THE C.O.’S.
TO TBK EDITOR. Sir, —Mr Mackie is certainly placing a very different interpretation upon my previous letter than was intended. The question of '' deliberate disfranchisement" can, contrary to the views of Mr Mackie, be met with sufficiently sound argument tor persons of reasonable intellect. "Invincible bias" mentioned by this gentleman is one that has been cultivated by years of active service, and is borne on principle- Simi-y lar conditions would most likely have given the C.O.'s other opinions than those they so publicly express. We are unable to understand these men, who, during the war, have hung back and have actually seen their so-called principles overwhelmingly discountenanced by actual events. The "end all" of the arguments is not embodied in the particular questions put forth by Mr Mackie, but is a question of privileges which have or have not been rightly earned, and is consequently not merely a "convenient by-play." _ As accused, we are not dealing entirely with the merits or demerits of the C.O.'s, but -with the right of constitutional privileges and with the justice or injustice of granting these men any part in the ruling of the country which they did not consider fit to fight for- The electors of the Dominion (in general) will decidedly not be penalised for ten years "in order to gratify the spleen and vindictiveucss of a few politicians whose fiat has been defied," but those people who refused their services not merely in a spirit of defiance of the politicians who represent this country in Parliament, but mainly in consideration of saving their own skins, even more so than their prdncfcpltest, should decidedly be " penalised" or punished in this respect. "We have no recollection of " revered memories and honoured names" of C.O.s (actually as conscientious objectors) appearing in our roil of honour either of the past or of the present. The main demonstration during the war, to our knowledge, expressive of the high esteem in which the conscientious objectors are held, was an incident in the Dartmoor Camp (England), in which the German prisoners of war strongly protested to the authorities against being confined in the same camp as C.O.'s. This speaks for itself, and is consequently the feeling not only of our won lighting men. Had these men followed the teachings of God, as they proiessed to do, they would surely have participated in the war in some manner,, if only to uphold the principles of right and justice which are directly involved in such teachings. \\'e ask readers to kindly consider for one minute whether any man's personal feelings and ideas can possibly override the necessity of defending his country agamst the degradations so clearly threatened during the last four years and a hall, by such a powerful and unscrupulous nation as that which wo ha-ve been fighting. We do not know of any case where the C.O.'s, in incurring the unpopularity of the country, have lost or even risked their lives iViLess through studying their principles*, too closely packed round the fireside or by chancing catching colds from the orator's noted "soap-box." "We, in disagreeing -with his principles, do not deny him the title of " patriot," but we consider he still has to prove his right to it. May we also mention the fact that a large number of these men are understood to have gone to the mines—an essential industry which carried with it exemption,- but in which were experienced more strikes than any other industry in New Zealand—during the period of compulsory service, and we understand remained only for the duration of the war. _ln conclusion, I would iifce to mention that it is far from my mind to give the impression of abusing the principles of tb.eop men, but this is a question in ■whic*'?. it is to give full expression to our opinions, so as to make the position quite clear. We are not so biassed against the "principles" as against the men who have, in so many cases, taken temporary shelter under them—l am, etc., RECENTLY RETURNED.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TS19190722.2.31.2
Bibliographic details
Star (Christchurch), Issue 12699, 22 July 1919, Page 4
Word Count
675THE C.O.’S. Star (Christchurch), Issue 12699, 22 July 1919, Page 4
Using This Item
Star Media Company Ltd is the copyright owner for the Star (Christchurch). You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Star Media. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.