Four Colonels Retired

Manawatu Times, Volume 63, Issue 153, 1 July 1938, Page 7

Four Colonels Retired

Criticised State of Defence Forces HAVE THEY BEEN DISCIPLINED? Per Press Association. AUCKLAND, Last Night. Diaciplinaiy action by posting to the retired list has been takon against the four colonels of the Territorial Force who issued a joint statement on May 19 calling attention to the state of the defence forces and the policy enunciated by the Minister of Defence (Hon. F. Jones) at DargaVille two days before. To-night’s Gazette contained the following notice: “His Excellency the Governor-General has approved of the following.—The under-mentioned Co oftels are posted to the retired list with permission to retain their rank and wear the prescribed uniform: A. fc>. Wilder, D. 5.0., M.C., V.D.; C. R, Spragg, V.D.; R. F. Gambrill, V.D.; N. L. Alacky, M.C.” The notice is dated June 13 and is feigned by Hon. F. Jones as Minister of Defence. Last week’s Gazette announced that Colonel Wilder arid Colonel Macky had relinquished their appointments as honorary aides de camp to the Govern-or-General. The four Colonels are on the “Colonels’ List” which was created when the territorial brigades of which they had command wei*o disbanded on the reorganisation of the forces. ey were required to do teu days’ training in higher command work and to visit four camps a year on mobilisation. It was to be expected that they would be called on to command brigades in the field. No official explanation of the action taken against them is forthcoming. When questioned to-night the Prime Minister said that the retirement of the officers was purely a service matter and not one which concerned the GovcrnColouel Macky, speaking on behalf of the fdur officers, said they were not prepared to make any public statement at present. They intended to meet in Wellington next Week to confer on the matter. It is known Hint in disciplining the Colonels Paragraph 440 of the Military Regulations has been invoked. This paragraph expressly forbids any person subject to military law to communicate to tho public any military information or their views on any military subject without special authority. There has also been a hint of action under Paragraph 175 which empowers the Govern-or-General to cancel the commission of any officer who is reported as being incompetent, neglectful of duty, or

“otherwise unsuitable to exercise the duties of his rank or appointment.” The Suggestion was made by other officers that not only have the Colonels been punished without trial but that the disciplining of them under tho Regulations could be questioned. It was contended that apart from any merit there might be in the Colonels’ action in drawing attention to the situation which they as citizens possessing the requisite knowledge could no longer toler* ato in the public interest they had not violated any section of the Defence Act which alone could say what was or what was not a military offence. The submission was that tho Regulations are merely the machinery to give effect to an Act. They cannot create offences.