THE CURSE OF MILITARISM.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXX, Issue 3785, 6 July 1899, Page 5

THE CURSE OF MILITARISM.

"Whatever may bo tho immediate results of the Peace Conference, the ultimate effect cannot fail to be good. It is too much to expect that the realisation of the dreams of the peacemakers will result from the present Conference, but there is really no insurmountable difficulty in the path of those who hope for and expect ultimately a state of universal peace. The real difficulties lie. chiefly in tho prejudices instilled by the history of the world and the self-interest of those who look upon militarism as at once their occupation and a necessary factor in national greatness. There is much more in the proposal to disband armies than at first sight appears; and, ns this fact is made more apparent, tho public conscience will become more and more indent upon obtaining tho desired end. Armies and navies, it cannot.be denied, involve a great waste of productive power. True, work is found in various ways through them; but tho same might bo said of many other things which could well bo dispensed with. A great fire or storm, for instance, will wreck a city or a fleet of ships, and a demand for labour may be thereby stimulated. But no thoughtful man would regard either as desirable on that account. Either calamity would, however, bo less objectionable than an army or navy, viewed from a humanitarian standpoint, since tho former are accidents, while tho latter are the effects of human action. Tho old idea, that war, famine and pestilence wore necessary to keep population within the limits of subsistence, is fast losing its hold on the popular mind; indeed, it seems hard fc account for such a theory dominating thought in any Christian country. Even conceding that the doctrine of Malthus is correct, there is no evidence that the world is, or ever has been, anything like adequately populated. If seems to l&'tKat" tvhfr aie endeavouring to propound a remedy for the appalling state of things which /every-

where exists in connection with standing armies, notably in India'at the’present time, do. not. go,to the root of the problem’. The immorality that seems to be •inseparable from armies can only be abolished by international disarmament. Obviously early marriage is the best safeguard of morality—the best because the most natural. But nothing is more certain than that a military life is conducive to immorality, partly because soldiers are often removed far from the, neighbourhood of relatives and acquaintances, and are, therefore, under less restraint, but chiefly because married life and militarism are wholly incompatible. In the natural order of things young men should marry and become responsible for families. Any system which makes this impossible is a violation of a natural jaw, and must end in disaster to the individual and to the State. The unit .of any nation i is the family. It is on his family that a man centres his affections, and there is no better safeguard for ,right .conduct than family ties. The fact that a soldier is debarred from exercising an essentia! duty of citizenship, and is deprived of the humanising and elevating influences of family ties, constitutes one of the moat powerful objections to- militarism—one that appears to be generally over-looked, and one which, when properly ventilated, must inevitably enlist enthusiastic sympathy from those earnest men and women who everywhere strive to raise mankind from degrading conditions and improve the race, socially aqd morally. Of course there are: other potent objections to which attention has repeatedly been drawn. His Holiness Pope Leo XIII., in an Encyclical, some years since, truly pointed out that militarism implied heavy and oppressive taxes, especially on the poor. .'With equal force it might be fairly stated that a. standing army may become a menace -to internal security. Even contemporary history is replete with instances which hear out this fact. It was the army wdiich’recently forced Spain into a disastrous war .with America ; and it is the army in France that is largely responsible for the disgraceful treatment of Dreyfus. Whether the question is considered from, the standpoint of expediency, or of justice, the verdict is the same. It is, of course,'inexpe'dient to levy oppressive taxes, or to maintain a system inimical to internal tranquillity. It is unjust in the last degree to placa men in a position which dooms them to immorality and .foul disease, and infects society with a taint .from which even the most virtuous and innocent cannot claim immunity. It is unnatural and unjust to discourage family life;-and it therefore follows that those who strive to bring about international disarmament are the greatest benefactors 'to .mankind.Tlie question is one of paramount importance to the whole world, and, in New Zealand we cannot afford to, igripre ’.it. The 'ale &iv George Grey often raised his eloquent voice in warning 'the. democracy of this colopy of the, danger of. unduly fostering the military spirit., It is well that »ro shored romomeber his words. ■ It is we'l that .we should face the question in a proper spirit, and,' warned by the lessons of history, beware of the evils attendant upon a system which it is the aim of ail those who appreciate the-spirit of Christianity to'.abolish, from'the-face of the earth. •’ - . :