THE MILITARY AGE

Southland Times, Issue 17734, 11 August 1917, Page 5

THE MILITARY AGE

ATTITUDE OF THE SECOND DIVISION. (Per L'uitcd Press Association. I PALMERSTON NORTH, August 10. A meeting of the Secivid Division League to-night passed a resolution "that this branch strongly disapproves of the Government’s proposal to call up lads of 19 years for active service.’’ SOlTi! LAND PROTESTS. SECOND DIVISION LEAGUE'S DISAPPROVAL. In connection with the rumoured intention of the Government to reduce the age for compulsory military service to youths of nineteen years of age, with a possibility of it being further reduced to eighteen years, and the attitude of the Second Division League thereon, we were informed last night by Mr A. R. Dawson, who represents the Southland District on the Consultative Executive Committee, that the following urgent telegram had been sent to the Dominion Headquarters of the League in Wellington;—" The Southland Executive strongly disapprove of the proposal to lower the cmrr-cription age limit to nineteen.” This wire clearly indicates the attitude taken up by (he local brunch of the League, and we understand that an emergency meeting of the Executive will be held this morning, when a resolution of emphatic protest will be submitted to the meeting. {FARMERS’ UNION FEELS STRONGLY. At its meeting yesterday the Southland Executive of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union passed a motion of strong protest against the reported proposal to reduce the minimum age for military service from 20 to 18 or 19 years. Members cited numerous instances in which farmers were “cardying on” with the aid of 18 and 19 yearold sons in the absence on active service of the boys’ elder brothers. If these boys were to go off too the farming community would be hit very hard. At the same time speakers made it clear that that was by no means the principal plank of their objection to the proposed reduction in the age limit. They protested on behalf of the town boy equally as much as for his country brother, and Mr W. S. Fleming, who introduced the question, said that it would be a cruel shame to take lads under 20. Other members mentioned that experience had proved 20 to ba just on the low side for an active service age, and the Second Division League, whose agitation was held to be behind the new proposal, came in for a little adverse comment, the opinion being expressed that the first class of the Division should “step out” well in advance of the boys. The protesting motion was yesterday telegraphed to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence, besides the Hons. Sir Joseph Ward and J. A. Hauan, and Messrs G. J. Anderson and J. C. Thomson, M.s.P.