FOR CONSCIENCE SAKE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8609, 20 December 1913, Page 9

FOR CONSCIENCE SAKE

MILITARY TRAINING QUAKERS STATE THEIR OBJECTIONS TO MILITARISM. SYSTEM FOR DEFENCE, NOT OFFENCE. “ It is defence, nob offence, our system.” This was the essence of the G-overnmcnt’s reply yesterday to a deputation from tho Society of Friends which waited on tho Prime Minister ■Hon. W. F. Massey) and tho Minister sor Defence (Hon. James Allen). Tho main object of the deputation was to present tho following memorial from tho society's headquarters in London regarding military training: “ There are some .‘3BO of our members , and associates scattered throughout tho Dominion. It has been understood hitherto that tho religious convictions of your citizens wore safeguarded under tho terms of your constitution. We have heard with deep regret that associates of our religious society have recently been lined for non-registration and refusal to drill under tho Defence Acts; and that youths in their teens arc liable to bo consigned to lengthy •custody in barracks because they cannot conscientiously give themselves to i. military training. We that , it is indefensible for civil authorities to subject a minor to the- rule of soldiers, for a purpose antagonistic to his homo religious training. Wo understand that similar imprisonments have been imposed against many others, with tho probability of serious civil disabilities attaching to them m after life. •• The Society of Friends is well mown to be a law-abiding people, but I a, choice is to bo forced upon us as parents between training our children 'or war, and obeying to tho best of our understanding the teaching of Jesus Iju'i-a, then, the only possible answer is the one. of former tunes, that we must obey Cod rather Ilian man.

Whilst recognising fully our duty as citizens of the communities of which wo form a part and endeavouring to serve tho State in national and municipal affairs, as well as in philanthropic activities, wo feel debarred as Christians from serving in any military capacity, recognising the claims of brotherhood as between all the nations. “Our religious views on this matter have long been respected in Great Britain and Ireland, and it is, therefore, with surprise and grief that wo find your great Dominion contravening the principles of religious freedom and tho right of every man to live, according to his conscience and his faith. Wo had hoped that the nations of the Southern Hemisphere would recognise their unique opportunity to set a peaceful example to the rest of tho world, and especially to tho European nations, which are bowed down by tho crushing weight of their armaments. Our Foreign Secretary’s declaration that the expenditure of the great countries of Europe on armaments ‘threatens to submerge civilisation’ should 1 challenge all rulers to bo wise in time, and to give more heed to those things which make for unity and peace. “With great deference, we earnestly plead, not only for our follow-mem-bers under your rule, but for all persons of whatsoever name or creed, that there shall bo no compulsion of conscience and no interference by the soldier with civil government, or education, or parental control. The growth of character, founded on religious conviction, in loyalty to Christ, the Prince of Peace, on the part of the young men of a nation is, wo believe, tho surest guarantee for that nation's security, permanence, and future well-being. We are convinced that yon aro not unmindful of these considerations, hut wo desire, with all respect, to commend them again to your matured thought and judgment.” The memorial was signed on behalf of a representative meeting of Friends in London. “ARE YOU A NEW ZEALANDER ?” Mr F. Alexander said that tho society did not speak in this memorial only tor the Friends, but they appealed for liberty of conscience on behalf

of their fellow-citizens. On the whole, the Friends had been carefully treated by the authorities, and no undue pressure had been" brought to hoar upon them by the Defence Department. 1 The Prime Minister: “Have you any authority to represent others outside your society?” Mr Alexander: - “Not directly, 1 ,grant you that. But -as citizens, wo 'want to appeal to the Government on behalf of the citizens as a whole.” Last year’s Act, said Mr Alexander, had fallen to the ground, because magistrates had gone outside it. It was supposed to deal with the individual’s religious conscience. Hon. Mr Allen: “No, with tho individual’s religion.” Air Alexander criticised the taking over by tho military authorities for some days of the Wanganui College. Air Allen; “That was done at the request of the teaching authorities.” Mr Alexander: “But not at tho parents’ request; and that is my point. Until the child readies maturity, tho parent should ho the controlling authority. Wo have too much interference with education by tho military authorities.” Air Alassey: “Are you a New Zealander, Air Alexander?” Air Alexander: “I have been a year in. your country. I am from England.” WOULD NOT DEFEND THEAISELVES. Air W. Fletcher, of Christchurch, said it had been a disappointment that the southern countries had not led the world in doing away with war and militarism. They had hoped that they would provide a haven of rest for those suffering religious disabilities and putting into practice the ideal that by righteousness alone a nation prospered. Air Alassey: “You don’t suggest that righteousness is not consistent with do, fence?” Mr Fletcher: “In our minds, yes.” Air Alassey; “If you were attacked, then, you would not defend yoursolves?” Air Fletcher: “Personally, no. \Va believe it is wrong to have any part in military training or military preparations.”

“I DON’T AGREE—” . “I am glad to meet yon,” said the Prime Minister in reply, “but I must say; from the outset that I 1 don’t agree by any means with many of the opinions that have been expressed. As for the memorial, I would like to point out to yon the fact that it comes from another country, and wa cannot allow the citizens of another country to interfere with the legislation of this country, with the administration of our law, or indeed with what is this country’s business.” The recommendations of the Joint Defence Committee, which were laid before Parliament last week, were in the direction of providing for conscientious) objectors. He thought that such a course was quite right, for ho did believe that something more should be done for the conscientious objector. As for the. compulsory training law, it had been placed on the statutebook after many sessions’ consideration, and the Government proposed to both stand by and administer the spirit of tho Act. Ho was convinced that tho Act was doing the. youth o£ tho country a great deal of good. “I believe.” Mr Massey said, “that the people of Great Britain will come to the same conclusion as we have in this country, and that they will do something to defend themselves, apart from keeping up her navy.” Members of deputation': “Never! Never!” Mr Massey said he believed that ta© time was a long way off when, aa the Scriptures said, .men would beat their swords into ploughshares. None ■ of them would ever live to see it. A deputationist: “I hope to.” Mr Massey: “Well, I hope you do, . too. I am against war as much as you are. I hate the misery and suffering. But wo have to deal with the present position, and our position as far as defence is concerned is a peculiar one. Tho object of the Act is defence, not offence, and I believe I am right in saying the great majority of the people in New Zealand intend ■to keep the Act on .the statute-book.” MINISTER’S STATEMENT. - Tho Minister for Defence said that if they would help him to get .peace.

ho would help them, for he was as much in favour of peace .as the depu-' tation. They must not forget that although tho Act was a military one, all the preliminary stages were . civil stages. The Government could not control the magistrates, nor did it intend to try. Magistrates had to exercise their own judgment, and the Government had confidence in them. As for tho recent report of tho Joint Defence Committee, it would not have said what it did unless he had been in sympathy with the proposals that were outlined. Under the Act every young man under a certain age was required to give something to the State. If some objected to military training, what was to be the alternative? There must be an equivalent and what was it to be? Tho deputation could help him by making suggestions in this direction. There ■were many grades of consciences, and all could not he placed on the same footing. No one should he allowed to go free, while others served their country in a certain way. ■ In reply to a lady member of tho deputation, Mr Allen said that the reports of chaplains convinced him that that military camps did the young, mon good. There might he cases of evil influence, hut there was nothing more than what could be met with at fho street-comers.