THE DEFENCE QUESTION.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLIII, Issue 119, 18 May 1909, Page 7

THE DEFENCE QUESTION.

[FROM OTTR CORRESPONDENT.] WELLINGTON, Saturday. Mr McNab dosn't intend to let the grass grow under his feet whilst on his lecturing tour in favor of universal military training. He has planned out a campaign worthy of Mr Seddon in the good old days, when "King Dick" used to rush round the two Islands ton electioneering bent._ I do not,' however, notice Blenheim mentioned in the itinerary which has been published,, and I would suggest that some of your citizens send Mr McNab an invitation to deliver an address in your town. [The matter is now receiving attention here.—Ed.] Mr McNab has been interviewed by a local/journal on the subject.of his scheme, and I am glad to see that what he advocates is practically a slight, variation of the Swiss system to which I have made frequent allusion in your columns. He laughs at the idea that he is to preach conscription. On the subject of dislocation of trade, he says:, "I recognise that every must consider the question of trade. But we must consider the question of trade remembering what will happen to trade if the people are not ready for war when it comes.. Is it too great an insurance premium to ask that at 19, or at 17, 18 or 19, at the man's option, he is to put aside one month of his time to get the basis of his instruction, and for two or three years afterwards a period time not exceeding a fortnight, which is to include Easter; the bulk of that work being directed to field manoeuvres ? More industrious, nations than we are carry on their industry with a far greater tax than that. I mention the Swiss and the Norwegians 'with their universal military instruction; and, of course, the, conscript nations, amongst whom, I suppose, .we can place the most go-ahead in the world to-day. "There would be no individual loss," adds the \ ex-Minister, "because the country must pay a man who is called out, and, as the country is getting the benefit, I cannot see the objection. I believe that the,maximum interference with business^ would be a fourweek period one year, followed by a I fortnight on two or three years thereafter. Certainly that would give us a cbuntry the volunteers from which for service hereafter would be qualified to a far greater degree for their work than they - are at the present time; And it would do this: It would let the nations of the world know that after having provided for the necessary transport to bring a fairly strong army to our shores to invade us, the work was only commencing when they landed their boats through the surf. Under present conditions, it is held by many authorities that the bulk of their task would be accomplished once they had landed." \

COMPULSORY TRAINING,

POINTS IN THE CONTROVERSY,

(N.Z. Times.) New Zealand is worth defending. Defence is everybody's business. It is cowardly to shirk one's duty. It is easy to roll stones in, the road of , reform. : It is easy to be a patriot by proxy. Defence is not the other fellow's job. The volunteer system has failed. Something' is wanted to take its place. ,What are we going to do about it? Shall we wait for a lead from the i Hoggs and O'Regans? . Or shall we take hold of the job ourselves? . . ' . " Shall we waste our time in squabbling? Or shall we settle the matter by arbitration? Shall we waste time hearkening to the man with a fad? ■ , •, * Shall we propitiate the grievance^ monger? Shall we discuss ''the ' incidence of

taxation?" Or shall we confer together in amity and wisdom ? And produce something worth while? We fought to obtain New Zealand. Shall we refuse to fight to retain New' Zealand ? . j Or shall we wile away the time listening to the perfervid eloquence of . the Hoggs and O'Regans? Until the enemy is at our gates? How can we best prove our citizenship? How can we best do our duty to the Empire ? How can we best mantain the tradi-

tions of our race ? ) How can we keep New Zealand White? . By having efficient and disciplined troops.

By having these troops well officered and well led... By haying a proper commissa,riat and medical equipment. Can these things be got at five minutes' notice? If not, what are we going to do about itr < Sit down and discuss single tax, and freetrade, and socialism? Or proceed,to set our house in order? You do not like compulsion? My dear, sir! Civilisation is based on compulsion. You are compelled to observe the law. You are compelled to obey the rule of the road. You are compelled to register your dog. You are compelled to serve on the jury. ■You are compelled to observe sanitary

precautions. You are compelled to do a thousand

things. Why? ... Because it is in the interests of the

community that you should do so. Most of the people who have shown practical resistance to compulsion are in gaol. They are called law-breakers. The first law is the law of pfeserva-

tion. Self-preservation, State preservation, the preservation of individual . rights. None of these rights can be ensured without force. The civil force is the Policeman. ' The military force is the Soldier. The volunteer soldier has broken down. The regular soldier is unpopular in democracies. No free citizen desires to have a hired man fight for him. He wants to defend his own hearth. . He wants to meet the enemy face to face. But if he doesn't know how to fight? If he hasn't been taught?

If he doesn't know the butt from the muzzle? If he hasn't ever visited the butts? What use is he? And if one man ought to be trained all men ought to be trained. The squatter's son, the merchant's son, the editor's son. j As well as the laborer's son and the son of the wharf-lumper. That's the democratic principle. Under that principle rights and privileges are synonymous. But they cannot be made synonymous unless two words are inserted m the preamble. . "You must!" These are harsh words, but unless you use them your scheme will fail. Because there are always a lot of people who will shirk. A lot of people want to lean over the football barriers and yell. A lot of young fellows want to makeJ 1 money at the pony meet. A lot of people want to go and play golf. But "You Must!" says the State. And you must, right enough! . < The football barracker is the makings

of a fine jingo. His business is to'urge on—the other fellow.

"Go it, Billy!" "Stoush 'im!" "Feet f ee t!"—the other fellow's feet al. . the time.

He gets very red in the face does the .barracker —hooling the other fellow on. •

My, and isn't he great at ,hooling the other fellow on when the drums are beating! .-

'<With the responsibility for war brought home to every household, there would be far less jingoism than there is to-day," '> Says Mr .Quelch, the English Socialist. The New Zealand Socialist, and, Mr , O'Regari respond to an this with an honest "Bah!" That is their language.

That will probably be their line of argument at the Town Hall meetv ing- ■■■,: 1

"Compulsory training," says Mr Quelch, "is the most anti-jingo, the most efficient, the most economical organisation that; can be devised under existing i conditions." "Bah!"

Listen: "Compulsory training is a I live problem in the ranks of the Tory party, seeing that ; their avowed object is protection and onscription." Says Mr O'Regan. "It, finds no support in the Liberal Party, outside of a few Whigs who are Tories in disguise." ; Says Mr O'Regan. "In the ranks of' Labor it finds no •support whatever." ' Says ,Mr O'Regan., "It is true that the Labor party in , Australiaj after many grave disagreements, have agreed on a sys- .' "■. tern." Says Mr O'Regan. Mr O'Regan assumes that he can lead the New Zealand Labor 'Party by the nose on this question; But can he?

Does he not know that the New ZJealand Labor Party has got a curious habit of thinking for itself?. That it is tired of the wreckers and the people who put boulders in the road? • ' / ; Let Mr O'Regan listen to Mr Hughes, of Australia, as sane a democrat, as ever breathed. .

"Peace can be obtained by the Britisher, by the Australian, only by being ready for war." Says Mr Hughes. ■ "There are men who talk about the , brotherhood of man and urge that no one will attack an inoffensive nation." Says Mr Hughes.1 "Is Great Britain inoffensive? Is' there a nation upon which she has not declared war on occasion? What is bur right here, we who prate about peace ? By whajf, virtue are we There to-day except' by brute force?" Asks Mr Hughes. , ' ' 'We came here and displaced those who were placed in possession, if any were, by the hand of Providence. Where are they now?" Asks Mr Hughes.

"In Tasmania there is not one to Le found, while in Australia there may perhaps be one in every hundred miles. And we talk about peace!" Says Mr Hughes. "We have arrogantly proclaimed to the world that this is to be a White Man'^ Country, xhere are 4,200,000 of us, of whom 21,000 bear arms, and perhaps 5000 or 6000' could bear them efficiently. We debar the colored races from entry.", Says Mr Hughes. • "To the 400,000,000 of Chinese, toth* 44,000,000 of Japanese—flushed | by their triumph over a nation that humbled every other country in Europe, in its turn—we have said: 'You must not come in!' And the weapon with which we propose to keep them out is a parchment Act of' Parliament with a red seal on it 1" Says Mr Hughes.

"Beyond that, and Providence, and a noble opinion of 'ourselves, ye have no means of making good our boast. But if the White Australia policy is,to be a permanence there must be behind it a sufficient force of White Australians ready, if necessary, ,to make good their claim. There is no other way of doing it. Says Mr Hughes. "War is, not a vindication of brute force, but is the operation of natural laws. When a nation is sick it is not without-a cause; when she becomes an easy prey to a conqueror she meets a doom *>he has invited and deserves." Says Mr Hughes. And Mr O'Regan says, "Bah?" Mr O'Regan, the self-styled "Watchdog of Popular Liberty;" who says defence expenditure is waste, and ought to be devoted to roads ard bridges!"