AUSTRALIA’S SAFETY.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 144358, 24 March 1914, Page 5

AUSTRALIA’S SAFETY.

A CONTRAST IN OPINIONS., lAN HAMILTON AND PROFESSOR JORDAN. MELBOURNE, March 11. Not a stone’s throw separated Melbourne's most distinguished guests when they delivered themselves of their strikingly dissimilar views upon Australian security. "Beware the black crows 1” said Hamilton. "Don’t make your womenfolk take in washing!” said Jordan. The famous American prolessor’s address was almost overshadowed by the pompous red and gold military gathering at which General Hamilton spoke. Anyone looking tor melodramatic elfect could have found it in the contrast between the blood-red assemblage of swarthy men at the Hamilton dinner ami the quiet, pale assemblage at which Jordan discoursed on peace. The hails were neighhoms. and one could almost hear the soldiers’ shouts punctuatin'; Jordan’s premises that swords would soon be sheathed for good, and cannon sold as old iron. Yet. although Hamilton and Jordan differ in their treatment. and even more- in rh.-ir nicuii.u, they reaeli the same conclusion—that war in the Pacific can he at least indefinitely postponed.

THE MILITARIST, "My study Is war—bloody war.” said Hamilton to the Victorian military oilicers when he arose at the dinner 10 respond to the toast of hi., I.call!:. He has lot us knew that in many ways. Ho is the lighting man, first, hist, and all the time. Ho represents the rod corpuscle of the race—the men who live by lighting, and who wouldn’t care if liiev died by lighting, provided that their death were glorious. Those who have seen Hamilton in Australia have been impressed by his lino presence, his eloquence, and his physical fitness. The first impression is one of resplendent manliness. But the second and lasting impression i.-. that this is the type of military man who must essentially lie subjugated 10 civil authority. He is all for the army; hr likes ceremonial parades, is exacting on points of etiquette. is magnificent in coloured dress, and frankly cultivates the military spirit. It would not he fair to say that he advocates conquest. Tito fair thing to say on that [sunt is that he conveys the idea that the red corpuscle demands aggression, hut he does not put this itiea in words.

Listening to Hamilton addressing a rousing military gathering, one imagines with want fear such c man would be regarded by democratic leaders of an excitable people. Hamilton is tho tyjie of fighting man who makes wars. This is a typical sentence: “Australians have born in them the desire to defend their country.” Here is another; "The little dark gentlemen may come and pay you a visit.” And another; “You must lie so strong militarily that those you don’t want in won’t want to come in.” All sound statements, but said with a ring and confidence that, coupled with the subconscious impression of tho speaker’s personality, excites the military spirit to temporary madness. Cold showers and calm thought aro required in tho morning after a Hamilton dinner.

THE BLACK CROW SIMILE. Hamilton’s speech at the Victorian officer’s dinner was replete in such power to stimulate. "1 am told that in tho Australian bush tho crow site in a tree,” ho said. “When it thinks a sheep is getting sick it swoops down upon him and picks his eyes out. Disaster like that which comes to the sheep Iroin tho crow is watching every nation of this earth, and if one gets sloppy and lets things slide that little dark gentleman will pay it'a visit before it is expected. Look out in time, and got ready! There is a great moral force in ■ war, and in preparation for war, too. 'General staffs ore constantly studying out plans of offence and defence. When a nation takes timo by the forelock, however, and begins to get itself ready for war, the chiefs of tho general staffs turn that page in their diaries down, and that particular nation is not troubled much. So tho risks and chances of war decrease for a nation as it prepares and becomes stronger, and its potential enemies give up thinking about it, and do not make plans to attack it.

“In modern history there is no analogy with tho training that is going on here, but something similar might bo found in tho history of Romo at the time of the .second Pnnio war. Then something like 250,000 men had boon killed, but still the war wont on. So far as I can find out. there is no indication that these soldiers had any prolonged period of training in timo of peace. The Australian army is preparing itself, and its citizen army is following closely in tho footsteps of the old Roman Republic. Never forget that strength lies in preparedness.”

Hamilton, with his devoted South African veterans, his dashing aggressiveness, and his insistent advice, has been the striking figure of the year in Australia, and few will deny that his stimulation has been as useful and timely as his expert criticism of our military organisation. Australians are not so ungenerous as to find fault with other aspects of his visit; hut they may hope that their citizen army will not necessitate a military caste or militarism in any of its objectionable forms. They turn from Hamilton with the lesson of efficiency learnt, and with the great wish that tho legislators may keep cool heads and nip all undemocratic tendencies, however alluring, in the bud.

THE PREACHER OF PEACE. Melbourne bas bad the antidote of Professor David Starr Jordan, 'president of the Leland Stanford University, and leader of American thought. It has been a wholesome antidote, though Hamilton has beaten him badly in publicity, and the famous American has been found only by those who sought him. Jordan is not a pcace-at-any-price man; ho admits, for instance, that circumstances might arise in which Australia would I>o embroiled with a northern Power in the Pacific. In such a ease, ho told me to-day, the United States would stand in with the British Empire. There would bo no hesitation; America’s navy would range alongside that of Australia. And if the aggressive power happened to bo Japan—which Jordan will not believe—America would take the drastic step of ruining Japanese trade by boycotting Japanese goods throughout its markets. Such a course, says Jordan, would soon bring any war to an end; for the bulk of Japan’s foreign trade is with America, and with British and American markets closed against Japanese goods the Japanese would starve.

Jordan is a big, vigilant, quickspeaking student, and a man of affairs. He has lately travelled much. Ho speaks with confidence of international

affairs as if all were plain before him. •His bugbear is jingoism. He docs not openly connect Hamilton with jingoism, but the suggestion is there when ho refers to tho British General. In Jordan’s opinion, the great nations spend too much money on military preparations, and the military and naval interests have too much power. “Every Dreadnought that is-built means more women to take in washing,” is one of his interesting paradoxical phrases. What impressed itself forcibly on the American’s mind when in Japan recently is that “Japan has no more intention of coming to Australia or the South Pacific than Australia has of invading Chili.” He thinks tho AngloJapanesc treaty will not be renewed, because no one seems to want it now. But that will not affect Japanese relations with tho dominions. The Japanese aro busy settling Southern Manchuria. They have to find room for their surplus population, which is almost wholly small-farm labourers —coolies born on acre blocks. They could not come south in the Pacific if they wanted to, and they impressed him strongly as having not the slightest desire to come. “The best patriotism.” says Professor Jordan, ‘Ties in the spirit of justice to all men. and in the desire to see one’s country on the side of justice. America is taking a lead in arbitration as opposed to war, and tho growing mixing of commercial interests is forcing it on. Trial by combat is passing away, trial by reason is coming in. Tho private duel has passer! into ridicule, and tho duel between nations will pass away in abhorrence and ridicule before long. Tho only thing to bo achieved in this respect is to get rid of the idea of a host trying to kill another host because they are told to do so by a Government, whether right or wrong. . . . In Belgium tho people are hungering for peace. In Germany the people have no stomach for a fight. In Austria there is no dosire for war, and in Russia the people, bowed down by taxation and drink, have no thought of war. Where nobody is loaded, nobody explodes. German people regard war with Franco or England as the greatest calamity that could arise. It is absurd to argue that Germany wants a navy to protect its mercantile marine. The expense of the German fleet is too much to pay for the insurance of its merchant ships, and anyhow, the vessels aro insured in London. There is not tho slightest danger of Great Britain ever attempting to seiaeJSgnuanJ

trading steamers, and the German fleet Ims nothing to do with the development of that country's sea-borne commerce. All it has to do is with the development of the aristocracy, who want army and navy, as the right and left wing, to maintain their power over the common people. “Australia has no enemy in the world. Xo nation has the remotest idea of seizing Australia. Xo nation could hold it if it did, Xo intelligent man in Japan over dreamed of attempting to seize Australia. When that nation attempted to do something in China Great Britain said. ‘We don’t play in that sort of way. We are hungry for peace,’ ”

The common man associates three things with Hamilton and Jordan. The first is that not many months ago Great Britain and Franco wore within one day of warring with Germany. That is proved. The second is that racial hatreds and racial greed exist. The third is that unrestricted militarism and a parasitical military caste are nearly as obnoxious as war.