"SHIRKERS."

Star (Christchurch), Issue 11282, 9 January 1915, Page 9

"SHIRKERS."

•10 THE EDITOR. Sir.—l notice in the columns of your paper a lotter signed by •' Householder," who complains very bitterly of young men enjoying themselves at New Brigjhton. He mentions also that our Bishop had remarked that one would almost think young men had no thought beyond mere passing interests. •'Householder's" complaint is rather a personal matter, an.d tins Bishop's remarks are certainly uncalled for. and appear to reprimand one class, the working young man. If our worthy Bishop were to occupy a fair portion of his sermon towards assisting the mothers, sisters and maybe children of these young men, to secure for a sovereign what was purchasable for twenty shillings previous to this war, he certainly would be an asset to the Dominion. This young man, because he. takes his recreation at New Brighton in a healthy spirit, is termed a shirker. What is the young man who rushes round tho province on Sundays in a motor-car ? Is he a warrior or a wowser ?

Surely, Mr Editor. the working young man can enjoy his week-end without being flouted as a shirker. This class of shirker was the one who fought in South Africa, and is still agreeable to scrap again, but why hustle him around? Has he got mu<jh to gain if he were to resign his position, say, of 10s per day, to light for 5s per day? Who reaps the benefit? This young man never once since the world began benefited financially by any war. But note that the men whom he fights for robs him and his family by raising prices on every imaginable saleable article. If our Bishop were to send a sermon along to Mr Massey and his capitalistic friends, objecting to the raising ef prices on the food supply, he might in one sermon do more good than the Food Commission ever contemplated was possible. The Government of this country offers 5s per day to the ]x>rson who enlists to go to the front. Now for illustration : Presuming these. so termed shirkers were to inform the Defence authorities that they decline to move unless 20s per day is offered, what would be the cry of the merchant, miller, steamship owner, etc., etc. ? They would at once move on a simijor orrand to tliat which tliiev moved on at the late strike, viz., to crush tho man for once niul all. But if the .merchants, millers, steamship owners, farmers, etc.. etc., raise the price of all saleable articles to secure more greed for themselves, it is reckoned just, and absolutely correct. The onlydifference, as it appears to me, is that the working young man offers his life and the unassured upkeep of his family for 5s per day, as against tho merchants' opportunity of bleeding the family the working young man leaves behind. They art! both termed patriotic. The merchant is patriotic enough to secure the country and the gold. The fighter gets what he has "helped to pay for only, viz., what happens to be flying around.

Jf this country is why, then, docs not the Governnion* offer oven facilities to all young men !" Jf a man is good enough to light for his country, the responsibility should bo equalised. They all pay for the cost of the war, the man who fights and tho man who stays at homo, and each of these are worth, roughly, as an asset. £o a, week to rlie Dominion r»revious to the war. But on returning from the war the position is altered.

Should the working young man rctuni minus an arm and 1o«. he j.s .so much appreciated thai, h<> may receive a. pension of. say, two or three shillings a day. This is given him to keep his family alive To encourage. "Householder in his views of hunting these men off the bench, why will not the Government recognise the, fighter's responsibilities should he not return or .should ho return incapacitated':' Wil - V ri , ()l give them what is just and make the sbav-at-lioino merthanf., millrf, etc., ilc' pnv lor what the fighter has assisted iii win? Then you would not require conscription, and every man would be on tho «« m ?./""-IT"! " m -> ot( . #i NEW ZFAJ.ANDLR. Christehurch, January 7.