NAVAL DEFENCE

Southland Times, Issue 19257, 22 June 1921, Page 7

NAVAL DEFENCE

PRONOUNCEMENT BY R.S.A I ONE POWER STANDARD FAVOURED Since its inception in 1916 the New Zea- ’ land Returned Soldiers’ Association has pri- • manly, and very naturally, occupied itself . with the immediate economic needs of the ! ex-service man. With the gradual repatri- ! ation and settlement of the men, however, i the association has largely turned its atteni tion to public and national problems, re- • Diembering that its duty to its individual ! members is to safeguard their interests not only as returned soldiers, but also as citiz- ! ens of New Zealand and of the Empire as a I whole. At its fifth annual conference, held I in Dunedin ten days ago, special attention j was given to Imperial problems, and very I interesting (and in some cases notable i speeches were made during the discussions on i the recent convention of ex-service men of ; the Empire at Cape Town, on the subject of i immigration, and on the question of how the New Zealand Expeditionary Force canteen ! funds should be allocated. THE CANTEEN FUNDS. The most outstanding pronouncement made was on the last-named subject. It will be remembered that the surplus profits from the N.Z.E.F. canteens run in New Zealand, on the transports, in the United Kingdom, France, Flanders, Germany, Egypt and Palestine were announced as exceeding £BO,OOO, and that the Government has set up a Canteen Funds Disposal Board to consider the use to which the money should be put. The personnel of this board is as fol-lows:—Major-General Sir Andrew Russell, K. K.C.M.G. (chairman). BrigadierGeneral G. S. Richardson, C. 8., C.M.G., C. Colonel A. E. Stewart, C.M.G., D. Lieut.-Colonel R. St. J. Bere, D. 5.0., Messrs C. W. Batten and R. J. F. Aldrich (representing the N.Z.R.S.A.), and Captain L. C. Forgie (secretary). Some weeks ago it was announced that the board had passed the following resolution:— This board is of opinion that beyond assisting units in the writing of regimental histories in accordance with the conditions under which regimental funds were raised, the general fund of the N.Z.E.F. canteen should not be dissipated at the present time, but should be preserved for future requirements in relief of distress on the part of soldiers, widows, orphans and dependents of our fallen comrades. That in the interests of economy of administration, this fund, together with all other funds which exist in New Zealand for similar purposes, should be consolidated, and the Government is urged to take steps to bring about this consolidation by necessary legislation and the setting up of a committee representative of contributing bodies to administer this consolidated fund for the above-stated object. The board added that it was not intended that the fund should be controlled by the Government. The N.Z.R.S.A. was assured, however, that this decision was tentative only, that the board would defer any action till the annual conference of the association had discussed the question, and that any decision reached by the association would be given full consideration, and would not lightly be put on one side. THE RETURNED SOLDIERS’ INTEREST. When, in January last, the N.Z.R.S.A. was asked to nominate a representative on the board, the Dominion executive at once showed a keen interest in the disposal of the funds. The actual financial membership of the association is, in round figures, 36,000 —practically one out of every two men who left New Zealand on active service and returned home again. The executive felt, therefore, that no body could be found which would more accurately represent the feelings of the members of the N.Z.E.F., and that no decision should be taken in the disposal of the funds that was not acceptable to the wishes of such a body. At the same time confidence was expressed in the personnel of the Canteens Board. At the quarterly meeting of the Dominion executive in February, a motion was passed authorising the president to set up a special committee to consider the question and to report direct to the annual meeting of the Council of the Association—the movement’s final and most authoritative court. The committee appointed by the then president (Dr E. Boxer, C.M.G.), consisted of himself, Messrs E. W. Inder (Auckland), B. J. Jacobs (Palmerston North), R.B. Bell and D. J. B. Seymour (Wellington), N. B. McCallum (Westport) and the Hon. W. Downie Stewart (Dunedin). CONFERENCE AND THE NAVY. The report of this committee was presented to the conference at Dunedin in the form of a resolution, which was moved on behalf of his colleagues by Mr R. B. Bell: This conference begs to submit the following statement to the Canteen Funds Disposal Board regarding the disposal of the canteen funds, amounting to over £BO,OOO: — (1) That as the canteen funds were accumulated out of the purchases of the members of the N.Z.E.F. generally without any direct expectations that the same would be paid to the members individually,' this conference is of opinion that the funds may be fittingly used in the main for altruistic objects likely to commend themselves to the judgment of the majority of returned soldiers, subject however, to the general principle that the capital of the fund shall be conserved for the immediate future. (2) This conference, as representative of the Expeditionary Force, and as in part trustee for those liberties for which the N.Z.E.F. fought, suffered, or died, accordingly desires to make the following declarations and recommendations: (a) That it is desirable to commemorate the spirit and deeds of the New Zealand regiments in the Great War, and for this purpose this conference begs to recommend to the Canteen Funds Disposal Board that a sufficient portion of the canteen funds be set aside for the purpose.of preparing and publishing regimental histories. (b) That although this conference is not of opinion that the peace of the ■ world is ideally kept by national and international arrangements based on a balance of power, and although it does not approve of armed preparations for other than defensive purposes, it yet believes in the necessity for the proper defence of the British Empire and its free institutions, in the paramount need for adequate naval defence. (si That since the population of Great Britain contributes on an average an annual amount of over £2 per head to the support of the British Navy, while the New Zealand contribution is only about 5s per head per annum, this conference is of opinion that New Zealand should forthwith assume its due share of the burden. (d) That since it is not clear that the League of Nations is capable of assuming responsibility for, and enforcing the principles of justice among the nations, this conference views with profound misgivings the decline of British naval power below a onepower standard, and urges the Government to use every effort to secure the adoption of a one-Power standard as an irreducible minimum. (e) That as an earnest of its sense of the urgent need for public recognition and satisfaction of the requirements of naval defence, this conference begs to recommend to the Canteen Funds Disposal Board that the interest from the fund should be applied to such objects as may best secure public recognition and satisfaction, provided, however, that the money shall not be applied in substitution of any Government liability. (3) That this conferehce, realising that the principles of justice, law, and order among the nations can only be enforced by a league of which all nations may in due course become members, hereby formally places on record its emphatic support of the principle

of the League of Nations, and anxiously looks to a time not distant when the League will finally abolish the need for rival armaments. (4) That this resolution be referred to the following committee to consider the methods by which the fore-going general lines of action can be most effectively applied, with power to bring down a final and detailed report for consideration by the next annual general meeting of the Council: —Sir Andrew Russell, Messrs E. W. Ir.der, B. J. Jacobs, D. S. Smith, D. J. B. Seymour, W. E. Leadley, the Hon. W. Downie Stewart, Mr T. W. McDonald, and Mr R. B. Bell (convener). The motion was seconded by Mr D. S. Smith (Wellington), and supported by Dr Boxer, Messrs D. J. B. Seymour (Wellington), T. Long (Auckland), and others. One !of the Otago delegates spoke strongly against it, but he found no seconders, and the resolution as a whole was carried almost unanimously. The delegates who were actually present numbered 36, and represented the full voting strength of the conference (93 votes). Of these only one delegate (with three votes) answered “No.” The unanimity with which the proposal was received was therefore outstanding. The presentation of the resolution and the discussion and vote thereon were taken in camera, the principal reason being that the movers desired that such a notable forwrad step in the history of the movement should be announced throughout the Empire simultaneously. The necessary arrangements have now been made, and publication of the gist of the resolution is being made this morning in Great Britain, Australia, Canada and South Africa as well as in New Zealand. ARGUMENTS FOR ALTRUISTIC ATTITUDE. In supporting their resolution its framers first trenchantly scouted any possibility of a suggestion that the total amount (£80,000) should be divided up amongst returned soldiers individually, which would mean a “dividend” of about £1 per head. Secondly, while broadly agreeing with the Canteens Board in its tentative suggestion that in the long run the funds would be needed to supplement existing funds for the relief of distress among ex-suldiers and their dependents, they declared that that day was many years ahead. They felt that it would be 10, 15 or 20 years before need for the use of the principal sum would be felt, that at present and in the immediate future the returned soldiers collectively (as distinct from individually) should not be asked to augment war relief fiinds, and indeed, that any move on these lines should be deferred till such time as it was plainly evident that the people of New Zealand had forgotten the spirit and deeds of their sons in the Great War or were disposed tp regard the veterans of that war in a much less kindly light than they did now. Thirdly, having regard to the view of the Canteens Board, and notwithstanding the difference of opinion as to time, they felt that the retention of the capital sum was vitally necessary. Fourthly, they agreed with the Canteens Board on the whole question of regimental histories.

Fifthly, and specifically, they stressed the paramount necessity of continuous thought and service for the Empire and for mankind. They urged that the men who had shed, or who had been prepared to shed, their blood for King and country, for the liberty of the Empire, and for the world, and for the maintenance of civilisation gen erally, had not ceased their work or altered their attitude of mind when the armistice was signed on November 11, 1918. That work and that mental attitude could not be allowed to lapse or sink into oblivion. If they had freely given their blood in days happily past, they could in the new conditions “carry on” in terms of money and of positive thought. And lastly, they expressed the fervent hope that the path they endeavoured in a small way to point would be a path which New Zealanders as a whole would be glad to follow. The substance of the action of the conference was not so much the actual action of the returned soldiers themselves, as the spirit that actuated it. What the R.S.A. could do in a minor degree was what the Dominion could do in full measure —and at once. THOROUGH STOCK-TAKING NECESSARY.

It was urged that the condition of the world to-day, and its potential condition, demanded a thorough stock-taking regarding New Zealand’s position. The moment a world-wide view was taken it was apparent that the making of provision for the safety of the Dominion against attack was a vital and urgent duty.

This led to an examination of the causes of war and to the conclusion that a League of Nations based on the principles of justice and goodwill was the best solution of defence problems if such a league were practicable and was much to be preferred to arrangements based on a balance of power—a fruitful cause of the growth of rival armaments.

It was also pointed out that one of the surest means of establishing a league of all nations was the creation of a league of British nations and make such a league workable as an object-lesson for a larger league. The larger league it was said was only possible when representatives of large sections of the human race such as the British Empire, the United States, China and Japan could meet together under the dominating idea of the necessity for harmonising their conflicting interests. It was postulated that this was only an extension of the in-, ternal problems of government as they exist to-day in any of the countries mentioned, e.g., the problem of Ireland, or of the revolting provinces in China. The conference accordingly affirmed the principle of the League of Nations, but as it felt that the League was not capable as yet of fulfilling the functions for which it is ultimately destined, it further affirmed the necessity for the maintenance- and protection of the peoples of the British Empire and their free institutions. It was impossible to consider that they should be sacrificed at the feet of any aggressive Power which refused to abide by the decisions of a League of Nations which had not as yet power to enforce its decrees. In these circumstances, and in the light of the fact that this Dornin-, ion is set in the South-western -Pacific far from its chief source of protection, the Mother Country, the view was strongly expressed that preparation for defence was necessary and was paramount in the field of New Zealand’s relationship with the outer world. This was practically so as regards naval defence.

The resolution states the arguments used: That the British taxpayer pays eight times as much per head as we do for naval defence, and yet that the value of the defence is as great to us as it is to him; that the fair assumption of the burden of naval defence is immediately necessary if we are to maintain our self-respect; and that the very least standard we can aim at is the onepower standard. During the debate various methods of expending the moneys was suggested. One speaker advocated naval scholarships, arguing that New Zealand should supply her full share of both men and money. Others suggested assistance to the Sea Scout movement as a means of training New Zealand’s boys to a love of the sea, and to inculcate in them the principles of seamanship, and the virtues of hardihood and courage. A further suggestion was made that the money be devoted to the upkeep or maintenance of a submarine. In all cases the point was stressed that the money was not in substitution of any Government commitments for navel defence, bu was to supplement them, to point a way towards an adequate expenditure, and to encourage the people of New Zealand to take an immediate, deep and lasting interest in the problems of New Zealand’s defence and foreign relationships.