COMPULSORY TRAINING

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXXIII, Issue 15901, 12 April 1912, Page 8

COMPULSORY TRAINING

AN ANTI-MILITARIST DEPUTATION. . MINISTER. UPHOLDS THE ACT. [Pur Press Association.] WELLINGTON, April 11. Replying To-day to a deputation L orn the Labour and Socialist Parties, leac© Council, Society of Friends and Wellington Anti-militarist League, which protested against the compulsory provisions of the Defence Act, the Hon A. M. Myers said the arguments the deputation had used had in no way. altered the opinion ho held formerly. One speaker asked what had ho got to defend ? There was no class in the community which was more affected by the question of defence than the workers, and he'took strong exception to tho statement • that tho workers had nothing to defend. In the first place, they must admit that tho workers in New Zealand as a class were better off than those in any other country in the world. Secondly, ho had yet to learn that the worker cared less lor his wife and family than did any other class of the community, and, therefore, holding as lie did to serve the State in protectin cr the Stato, and thereby protecting his hearth and -home, ho considered that the Act was of special interest to the working classes in New Zealand. It had also been suggested that enforcement of tho Act would mean unpleasantness to tho Government Ho could only say that as Defence Minister it was clearly his duty to administer tho law despite any. unpleasantness that might arise through that administration. “You have, of course, nailed your colours to tho mast,” continued the Minister, “ and it is necessary for me to-do likewise. So long as lam Defence Minister it will clearly be my duty to administer tho law. I sliaU be no party to seeing that the law is broken, and I take exception to the remark's that have been made that tho authorities have only enforced it in somo districts and not in others. it that is so it will he enforced in all districts. I shall be no party to seeing the law held in disrespect. Everybody will be treated alike. A voice: You will have to build more prisons. , , i . ■ The Minister went on to say that as far as imprisonment was concerned, there was no doubt there would be an alteration of the law in that direction. Tn regard to disabilities, they might be disagreeable, but that was tlio Act. He believed they were quite sincere and quito conscientious in their objections, but they must bo prepared to accept tlio disabilities which tho Legislature imposed. Why should they take exception to tho Act? A Voice: Tyranny. The Minister said he failed to see it. It was a misconception. Every boy or man who had gone through a camp had been greatly pleased, and he believed from his own experience that they came out better men physically and morally. (“No no.”) That was his honest conviction, atul he offered any of them the chance of going to a. camp and making first-hand investigation tor thomsclves. They were aiming at efficiency. The State had rights, and individuals had duties to perform to tho State. They did not desire to create a military spirit. They were going to physically improve the youths ot i\ew Zealand,' and show them their responsibilities to the community, and lie believed that the result would bo in every wav eminently satisfactory. “ Why make it compulsory? asked ono of the deputation, and the Minister replied, “'Because we believe it is the duty of every individual to servo the Stato.” .. u You can’t talce them all, said someone. v “ That remains to bo seen, replied Mr Myers. “Meanwhile,” he added, “ I believe that from a physical, social and industrial point of view everybody will benefit. Wo have a glorious lientago* handed down to us. (Ironical laughter.) lam sorry to hear you. I feel convinced that if an cflemy was to land in New Zealand there would not bo a single shirker amongst you.” Tlio very existence of the Empire, their very lives, he continued, depended on efficient' defence. They said they had nothing to fight for. He said they had everything to fight for. A'Voice:. You can have my share. The Minister: You must- admit that there’s no place in the world where you havo greater freedom. A Voice: We-have no freedom here. Speech has been denied us. Look at our public meetings. The police force conies and disperses them. The Minister nointed out that the remedy lny in tlieir own hands. They must return members to Parliament who would give effect to -tlieir wishes. He would not vote for the repeal of the Act, which lie held was in the best interests of the people. The object of tho Act was to form a trained body of men which, if occasion arose (which God forbid) would be capable of fighting for their country and their homes, and their dear ones. . They considered that the best way to bring that about was bv training every boy. The deputation held tho contrary opinion, but he asked them to give the other side side credit for sincerity. After full consideration they would, of course, take such action as they deemed fit.

“ Would you be prepared,” asked a member of the deputation, “to amend the Act so as to prevent the forces being used in the event of industrial disputes?” “I would not.be in favour of that,” replied the Minister, “ because law and order have to ho maintained.” (Cries of “Ha, ha,’ and jeers.) “It is in your own interests. Don’t make, any mistake.” (Laughter and a Voice, “Class distinction.”) “ There is no class distinction. You are just as much interested in this as I am.”

A Voice: Tha.frreply won’t be forgotten right throughout Now Zealand. After further conversation the deputation withdrew.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, If a public man makes an uncomfortably true statement his political opponents raise a cry of “ bad taste.” If it is a woman they say “ hysterical.” Suppose, instead of adopting these tactics, wo discuss the Defence Bill. I have no doubt that you and Mrs Atkinson are as anxious for the welfare of Now Zealand as we anti-militarists, only wo differ as to the method of ensuring it. When'Mrs Atkinson says “without discipline, obedience, exercise and enthusiasm, the boyhood or this country cannot develop into the strong, lawabiding, faithful Christian manhood that is the greatest glory of a people,” she is on perfectly safe ground. If y ou nr she can give reasonable evidence that military drill will bring about this greatly-to-be-desired end, I think you will And the objectors to the scliemo reduced to such a small minority that wo shall bo quite safe in giving them full liberty of conscience. But if military drill does ensure strong, law-abiding, faithful Christian manhood, why do wo not see more evidence of it in countries where universal training has been in force so long? Austria has had compulsory military training longer thnn any other European country, yet in your issue of March 215 you report an interview with Mr J. Strassmeyer, who has just returned from a visit to his birthplace, in tho oourso of which ho says that only one in four of. the Austrian youths are found physically fit for military training, that “ crime is very great in tho cities, robbery and murder, being a daily matter, suicide also is extremely provident, there being several cases iii a day. Each man of the lower orders

carries his knife and in the case or quarrels which spring up on the smallest provocation, uses it.” : Truly, after a century of compulsory military training they seem as <ar from strong, law-abiding, Christian manhood as tho worst maligner of happy wholesome young New Zealanders would make out our own boys to be. Hoping that you will explain the j apparent contradiction. —I am, etc., SARAH S. PAGE. (Mrs Atkinson may bo safely left to ! speak for herself.—Ed. “L.T. )