TWENTY YEARS AGO

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 99, 30 April 1935, Page 4

TWENTY YEARS AGO

THE LANDING AT ANZAC “I COMMEMORATION QUESTION. ie u- RETURNED SOLDIERS’ VIEWS. (Our Own Correspondent.) WAVERLEY, April 29. Hl At the annual meeting of the Waver* e ‘ ley branch of the Returned Soldiers’ Association, some interesting observam lions were made on the commemoration of Anzae Day, when the secretary (Mr. W. Berridge) proposed the following motion:—“That this meeting of returned soldiers considers that, in view ■ of the fact that it is now 20 years since the landing of the Anzacs ou Gallipoli. , and that the day of commemoration of Anzae IDay is being looked upon by the 0 present generation as a holiday only, " and by some of the older generation as 1 ‘ a day of mourning for the dead with little thought for the men still alive •- who helped ( o prove to the world that e the. Anzacs were men who had to be taken into serious account in the war, y it is our opinion that commemoration in services and the parade of veterans s. and returned soluierf* on Anzae Day i- should be abolished in the Waverlcy .1 district. ” Mr. Berridge drew attention to the t fact that the Act of Parliament grantli ing the holiday stipulated that it should be observed as a Sunday. 1H Mr. L. Neilson said that the matter |. had given him a good deal of thought, and it did seem that Anzae Day was not being kept in the proper spirit. k The whole object, of an Anzae Day scrvice was to work for peace, while re* ‘ membering the past and giving it due, ( honour. Anzae Day itself seemed to be 1 ‘ losing its appeal and he would sooner see the commemoration run on the lines o of Armistice Day in England than in c the present form. He suggested that ■s Anzae Day should be retained as a e public holiday, but that the com- ;- meinoration should be observed in the f way of Armistice Day. Public services n could be held on the following Sunday, n Most people were hypocrites, and out* . door recreations were popular on Anzae Day. Returned soldiers did not to be reminded of the war. A man did his duty and did not want to be patted on the back on a particular day of each year. Objection to the motion was raised by Mr. L. E. Neilson who said that, thought the religious service had littl* u appeal, returned soldiers did not ol> 1 ject to the march to the cenotaph. At r the cenotaph there was no question but r that they were reminded of dead com rades and he considered the parade s meant much on that account alone. In reply to a question, it. was men :i tinned that the service was convened ; by the Town Board. t . Support was given to Mr. Neilson’s j argument by IDr. P. V. Graves. On fhe 0 suggestion of Dr. J. Duncan, it was d«’ I cidcd to take the original motion in two parts, dealing first with the commemoration services and then with the " parade. The first motion that commemoration services be abolished was carried with two dissentients. The c motion was seconded by Mr. E. <’. Hone, who said, in answer to Air. Neilson’s argument, that he, did not rec quire the stimulus of Anzae Dap serli vice to think of men whom he went d to the war with and did not return. After a little discussion the motion i was lost by an overwhelming majoritv.