COMPULSORY TRAINING

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8366, 28 February 1913, Page 3

COMPULSORY TRAINING

A CHALLENGE. To the Editor “N.Z, Times.” , Sir, —If the bold “Lancer” who cavorts so entertainingly in yonr columns this morning will undertake to prove his statement that I have at any time, at any place, or in any newspaper, dubbed the anti-militarists “shirkers, poltroons, and cowards" 1 will willingly contribute out of a sadly depleted exchequer the sum of hlo to the forthcoming carnival fund. I have never at any time indulged in “vituperative bombardment” of the anti-militarists, but as the result of my observations in Canada, America, Great Britain, Holland, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Japan, and China in 1907, I arrived at the conclusion that in the face of a world in arms no individual country' can afford to allow its manhood to grow up without a training in defence. Theoretically I am for peace, and look forward hopefully to a time when nations will become civilised and no longer submit their inevitable disagreements to the arbitrament of the sword, but that day is long distant, and u we are to hold what we have, we mhst be so prepared for attack that an enemy will ponder long before inviting a conflict. Havmg convinced myself that we must have training, I was not long in arriving at the conclusion that our volunteer system was wrong both in principle and in practice. We were wasting large sums of money and we wore not getting efficiency; a certain proportion of our young men were in the ranks, but a larger proportion were standing on the side-walks sneering at the march past. Defence was nobody’s business. The workers did their best; the shirkers escaped liability. Now that compulsory training has come we hear from the crowd that has “no country to defend” and which speciously fears that the guns of the Territorials will be turned on the in the time of industrial trouble. The reply to these afgumerlts i» firstly that with universal franchise the worker who says he has no country to defend is merely admitting his fatuity. If the workers of New Zealand once combine To demand that no man shall hold an acre of land which is not put to profitable use, and that no acre of land shall lie idle without being made available for settlement, there will be, an immense number of people iimbued with the spirit of patriotism, who feel that they have got something to fight for. But the individuals who are foremost with the “no country” argument, and whoso spirit of cussedness makes them oppose military training, are always those who are against every reform and the inveterate, enemy of every 'reformer. They always return their political enemies at the polls. The greatest protection of the workers against Territorial terrorisuk is to» every worker to he a Territorial. This will inspire him with a spirit of discipline and teach him to vote right as well as fight right. The growth of Socialism in Germany is largely due to the camaraderie induced by men being brought together on a common basis in the military schools where “conscription” really exists. ‘ But while I am in favour of compulsory training 1 am not at all satisfied that we are getting our money’s worth in New Zealand. Things are being carried on in a wasteful and inefficient manner. This is largely because the live men among the wageearners are so busy attacking the system that they are not keeping their j eyes on those who are administering the system. With the arrival of our Dreadnought there ■ will be whooping for more : expenditure, both naval and military, in the local jingo press and amongst a section of the politicians. What we want is more efficiency; more vvork,”~less flunkeyism, and less .gold lace. Everybody’s pocket is being touched, and the humblest workers proportionately most. . ■ By the way, when are we going to hear from Mr O’Began about those questions I put to him?- I am, etc., PIERCE C. FREEXH. February 27th. '