CLERGY AND THE WAR.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17435, 23 March 1917, Page 8

CLERGY AND THE WAR.

CERTIFICATES OE

EXEMPTION.

MILITARY BOARD HASFINAL

DECISION.

'A good dear has been written and said lately concerning the clergy and the war, with more,particular reference to priests of the . Roman Catholic Church. Further interesting reference was made to the subject before the Third Wellington Military Service Roard on Tuesday morning, states the "Post," when an appeal for exemption fron:. service was lodged on behalf of Father Patrick Fay, Greenmeadows College, Napier. The appeal was lodged by Archbishop OShea as 'the appellant's employer, and he was represented by Mr H. F. O'Leary. Mr W. H. S. Moorhouse presided, with him being Mr M. J. Mack and Mr A. O'L. Considine. Captain P. Baldwin was the military representative. > ■ Mr O'Leary asked if the board had received a certificate from the Minister of Defence to the effect that the calling up of the appellant would be contrary to public interest. The chairman: Yes, we have. Mr O'Leary: Then, sir, I desire to submit that the board, having received a certificate from the Minister that the callino-'up of .this reservist is contrary to the public interest, and without any evidence to the contrary, the appeal should be allowed under Regulation 9, which provides that the board shall, unless it sees some good reason to tha contrary, accept such acfrtificate. The chairman: The position wetak© up is this. It is our duty to investigate every case wfcich comes before us irrespective of the Minister's certificate. In that wav, and that. way. ohly, can wo find' out*if thero is any good reason why an appellant should not bo exempted. Mr O'Leary contended that Regulation 9 was mandatory, and that tho board must accept the Minister s certificate, unless Jt had good reason to the contrary. The appellant having the certificate of the Minister had he contended, discharged the onus,that wbb on him and the onus was on the board to show that notwithstanding the certificate of the Minister there was good reason to show "that the appelant should not be exempted. Also that : »£5 reason" must be stated in evidence before that tribunal. The board nS not act merely on th 6 op.niono it s individual members,, or o a raa ioritv of the board, as to whethei Mte £,l o 'f a reservist, with a mtnistSSficate, was or was against Saft^^"P^*£ V TO not contrary, to P« DUO „ " ...» "That," exclaimed counsel, the reflation and the certicat ? nd makcsH merely a scrap ofW: MINISTER OR BOARD? . • -\x- O'Learv submitted Continuing, Mi r V;Sded that the that Cabinet. never mtcn^u s individual XT against that board shoud beset V. Cerr,f the Minister who graivu-u . contrary, y> obtained.for a ? c^ln, h perhS'in-plete in{oSpS Baldwm: Or what out to bo incorrect representations to the Minister. ' Mr O'Leary. Exactly. . Cap Sin Baldwin : -Do you jggjb that the regulation gives the Minister O'Learv: Oh, not necessarily- ,i Mr °CbSne: Suppose the board thinks that the *&£9j>* £ .?£ Rei-rist who has been gran tod a cer Sat is no* against PUbho inter-. %r O'Leary:' Tha^s' just % Tpu. must allow the appeal in the absence of evidence to the contrary. -Thaohatrman: I suppose you are referring to the cases- of the theological students ?-Yes, and the priests, °The chairman: Nothing has been done with the priests;-their cases-nay© been adjourned. - (T ' ;: Captain Baldwin: What Mr OLeary is arguing, sir,, is that you must;, do something witht the priests; that-, you must exempt them.. . " Mr O'Leary: If you have no evidence to show that they should not be exempted. '"' . , ' Captain Baldwin,: Who is to: judgo what is in the oublic interest? Mr O'Leary: The Minister; the power has been given to him by iho regulation. • . .Captain Baldwin: I do not think the regulation aays so, but if it does it is ultra vires. The chairman referred to the cases of the theological , students, nnd said that the Archbishop had told them that the students were not'qualified to bury or marry or to administer the sacrament. The board, added the■.chairman, had no wish 'to do anything to interfere with the ministrations of the Church.

Mr O'Leary again contended that if proof wfire submitted that the appel-. ianfc were a priest the onus on him Was discharged. It was- then for the board to show that the calling up Was not against the public interest. Captain Baldwin: If you are standing on the strict thing; you nmst first of all prove that the appellant is a priest. The Minister's '.certificate will not prove it. The chairman: I think, Mr O'Leary, that you would find it easier to go on as wo have been doing in these.cases; Mr O'Leary: Well, sir, I am only acting on my instructions. THE OTHER SIDE. '

Captain Baldwin: The only body which has any jurisdiction to decide whether exemption would or would not bo in the public interest is this board. The Minister derives certain .powerß under the regxilation, but only subject to the jurisdiction of the board. Until a Final "Appeal Board is set up this board alone can judge su<h a question. , ■ '

The chairman held'that if anything else had been intended it would have been„ stated in the regulation and the matter taken right out of the hands of the ..board.

Captain Baldwin: So long as you are judicially satisfied that there are too many priests or ministers of any denomination; that is all. • MB CONSTDINE'S VIEW.

Mr Considine oaid that ? as a Catholic member of the board, hb wished to say that ho. respected the ministers of all denominations, because they hadoon» secrated their lives to the doing of good, and they were doing good. With their training and education they would, no doubt, 1 m other walks of life accumulate wealth. No one would expect that they should be sent to take the lives of their fe.llowmen, but the recent recommendation that some of these appellants should" be placed.in the medical. branch seemed to him a good thing. Where -the soldiers were dying in their thousands fighting for the lives of the people and. the liberty of the Empire, in the sight of God and man, he held these men could do more good in alleviating ,tb« Bufferings of,the wounded and consoling thoso who were dying, than by ..staying at home. " If Christ were here on earth to-day," he added, "He would say tc these men, 'Go, do this work,' ":,.•• "...

Mr Considtine concluded by stating that the impression seemed to nave got about that the board wanted to conscript the clergy to make them fight.. That was not so. -,., •,'. /,.-, THE BOARD'S DECISION. Mr O'Leary then produced certificates from Archbishop O'Shea to show that the appellant was a priest; that he was willing to serve as a chaplain, and that, his withdrawal from New Zealand Would inflict undue hardship on the Catholic. people. . ':,,',,....'..-,,,.. 6 The chairman said that it. appeared to him that the position was a trifle inconsistent'. It was stated that ' the appellant was willing to go and serve as a chaplain, also that .his: .withdrawal would be a hardship to the Catholic people.', "■'••'" s'• ■■■■■ Mr O'Leary: He would not bo withdrawn from. New, Zealand for'some considerable time. , ■ . Tho chairman : What: about when he goes to the front? ~'. , .-,- Mr O'Leary: When he goes to tho front it would mean thatlooo' Catholic soldiers would go too. 1' ■ ■ Captain Baldwin:' How "many Catholic chaplains have gone now? , Mr O'Leary: Eighteen. The chairman: What; are there I£,ooo Catholic'soldiers gone from New Zealand? Mr" O'Leary: No: 14,000; in four instances chaplains were substituted. ■ The decision of the board .was that tho appeal should be adjourned sine die, tho case to he reviewed again before tho First Division is exhausted.;