feel impelled by such scruples. Except to raise ail objection to bis reference t o what lie calls “ persons afflicted with the tired feeling. ’ which is only idle talk. I can see nothing whatever that would enable any compromise to be forthcoming. Truth "knows no compromise', and the man who is col pnourii to dabble with it, with this end in view, courts certain disaster, and the dividing knife between truth and falsehood, between the real and the unreal, between the genuine and the pham, is as keen of edge as ever it was ages and ages ago. The Defence Act, I know, aims at providing certain work which might be thought—by “somebody else’ of course —suitable for the objecting “non-combatants.” But-, as Mr D. W. ♦Tones hn& so well put it, can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? Can we, in sincerity, continue to preach “ Defence, not defiance,’’ and at the same time deliberately defy man’s most sacred, inmost and impelling convictions? From the very nature of the thing, and its deliberate interference with mail’s' actions towards his fellow humanity (and compared with which such questions as “compulsory vaccination,” “national prohibition,” and. “Bible in schools” are as mere flea-bites) there can be no such thing as compromise ! It amounts to nothing else but “ a parting of the ways,” and a shaking up in this dominion's politics—both church and State—such as we have never known before, is a positive certainty! Verily, when Mr Cox made that reference to a “ destiny-point,” little did lie dream that it was so close upon us! —I am, etc., , E. H. C. BIDDER.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Is it not a great pity that such a worldly necessity as military training cannot lie honestly discussed without numerous and altogether misplaced references to the Scriptures? Surely the head of your correspondent Mr K. H. C. Ridder must have ached after searching the Book for his feeble quotations, which, l take it. he considered as upholding his side of the question. Of course, it is only to lie expected that ono looking down from the loftv pedestal of self-esteem upon which your correspondent is perched would term my “ ideas,” as set down iii my previous letter, as “muddled.” Perhaps Mr Bidder was himself in a muddled condition when lie read them, else, where would he find me as quoting such rot as my “assisting in the British manufacture of arms and ammunition for the Chinese, Japanese and other foreign Powers?” The concluding portion of your correspondent’s letter was mainly based on his suppositions of what 1 thought, and he therefore is to be excused for his very feeble remarks on the grounds of his incompetence as a thought reader. However, 1 will not further discuss such bombast and efforts at self-ag-grandisement as your correspondent employs. To make my views plainer and absolutely above misconstruction,! T contend that compulsory military training is justifiable on the following grounds: •Firstly, it tends for peace. The very fact that any country or organisation is prepared! to face any emergency lends security t'o that country or organisation. It would be absurd for an untrained man to attempt to thrash a man trained to the hour. As with units s<> with thousands. Great Russia thought to thrash little Japan. She met a smaller number of men. but better trained and better disciplined ones than her own, and was herself thrashed instead. That, you see. was the result op over rielf-estimat ion. Secondly, military training in times ot peace is not merely a good education for a youth or a young mau, but gives him knowledge which is of vital importance, particularly in a country which would practically he wholly dependent on a volunteer army should occasion arise to defend, her shores. Mr Ridder prohahlv decs not know which end oi a rifle “shoots." The knowledge obtained in military training represents so much reserve power to the. country wherein it- is practised. Thirdly, and lastly, military training tends to promote the development of healthy minds in lmnlthv bodies. Apart from the education rained when on parade, n few hours per week given, to .healthful ex-' ercise and social intercourse is net- retrograde step in the upbuilding of sturdy manhood. As regards camp life. : it. is, evident that some of your correspondents have culled their ideas from-very unreliable hearsay—certainly not from personal experience, The majority of volunteers look forward to the week or fortnight’s encampment as a in oft delightful holiday. Only grumblers and discontents, such as “ AntiPatriot." cry against these camps of instruction. I suppose we shall find all your onti-militarv training correspondents far from the madding crowd ! m June :?? next. It would truly lie a ! most galling experience for them to | see the thousands of Territorials in i Christchurch who take a pleasure and [

pride in endeavouring to be a credit to the company to which they are attached.—l am, etc., "UNION JACK. TO rnE EDITOR. Sir, —I am well pleased with two of your young correspondents as regards compulsory military training. lam not pleased with the way the Bill went through the House. T, for one, knew practically nothing of the seriousness of it and what it meant to young men like myself. I would like to know what the churches think of a matter like this; they seem to be rather quiet. I should also like to know how a young man attending a night school and holding a. scholarship for the same is going to bo considered. This compulsory military training system seems to be a scheme to protect the big man and his capital in New Zealand and England. Ido not agree with being dictated to by a bumptious, highly-paid individual who, according to what we have seen of military officers, will expect us to wipe the dust off his boots at his command. I think that, every young man ought to hold out for his rights and not accept the law without a murmur.—l am, etc., BIGHTS.

TO THE BDITOB. Sir, —Being a New Zealander, and having on two occasions risked my life and, I might say, all a man has by volunteering and being accepted for active service in the Boer War and Natal Rebellion in 1906, I would like to state what the present “so-called patriotic Government” has done, or has not done for me. When the Boer war was on, young fellows leaving for the front were considered heroes, and it was said that the Government were going to give them all sorts of things when thoy returned. I happened to be one of the unlucky ones who wished to fight for King and country. I tried six contingents. Being only five feet six inches, I could not be enrolled, so I resigned from the railway service. Although I had been in it three years and a half, they would not even allow me “ leave of absence for active service,” although all oontingenters got such leave.

I happened to manage twelve months’ active service without ever being sick or off column; I never even missed a day’s duty, and for six solid months had outpost duty every other night. This shows Government red-tape. A small man was not considered as good as a. big man, and I did not get my leave because I was a small man. Yet many a big contingenter never even saw the firing-line. After serving in an irregular corps I had no difficulty in getting into a contingent in Cape Town. I returned home with the same, and subsequently joined the railway. In *1906 the Natal Rebellion broke out, and knowing I could not get leave for active service, I again 'resigned from my position, and on the second occasion paid for a passage, £l7 17s, to Durban, and joined a corps, and I was one of the last on the British side to be disbanded at the finish of the rebellion. On my return to New Zealand I again applied for service on the railway, having previously served seven years, but. T was informed that as I had twice been in. the service' I could not bo again engaged. Is this how the present “patriotic Government” intends to treat the lads who now are supposed to do compulsory military training P After having served the. best part of their lives in a Government position will they be thrown over?

I know when the time comes for my lads to do training I shall take them to another land. I trust they will never see the degrading sights their, father lias seen, never hear the disgusting, . insulting and impure language which is heard and is so common when on active sendee, and also heard in ordinary .Volunteer camps in New Zealand.. My hoys shall not bo tempted to drink beer and liquors as they would be in camp, and especially on active service. The Germans or Japanese may occupy New Zealand now; it doesn't matter to me.—l am. etc., "SILENT SIX.

TO THE EDITOR. ■Sir, —Of late one of the _ main subjects of discussion in your journal has been compulsory military training, and it is . pleasant to note there are some men at least, who do not believe in war ns the only means of adjusting disputes between nations. I, as a young man eligible for this training, find it impossible to meet with the demands of man’s law in this respect. Since I have been brought up in and have endeavoured to adhere closely to the bonds of Christianity, I have learnt that to do good is right, but that to seek to bring: man’s downfall in any respect is injustice. With the poet I say, “ War in all men's eyes should he a monster of iniquity.” Any man that hns studied the question seriously cannot indulge in the higher ideals of life if he holds with war or any of its surroundings. We read by notices and newspapers that any young man who comes under, this military training and neglects to register himself will become liable to a fine of £5. Should that intimidate us to lose our right of conscience, even if some of our leaders have deserted us in the hour of need. Well do we know that all the regalia of this world cannot dignify the death of n villain, neither can prison-cells taint the unblemished honour of a son of freedom and Christianity. If the worst conies, and they can offer us no other alternative than imprisonment if we do, not enrol, then let us submit to the alternative in preference to spending years in training to bocorno proficient. in the art of slaying our own human brother, who is, perhaps, compelled to battle by those who seem to see nothing nobler in life than the worship of self, the love of power and the lust for gold.—l am, et-c., H. Ik OOLDBECK, Jun.