MARRIAGE PROBLEM.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 12784, 30 October 1919, Page 8

MARRIAGE PROBLEM.

QUESTION FOR REPATRIATION BOARD. The Canterbury Repatriation Board spent a considerable time last night discussing the problem of whether discharged soldiers who are being subsidised at new trades by the board should be granted the furniture loan of £SO. The discussion arose out of an application for the loan from a young man, twenty-one years of age, with a record of three years’ war service, who was contemplating getting married next month. Mr H. S. J. Goodman, chairman of the Furniture Committee, stated thal when the case came before the committee only a few members were present, and it had been decided to leave it, and another case of a similar nature, for the board to decide. The man in question was a subsidised worker receiving a wage of 25s a week, which was being subsidised up to £3 by the board. The man had stated that ho was getting married next month and had made application for a loan of £SO to purchase furniture. Personally ‘he (Mr Goodman) was of the opinion that jbeh cases should be declined, as he did not think the board should offer any encouragement to subsidised workers to get married. The subsidy was only given as a trial to see if the man could make good at that particular trade, and it might happen that he might not succeed at it. The man was discharged as lit and was not receivin'* any pension. The other case was an application from a man twenty-three years of age, receiving a permanentpension for disablement, but his wages W^ re . .? n v P cr week and they were subsidised tip to £3 by the department. He moved that bobli applications should be declined. Mr J. A. Clarice, in seconding the motion, concurred with what Mr Goodman had said, and expressed the opinion that the subsidy was only granted in order to enable the man to live comfortably while learning a new trade, n W ?i ? CTer i . ntonded that the subsidy should be an inducement for the men to get married, and he hoped the board would not encourage them to' assume such responsibilities on so low a wane. Mr N. B. M’Galium said that the hoard could not prevent the men from getting married if they wished to do so ; +t the men had made up their minds about it they would get married whether the loan was granted or not. the board should not encourage such men to get married, but in the cases before them he was of the opinion that the men should be assisted. Mr P. Davidson suggested that if the young men were spoken to privately b .y an official of the board, and the rights and wrongs of the position explained to them, they might give up the idea of getting married just now. Three pounds a week at present is no better than 30s a week before the war, ’ said Mr Davidson, “and we should see the young men and put the pomtioa clearly before them, instead of oe-ing a party to encouraging them to ruin their lives and leading them to certain trouble.” \ The chaiman (Mi A. W. Jamieson) said that board had certain responsibilities in the matter, and every case must bo,settled on its merits. He personally thought that until the youuomen had acquired trades they were not doing the fair thing in getting married and assuming such great responsibilities. \\ hile entirely in sympathy with the soldiers, he did not think the' board would bo right in encouraging thorn to get married. Mr M’Callum pointed out the probability of the men getting married and coming back to the board afterwards iul •? oai h T lien waa hafdly likely that it could he refused. At the same time he believed that no young man until he had reached the age of twen-ty-four or twenty-hye years could rightly assume such responsibilities. • Mr W. E Lead ley contended that m both cases the loan should be granted. We seem to be taking upon ourselves responsibilities we have, no right to assump when we start advising returned soldiers when ,to get married and when not to got married,” he added. “This young mam had three years of hell oyer there,, and if wo tell him ho is not m a position to get married wo are exceeding our functions. By getting married he is doing the very best thing he could possibly do, I' advise every jeturned soldier to get married, because it is the best way of getting them To settle down after being away at the war.” Mr M’Callum remarked - that it was for the benefit of the country and the men themselves for returned soldiers to get married. - ■ V Mr E. J Howard said that one aspect of the OiVjC which had been overlooked ■was that the man as a subsidised worker could apply to his employer for bigger wages when he got married. Regarding the cases under discussion, he had not heard one sound argument in favour, of refusing the applications, lie believed in urging every young man and every young woman, if physically •fit, to get married. The man in question must have some go in him or he would not have gone to the,, war to young, and children from young men of that description were good children. That was a eugenic principle, and ho was going to vote in favour of/the loan, because he believed in early mar mges from the point of view of iho State and of the young man, and as a subsidised worker the man would probably get an increase of wages. In the first years of marriage the voung men had more incentive to get on in life and early marriages were nearly .always successful. He bad been under twentvone and Taming less than £3 a we«k and less than 30s a week when he' -’as roamed, and he had never regretted In reply to Mr F. W. Hobbs, Mr Goodman stated that the men had nutbeen interviewed by. the committee and no report concerning them had been received. In view of this position, Mr Hobbs mcmxl that the applications should be referred back to the commitMd conmous?y iUncndmcnt was carried unani-