MILITARY TRAINING.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20323, 2 August 1929, Page 16

MILITARY TRAINING.

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.

AMENDMENT TO ACT SOUGHT,

LABOUR BILL TALKED OUT. [DY TELEGRAPH. —rnEPS ASSOCIATION.] WELLINGTON, Thursday. The second reading of the Defcnco Amendment Bill was moved in the House to-day by Mr. H. G. R, Mason (Labour — Auckland Suburbs). Mr. Mason said tho bill dealt with conscientious objectors and ho asked the House to deal seriously with the ques tion. He believed the bill only made tho law clear as Parliament had intended it in the Defence Amendment Act, 1912, and that the trouble that had existed in the past had been due to a wrong interpretation of the law. The bill actually made no change in the law. He recognised that the Government in tended to deal with tho matter in another way, by exompting divinity students, but he did not see why divin ity students should bo singled out for special treatment. It should be a case of conscience and nothing else, and the particular Church to which the applicant belonged should not enter into tho matter at all.

In regard to provision for non-military service, it was proposed that this phase should be outside the Defence Department altogether. Mr. T. W. McDonald (United —Wairarapa) said ho approved Iho bill in some respects, but was not quite sure of the extent to which it might go. He suggested that the bill should remain in abeyance to give tho Government time to look into the mattei in the near future. He thought the wishes of the mover would receive sympathetic attention. Mr. A. Harris (Reform—Waitemata) contended that the bill was simply a repetition of tho principle rejected the previous day. He said he would call for a division on the second reading. Mr. \V. E. Barnard (Labour —Napier) denied that the bill was the same in effect as the Compulsory Military Service Repeal Bill. He said it was merely designed to make clearer tho duties of magistrates in hearing cases of conscientious objectors. Mr. P. Langstono (Labour—Waimarino) spoke 011 similar lines. Opposition to the bill was voiced by Mr. T. Makitanara (United—Southern Maori), who said it was designed to support religious hypocrites. Mr. C. L. Carr (Labour—Timaru) appealed to members to try to understand the point of view of tlie conscientious objector. Ho warned the House against enforcing tho principles of what had previously been termed "Prussianism." Mr. W. E Parry (Labour—Auckland Central) criticised the action of Mr. Harris in suspecting an ulterior motive in the introduction ot tho bill.

Mr. R. A. Wright (Reform—Wellington Suburbs) expressed the opinion that the bill would not help a magistrate in reaching a decision as to the worthiness of a claim for exemption. Mr. J. O'Brien (Labour—Westhnd) spoke in favour of the bill. Tho Hon. A. J. Stallworthy, Minister of Health, expressed the opinion that the bill was an honest attempt on the part of the mover to improve conditions. He admitted that there was need for improvement. Mr. Stallworthy's speech was interrupted by the dinner adjournment and the debate was not concluded.