LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Otago Daily Times, Issue 16590, 13 January 1916, Page 6

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

, MR HORNSBY, M P., AND THE TROOPS. Sin,—Tho last issue recoived in Egypt of tho Otago Witness contained a report erf remarks by Mr Hornsby, member for Wairarapa, which oast a grave reflection upon thoso troops in ligypt who were unable to prooeod to the firing lino on the Gallipoli Peninsula. Mr Hornsby asked in Parliament if it wore fair and decent that these men should havo the some treatment served out to them as those who were broken in the trendies. He also stated that, according to rumour in tho streets of Wellington, all thoso troops who remained in Egypt were under the imputation of oowurdioe. These remarks, Sir, make anything but pleasant reading to thoso who, through no fault of their own, and much against their inclination, were ordered to remain here. Perhaps Mr Hornsby does not understand that a soldier's first duty is obedience. It is hardly for me to attempt to write a treatise on "obedience on activo service," but I should like to remind Mr Hornsby that the extreme penalty for disobedience on activo sendee is death. _ I can quote three instances of men, belonging to my own unit., who broke camp in tho endeavour to reach tho Dardanelles. One was fined £12; another £8, with 14 days' confinement to camp; and tho third was sentenced to 42 days in Abassia Detention Barracks. It has been the lot of a largo nurriber of men, particularly the drivers, whose services were, according to the military authorities on the Peninsula, not immediately required in that particular theatre of the war, but who might, be called upon at the shortest notice to bo relegated to the oamp base at Zeitoun. I havo heard no ono of these men express a desire to remain here; but all, without exception. have chafed under the enforced inaction, and cursed the day they joined as drivers. I can safely say that all would eagerly embrace the opportunity to join anv'unit which would bring them within the firing line. But it is useless to apply for a transfer. On an application for a transfer, not only is a man met with an emphatic refusal, but ho is informed that he is doing his duty towards his countrv just, as much as those who have been nobly upholding the honour of New Zealand and our Empire in the trenches. On the top of this. Pir. von can readilv nnrfer'+inr) the feelings of "tho bovs" when Mr I-Tornsby's remarks, to tho effect that, the fincrer, of scorn and contempt should b" pointed at them, were read out in the different, mess rooms. Mr Hornsby also states that he is unaware of +he reason for the detention of the men in Egypt; hut he should remember that is not an excuse for n.Nise. As a public man, Mr Hornsby would have great pleasure in hearing so many opiivons passed, and so jrinny inquiries made aibout this member for Wairarapa. Tn conclusion. Sir. I desire to express thronsrh vour columns, that o"r position of enforced inactivity here at 7,"itoun was harrl r-rioucrli for us to bear without those at home, from whom the least we eould expect was sympathy. casting upon ns the horr'ble imputation of cowardice.—l am, etc..

J. M. B. Body. Zeitoun' Camp, November 21.

rVYe think Mr Hornsby's remarks nr>p!Wl only to men who had been sent hick in the first batch of returned soldiers, nnd who had not gone beyond Egypt.—Ed. O.D.T.]

WHY (NOT CONSCRIPTION?

Sir, —In tin's morning's Daily Times I note that another column of good space is allowed to ono, "J.1.C.," in the iorm of a letter headed "Why Conscription." I think that you havo been more than kind to this windy correspondent, who fails to conoeive tho crisis in the Britisli Empire to-day, and who clothes his own idea in a pother of words. His last letter is on a par with his previous ones, and would not merit reply were it not that there aro doubtless some who find in it a salve or excuse for their own unpatriotic attitude. The Empire needs men, and has not the required number. That plain and unfortunate fact we know from the statement by Lord Kitchener the other day. What then Must we not tamper v-ith the "civil liberty of the British Empire, the sublimest national fact in the world to-day, and of which every tirue-hoartod Briton is so proud ?"—'(See "J.I.C" in his last effusion.) Yes, by all means. There were over half a million single, eligible, true-heartod Britons, evidently of the "J.1.C." type, who declined to offer their services in tho day of tlheir country's need. Doubtless they were proud and pleased to know of this sheet anchor in the glorious British Constitution—" serve if you like " —and were not above sheltering themselves behind it. And here it is the same. " Givo us men "is tho cry. but tho men will not line up, and the reinforcements are. leaving short of the number. "J. 1.0. " goes on: "What, Sir, is tho absurdity of tho position of most conscription advocates? It is tho monumental assumption that voluntaryism has failed, that Britain ought to adopt oonscription because her allies are conscript nations," etc., etc. Never wa6 such crass stupidity. Voluntaryism has failed —that is, it has seen its limits—and sensible men with no ulterior motive must admit that fact. As to anyone holding the opinion that Britain ought to adopt oonscription merely because her allies are conscript nations, that contention is too absurd to bo discussed. Brita : n need not and does not care a rap about tho military arrangements of her allies as to getting 'heir soldiers. She is only concerned about the finding of her own, and if the great British public still hangs to the fetish of its free constitution, it must be brought face to face with tho fact that the' German juggernaut is not to be destroyed by a nation of individuals whose id- 3 as of patriotism begin and end with the singing of " Britons never, never shall be slaves, '—with a terrific emphasis on the "never." And if Germany were to win, well, what about the priceless heritage of liberty of which we aro all so proud? As Lord Rosohery has said: " Better that every decent Britisher were dead." To quote "J.1.C." again: "Must it bo hammered into the heads of intelligent men that the Britkh system of Government has weathered the storm for 17 months, has revealed powers of adjustment to utterly unheard of conditions which have amazed and outrooched even the most sanguine amongst us (amazing, too, methinks, tho miraculously prepared foe) and still holds on its unique and triumphant way to a glorious issue?" Now, it seems utterly unthinkable that any sane man, taking a broad view of the position to-day, can write in these terms. "J.1.C." wishes to hammer into the he?ids of intelligent men that the Britisli. system of Government has, weathered the storm for 17 months. At sea, yes,—but how about our operations on land? What pr»£iortion of lines in tho west compared with France has Britain been ablo to hold with her limited forces? What sort of world would we bo living in to-day if France and Russia had been content with a free constitution such as the British? It is quite beside the question to arguo that Britain being'an island power, she did not require an army on conscript lines. This war has knocked all those ideas askew, and has proved it to bo imperative that Britain should havo had an armv at least on a scale approaching tho size of the Continental armies, arid if she had listened to that fm-o old soldier and shrewd Imperialist, Lord Roberts, she would havo adopted somo form of universal military training, which would have been of oountlcss value :>t tho present day. Tliink of it! With an intelligent appreciation of the duty which every man owes to his oountry, we should have had no heart-breaking Gallipoli campaign, and should never havo missed tho face of some dear relative or comrade, who has found a grave on foreign soii. Tlure would have been no retreat from Mons. perhaps no Mons at all. For Germany knew well Britain's military strength, and courted it as nothing. But if Britain had an army commensurate with tho scale and importance of tho Brilish Empire, Germany would never have dared to maxeh into Belgium. " J.1.C." writes of the great numbers of men who havo volunteered under Derby's scheme. Yes, that is so. But that, "cuts no ice" in tho final argument. Did "J.1.C." not read next day that more men were still needed, and that the British lost 60,000 men at Loos in capturing a few trenches? To read his letters, ono would gather that Britain was laying down for all timo (ho principle of oonscription as known in Germany, whereas she is asking for national nervico only for the term of the war to destroy this worship of militarism. "J.1.C." prates_ of an educational and inspirational campaign (his letter is full of tall words). Well, let him get on the hustings, and he will find himself heckled with shouts for conscription. The country wants : t„ and the Empire needs it. so then, : n God's name, let us have it.—l am, etc , E. KETtn.