NO COMPULSION.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume I, Issue 59, 16 April 1914, Page 3

NO COMPULSION.

THE DEFENCE SYSTEM. MINISTERIAL PROPOSALS. CITY COUNCIL UNSYMPATHETIC. The Christchurch City Council last evening decided that it had no recommendation to make to the Minister of Defence with regard to the provision of suitable employment for young men who have conscientious, objections -to military service. The following letter was received from the Hon. James Allen:—

"As you are doubtless aware the Defence Act makes provision for the exemption from military service of those persons who satisfy .a magistrate that their religious principles would be violated by. the perf oriiiance .of military duties. The advisability of providing a similar exemption to those who on conscientious grounds seek to be relieved is now being considered. In justice to those who, in.accordance with the Act, carry out the prescribed military training, it is felt that some equivalent service of a non-military nature should be exacted from those who for religious or conscientious reasons, cannot see their way to carry out their statutory military obligations. "It is considered that it might be possible to employ those exempted on .religious or conscientious grounds in work that might be of use to the community. The time spent on such work should be the equivalent of the military duties performed by members of the Territorial force and Senior Cadets, and, if in camp, pay and allowances should be given for an amount of work equivalent to that performed by those doing military duty when in camp. "At present the number of 'religious objectors' is not considerable. • There are only 69 so exempted in the Dominion, but it is probable that when the exemptions are extended to the conscientious objectors there will be an increase.

"I should be most grateful if you could favour me with any suggestions on the following:— (1) What nature of work will be most suitable in town or country? Would the local authorities provide work? (2) What would be the most suitable method of supervising and recording the work done? Would the local authorities assist in the administration? (3) Would it be possible to carry out the work as provided in regulations 247 (ex- ' eluding Sl'), and 249 (excluding .* c') which detail the drills and parades Territorials and Cadets must attend per year? If not, how would you propose to allotjtne time for work? (4) Any other points

that may occur to you. "I feel sure that you will gladly second the efforts of the' Government to equalise the duties of personal service in such a manner that all persons may, during the period for which they are liable to serve under the Defence Act, contribute a just share of work to their country without doing violence to their religious convictions or to their consciences." < ' ADMISSION OP DEFEAT.' > Cr Burgoyne moved that the letter be received. He said that he did not think that the council should be asked to carry out the duties of Parliament,, and to say what objectors should or shauld not do. The Minister's letter was an admission of defeat. Already the Defence Act had wrecked two Governments —one in Australia and one in New Zealand —and it looked as if it were going to wreck another. It was not the function of the City Council to administer the Act. If' the' Government had got into a muddle, it should get itseif out again. The council had no .right to give employment to objectors, and by so doing keep men out of work who had a right to have it.

Cr Hunter seconded. He said that he for one would not be a party to any such action as was suggested in the letter. He believed that the Defence Act should never have been put on the Statute Book, and he did not feel inclined to give any assistance to the Government in its administration. SHOULD BE < ' RUN IN.''

Cr Sorensen said that he could not agree with the previous speakers. He thought that the council had every right to assist the Government in the administration of the Act. He had great respect for the conscientious objector, so long as he knew that he had a

well-balanced conscience. -The council should have' some' opinion on the subject. Ifjhe were the Minister he would run in all the objectors, and make them do some work. -

Cr Hunter: Why don't the Go vernment do that?

Cr Sorensen: I think they don't want to work. There may be a few who really have conscientious objections to service, and these should, be able to render some equivalent service. ; Cr M'Cullough: Why don't they do it? " •■ ..•■■.■ Cr Sorensen: The Minister, should carry out the law. The Act was carried by a Government representing the Social-Democrats, Labourites, and Liberals,. Voices: No. Cr Hunter: What happened to it? (Laughter.) !\ • VOLUNTEERS v. CONSCRIPTS.

Cr Mjllar said' that he was an old voluntedr. officer, with twenty years' service. The volunteer force was a good one, and might have made an excellent forced; He-did not know why the Government should have abolished it, but it hail done so, and- as a result had died a natural death. He believed in the principle of every man defending his country if. required, but he did not believe in compelling .the boys to defend it £or them. He believed in taking his own '"whack..*' The Act had been pushed on to the - people. The truth was that the Government was looking for a new policy, and was coming to the council for it. (Laughter:) The Social-Democrats -would give them one. (Laughter.) It was a great pity that the Government should have come to them like this. It was a well-known fact that the Act was a failure. The weak spot in it was that it provided a force of which one or two members would be bound to turn tail in the face of trouble, and everyone knew what happened then —the whole regiment would be demoralised.

Cr Otley: You are not- talking about New Zealanders? Cr Millar: You hear a lot of bombast about New Zealanders. They are just the same- as anyone else. He went on to say that many New Zealanders laid down their bones on the veldt for a lot of diamond miners, and when the war was overj the country was overrun by Chinamen. If ever the time came they would be asked to do the same tiling again. The best thing the council could do with the present proposal was to leave it alone.

COMPULSION CONDEMNED. Cr M 'Cullough agreed with Cr Sorensen that every man had the right to render service to his country. The Mayor had said earlier in the evening that he had dozens of men applying to him for work, and it would be a "deuced siglit'; better if the country spent the million a'year which the defence scheme cost ini-providing work for such men, who probably had wives and children to support. The man who worked and earned good wages was doing better service for the State than the man who shouldered a musket. He himself had done twelve years as a volunteer, but it was an-insane position to give a young man a musket and say to him that he must drill. The City Council had no right to provide employment as an alternative for military training. The men who advocated the present defence scheme were the men who had never given one hour in their lives to military training. He had one such man in his mind's eye at the moment. Cr Sorensen: He is a shirker.

Cr M'Cullough: Yes; he advocates the .system that you advocate. He wants boys to do the work that he won't do himself. It only took three months to train men for service in South Africa, he continued. When men would not take on military service, he was not prepared to force it on the boys. The motion was carried without further discussion. CR M'COMBS'S VIEWS. A long letter on the subject was received from Cr M'Combs, who was unable to be present at the meeting. In the course of the latter Cr M'Combs said:—

"I regret very much that I will not be present at the next council meeting, when the Hon. James Allen's letter on alternative service will be dealt with. I trust that the deliberations of the council will result in finding a way out for the politicians—both Liberal and Reform —in their difficult task of trying to ad-: minister a most unpopular Act. I have a great deal of sympathy with the present Minister of Defence in his efforts to give effect to the recommendations of the joint committee, composed of Liberals and Reformers, and I realise that Mr Allen is patiently trying to administer an Act which was placed on the

Statute Book when the Liberal Government was in power. "I hope the Christchurch City Council will vigorously repudiate the principle of forced personal service as being a reversion to the bad'old days when the manor was the controlling entity in local government, and forced personal service for the maintenance of roads' and bridges was the order of the day. ... "Mr Allen's proposal means the partial re-enactment of the long-since abandoned principle of forced personal service. -, It means the extension and not a mitigation of the principle embodied in our .Defence Act. It will not settle the difficulty; it will but intensify it. It may, however, serve to illustrate the false basis of the whole business. I- agree that citizenship carries with it 'duties' as well as 'privileges,' but suppose under this scheme a man is asked to plant trees for a fortnight, would not the State be. equally well (if not better) served if that man paid a gardener to do the work for him? The payment would-, of course, be equivalent to a tax. "Taxation in. lieu of personal service is a mark of civilisation; and forced personal service of all kinds, including military service, was finally abandoned in England as far back as the Restoration. In these days of specialisation and division of labour the stupidity of asking all men to personally do their share of roadmaking and bridge-building must be manifest. Only through taxation can the Government approximately apportion the : duty each citizen owes to the State, : because all citizens do not owe the same 'jfl'ity. . . . The only solution of the defencej; difficulty is a paid citizens' army with: voluntary enlistment, the adjustment of the.burden to be through taxation. That is the only satisfactory solution of the difficulty, and* the one that is in accord with the best traditions of a free people. Taxation is the only method of scientifically adjusting the burdens of State. Forced personal service and equal service belong to the days of barbarism. Instead of fining the conscientious objector or demanding equivalent service, the, balance of responsibility can be arrived j at by the State paying for all services directly rendered. This might mean in- : creased taxation, but it would result in the just apportionment of the burden., The recognised canons of taxation would; have to be applied. The trainee would! have to contribute his share of the taxation, but would be paid for his services. The non-trainee would likewise have to contribute to the revenue, but would not I; participate in the military payments.? . . . Military detention has proved? worse that gaol, but the proposal for forced personal service may become more harassing tha& either. Any-;' Low, the whole principle or •tfie. thing is, wrong, and I hope the council will have' nothing to do with it, because, apart from the principle of the proposal the practical difficulties will be enormous, and Parliament may very well be left to sohe the difficulties it has created."