THE MILITARY AGE

Southland Times, Issue 17735, 13 August 1917, Page 5

THE MILITARY AGE

PROTESTS AGAINST REDUCTION. (Per United Press Association.) DUNEDIN, August 11. A mass meeting of citizens, the Mayor presiding, under the auspices of the National Welfare Association, is to be held on Monday night to protest against lowering the age of recruits to nineteen years. AUCKLAND, August 11. The executive of the Auckland Second Division League passed a resolution emphatically protesting against any attempt to lower the age limit for military service, and will urge the central executive to use every effort to prevent same. STRONG PROTEST FROM SOUTHLAND. SECOND DIVISION LEAGUE’S MOTION. At an emergency meeting of the Executive of the Southland Second Division League held in the Y.M.C.A. rooms on Saturday morning the following resolution was carried unanimously;—“ That this meeting of the Executive Committee of the Southland Second Division League’s representing some 6000 members in Southland, most emphatically protest against the rumoured intention of the Government to lower the age for the conscription of youths to 19 years, and, further, that a copy of this resolution be telegraphed to the Prime Minister, the Minister for Defence, the Minister of Finance, and the Hon. J. A. Hanan." NEWSPAPER CRITICISM. THE DOMINION. The alleged proposal to reduce the age limit for enlistment to 19 years has provoked a good deal of discussion in the Wellington newspapers. The Dominion says; “If any proposal of this nature is brought forward it will be strenuously opposed. The fact that a lower age than 20 is adopted in England is no reason why we should expect boys to go out and fight for us when we still have men in plenty to do the fighting. It is sought to popularise the idea by making it appear that if the boys are sent the men of the Second Division will secure a longer respite. We do not think the • men of the Second Division wall be flattered by the suggestion that they wish to shelter behind the boys. If the Minister of Defence,had any thought of this kind in his mind he will be well advised to reconsider it.” THE LYTTELTON TIMES. We hope it is not true that the Government wants to conscript lads of nineteen years for service at the front. We desire to speak frankly on this matter, and not to be misunderstood. New Zealand is in this war “for keeps.” Be the struggle long or short the Dominion is bound by everything that decent men cherish, and by a thousand official resolutions, to see it through. If circumstances do unhappily drive New Zealand to it the assistance of youths may have to be enlisted. The military age may require to be extended at both ends, or even abolished altogether, before this terrible war is over. But surely we must not think, or begin to think, of sending youths of nineteen while there are scores of thousands of grown men available. If the proposal that is rather broadly hinted at materialises it will be the duty of Parliament to give it short shrift. At the present stage of the proceedings we think the lowering of the age would be indefensible. That the stripling may have to go to the war, later on, we must recognise, however unpleasant the contemplation, but that must be when the supply of men runs out —the boys must not be sent in place of men remaining behind “to maintain production” or any other plea.