THE DEFENCE ACT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 10682, 31 January 1913, Page 4

THE DEFENCE ACT.

COMPULSORY TRAINING IN NEW ZEALAND.

ATTACKS IN BRITAIN,

HON T. MACKENZIE'S REPLY. [From Our Cokbesi , oxdkn*t.] LONDON, December 2!

'The Higli Commissioner has spout quite a considerable portion of his official hours unci his leisure timo since his arrival in England in endeavouring to persuade Home objectors to compulsory military training in Now Zealand to mind their < \vn business. It is a thankless and a hopeless task, but, of course, Mr Mackenzie, cannot afford to entirely ignore tlicso everlasting attacks on the dominion, even though many of them are made by people obviously "cranky'' on the subject of what they are pleased to term-"con-scription," and who arc, in not a fewcases, just as obviously ignorant of the real naturo and scope of New Zealand's legislative endeavour to prepare lor the days that raav be.

.Just recently there has been another wholesale distribution of anti-compul-sion literature in the'shape of pamphlets, circulars and letters to the Home Press, particularly the provincial section. This new campaign ,is based upon the alleged woes of a family of recent settlers in tho dominion named Selkir, who apparently went to New Zealand ignorant."of the fact that compulsory - training was in force there. Certain persons have been very busy voicing the "wrongs" of the Sellars lor the benefit of the people at Home, and their lucubrations have drawn from the High Commissioner <i letter which has been sent to every paper that has published the anti-militarists' complaints. In this letter Mr Mackenzie remarks:— "If it did not savour so ranch of interference in our affairs, Messrs Gre-o-orv, Whiting ' and Co.'s hysterics over New Zealand's-notions would be amusin". As reuresenting New, Zealand here L can "tell these gentlemen that those who make the laws in New Zealand aro responsible to. the people of New Zealand alone, and not to a few noisy outsiders. . . " This family of Sellars has gone to reside in Ta.ranaki, one of the richest of New Zealand's provinces. I represented a constituency there, and just before coming Home,to the Old Coui>,try I- unveiled two monuments to "tho brave farmer and military soldiers who fell while protecting the settlers' homes and their women and children. No** these men who object so loudly to raising a hand for defence do not object to go to the rich country that these brave men have sacrificed tucTr lives to protect and render fit lor settlement; they are .quit© ready to take all the advantages and the present •.■protection which others have provided, and, more than that, have the effrontery to denounce the country, its laws and its, statesmen for training men in the future to do that which had made Taranaki province a peaceful and prosperous country. "In a letter that I have received from New Zealand to-day , there appeal's the following, which T have extracted and which might have emanated from the pen of any of the hysterical English writers:— " ''Conscript New Zeala.nd legislators are being looked upon as a body of spineless nondescripts not worthy of the nam's .'of man.' , ' ■" The fact is. however, that it is because the Government is not ' spineless' that we have this screeching. Tho Government and country hare decided that tho young nien of New Zealand are to train in order to .defend their .country. Ninety-nine _ out of every hundred young men in New Zealand, and are noble and courageous enough to welcome the opportunity to train ; the other one per cent, for various reasons, is* trying to overthrow the system, and they are getting equally noisy friends in England "to sympathise with them, and, ,if possible, to disturb the' public mind in New Zealand as 'well as in this country. ' \ " The point' made of the case of tlie Sellar family is that they were pot aware ,of the laws in force in-New Zealand before leaving the Old Country.- I am sorry that, they should not have known and thereby incurred the, expenditure and the trouble that has arisen. At the High Commissioner's office we are in the habit of giving as much information as possible on every point that information is sought upon: we mention that we have a. system of compulsory military . training, and, in the majority of instances, when any remark "is made at. all by_ intending, emigrants, it is an expression of approval of that law."

Mr Mackenzie proceeds to point out that there' are far more applicants for passages to New Zealand than shipping accommodation can.be found for, and that vessels sailing for the dominion are booked full right ; on 'up to April, so that .all the noise that, the anti-militarists are making in England is having "but little effect so far as the right stamp of people is concerned. The High Commissioner proceeds:— "What is the position of our country, and why do we adopt the system of compulsory training? First, because it is one of the richest and most delightful countries in the world in which to live—a country in which every welldoing man and well-doing woman have an opportunity of living in comfort, and, in addition, have bright prospects for their'future. The country is so good,. and its attractions are so great, that those who live there are determined that* it shall not be their fault if it falls into the hands of an enemy. We cannot look to Great Britain at all times to send us ships_ and soldiers to protect lis'; the time might come when, unfortunately, she might be in a death struggle with powerful continental nations, when .she could not afford to send, us the means of protection, and it is to meet an emergency of that sort, and also to sho.w that- we are selfreliant, that we are training our people (with their will- co-operation) to strike a defensive blow, if need be, for home, for country, and especially for the women and children of that country.

"It might be mentioned tliat ive are, without the slightest difficulty, obtaining all the young men we require for defence purposes, and that the numbers that we have fixed upon for. training are pretty nearly secured now, so that 110 difficulty whatever is experienced in carrying out our plan. The, reason for some of the prosecutions is .the open and offensive defiance they are making of our laws. It is .not mentioned by these outside .meddlers that each private is paid a minimum sum of 4s per day, with free rations for.himself and forage for his horse, if mounted, in addition to every other expense being paid; nor do they mention that there is a provision in the .case of religious objectors for duties of a nature equivalent to the service given by others, in the performance of which they are not called upon to bear arms or to fight." In conclusion, Mr Mackenzie says:— •'Just to expose the line of action that these outside interferons are pursuing, T. might say that there is not a complaining soul in New Zealand that they do not unearth, whether publicly known or unknown, and give, its-forth here as an indication of what they call 'the strong objection ' that exists in New Zealand to compulsory training. They even attempt to make out that the working man is opposed to it. Let mo say that the ablest Labour member in the New Zealand Parliament gave an emphatic denial in Parliament to the statement that the workers of New Zealand were so disloyal to their country as to opposo compulsory military training."