Untitled

Sun (Christchurch), Volume IV, Issue 963, 13 March 1917, Page 6

The following paragraph appeared in The Sun report of yesterday's sitting of the Second Military Service Board: The chairman said that the appeal came under the "shirkers clause." That, he said, would prevent the board from looking at the matter sympathetically. The appeal would be dismissed. The chairman referred to is Mr H. W. Bishop, S.M., and we suggest to him that it is neither fair nor dignified on liis part to give Section 35 of the Act that opprobrious designation. We are not concerned with the facts of the particular case in the hearing of which the obnoxious phrase was used; the point we wish to make is i that the chairman went outside his ' jurisdiction in using it. After having read the report in The Sun the appellant came to this office and complained that the words, as used in connection with his case, carried an implication which (he evidence did not justify, and so were liable to misconstruction outside the court. That appears to us to be a fair inference. Many people not aware of Mr Bishop's habit of indulging in magisterial pleasantries would be inclined, on reading the report in quesI lion, to jump to the conclusion arrived at by the appellant. This is not the first time that men appealing before the Second Military Service Board have complained of the chairman's attitude towards (hem. We would remind Mr Bishop that the majority of those who appeal against being taken for service do so because they conscientiously believe they are justified in that step. It is the most critical stage in their lives, and the least the boards can do is to treat appellants with a sympathy and consideration befitting the circumstances. The chairman of the First Board sets an excellent example in this respect, and, to our mind, Mr Bishop might with advantage to all concerned heed that example and show a little more regard for the feelings of those who are facing the greatest crisis in their history.