“The Four Colonels”; Their Case Submitted; Took “The Only Way”

Northern Advocate, 29 July 1938, Page 9

“The Four Colonels”; Their Case Submitted; Took “The Only Way”

[Per Press Association. — Copyright.] WELLINGTON. This Day. “I GIVE THE MINISTER OF DEFENCE. THE HON. F. JONES, FULL 1 CREDIT FOR HIS BELIEF THAT THE PRESENT FORCE IS SUFFICIENT FOR THE DEFENCE OF NEW ZEALAND. 1 SAY HE DOES NOT KNOW, AS WE WHO HAVE STUDIED THE QUESTION FOR 25 YEARS KNOW." With these words. Colonel R. F. Gambrill. of Gisborne, one of the four colonels who wore posted to the retired list following the issue of a manifesto on national defence, concluded a speech at the conference of the New Zealand Returned Soldiers' Association in Wellington last night. After giving the reasons which actuated himself and his fellow-colonels. Colonel Gambrill outlined his views of defence in New Zealand, expressing the opinion that the country could be defended bloocllessJy if sufficient forces were trained. He advocated universal training.

Knew the Penalty. ! -As one of ’the four colonels.’ 1 speak with a great deal of diffidence, said Colonel Gambrill. "The countiy requires a lead in this matter, and there is nobody who can give a better lead than this ope. As far as the punishment of the four colonels is concerned, we ask for. and seek, no assistance from the Returned Soldiers’ Association. What we did was done with full knowledge that wo wove breaking military traditions. Wo know some punishment must follow, anc; wo accept it. We do not want anybody taking up the cudgels on our behalf. We did this with our eyes open. “We did consider resigning first, which would have been the proper thing under the Army Regulations, but we thought that would be a cowardly way. Our association with the army is a very real thing. We knew we were throwing all that in. We had a good reason for it. We had taken the oath to obey the command of those above us, but we also knew we had a duty to our country. What Was Their Duly? “The question arose; Does our duty to our country as citizens and soldiers transcend our duty to His Majesty’s regulations? What happened to us. ( does not matter very much, but what happens to our children does matter. Were we justified in living a lie, in carrying on as though all were well? We debated it for four nights in succession, and decided on the only course we considered in the best interests of future generations as well as our own. “We realised that we had on our shoulders the responsibility of the country’s defence. When we know it is not sufficient, when we know we were going to be in the position of asking volunteers under us to undertake tasks for which they are not fitted, and that they will probably lose thenlives, what are we to do? My conscience is clear. I. think we have done what we thought right. Need For Defence.

“The need for defence is upon us,” declared Colonel Gambrill. “This country of ours is the most easily defended if we are prepared. Our greatest safeguard is our longdistance from other countries. As long as the navy is floating on the high seas we can regard the danger as almost negligible. Our air defence is in Great Britain. A successful air attack on Britain would paralyse us. Our navy would go, and we would be open to the wide world. Thus our first line of defence is our navy. “We defend our own country in our own country. We are called upon to do that when our navy is gone. We have had our warning from the Prime Minister of Britain that some outlying parts of the Empire may be called upon to defend itself. We have to protect ourselves against that possibility. We can do that bloodlessly. Difficult Proposition. “In 1929. when compulsory Training was suspended, we had 20,000 trained men, each of whom did three years’ training. To get 140,000 will require 21 years. In ten years’ time we shall have fewer than 70,000. Faced by 140,000 men.equipped with the most deadly weapons of war, rifle and bayonet, and with machine-guns, an enemy general staff would say: ’We know what sort of fighters they are. Wc arc not up against an easy proposition. For every one of those 140,000 we shall have to land at least two attackers. For every one of 200,000 we land we must have ten men on our line of communications, and the nearest base is three days away. Is New Zealand worth it:' “Thus if wo are prepared to tra'in our youths we shall not have to worry I about a raid. We shall fight and win a bloodless victory. That is the nearest I approach to pacifism I can sec in this | j benighted age.” ! j TJomlniou’s Refence. i Colonel Gambrill wont on to refer j chiefly to the benefit gained by youths | who underwent compulsory training. He dealt also with the economic factor of home defence, stating that small arms, rations and other equipment could for the most part be manufactured internally. “If we are called upon to defend j ourselves, we can do it easily,” he declared. "It is only a matter of getting the public to understand and you will find the objections to universal military training will disappear.” ! C. Cooto; auditor. Mr R. R. Rose-man; executive committee, Messrs M. Edgar. C. V. Stringer, C. Smooting. T. H. Steadman. J. 11. Marwick; general 1 committee, the foregoing, with the addition of Messr S. Blanshard and J. ■ Spiers; emergency committee; Messrs. . Miller, Moore and Coote,