MILITARY TRAINING.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 143587, 28 August 1911, Page 6

MILITARY TRAINING.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —In your is*ue of Thursday we were favoured with the views of “Territorial, ” an individual who takes a somewhat bombastic and jingoistic attitude, metaphorically inflates his chest, contemptuously classifies all who object lo compulsory military training as silly youths, and hints that they would bo afraid to defend their country. New Zealand is indeed fortunate in possessing such a patriot! But, as “Territorial” poetically puts it. let us refuse to bo stranded on the rocks of sophistry (“Territorial” conveniently refrains from pointing out wherein the fallacy of the objector*’ arguments lies) and let us consider the question from the standpoint of an ordinary individual and not from the giddy heights from which “Territorial” airs his views. The military training scheme, as it stands, is out of proportion to the needs of the country, and the amount of training which is required of each man is equally out of proportion to the amount of military skill necessary to enable the ordinary individual to assist in the defence of his country. * "Would your correspondent have us believe that from the age of 14 to the ago of 30 a man must spend the amount of time stated by the regulations in learning the use of a rifle? None could object to a reasonable scheme for the training of our youth while at school in the use of arms., or to popularising and making attractive the old volunteer system; and few would grudge the money spent in this way, but to hand over the country to the military element, ns is proposed, is both an infringement of individual rights and an unwarrantable expenditure of public money. “Territorial’s” line of argument is somewhat illogical. While agreeing with him that a man does not grudge the cost of a fence to keep out his neighbour’s fowls, I would point out that he might reasonably object to the erection of an expensive brick wall for the some purpose. “Territorial” also refers to the days of tho press gang, and would seem to lay the credit of England’s great naval victories at tho door of that no doubt excellent but somewhat primitive institution. History tolls us that at one time men were tortured and burned alive for their religious opinions; would he have us revert to that method of correction, on the ground that it produced men of greater hardihood and with more regard for their religion than is to be found in the man of to-day? In apologising for troubling you with this letter I would explain that it seemed a kindness to rouse “Territorial” from the state of coma into which he seems to have fallen, for in stating that the objectors are only a few foolish youths, he overlooks the fact that according to the papers an AntiMilitarv League in Christchurch has a membership of 4000 and that the Ministers’ Association there is pledged to oppose the scheme.—l am, etc., ANTI-JINGOISM.