SHOULD MARRIED MEN ENLIST?

Wanganui Herald, Volume L, Issue 14741, 21 October 1915, Page 8

SHOULD MARRIED MEN ENLIST?

DISCUSSION BY BOROUGH COUNCIL. NOT DESIRABLE TO ENCOURAGE THEM. A discussion on the question of married 'men enlisting took place at the Borough Council table on Tuesday evening, following on receiptof a‘ letter from one of the Council’s employees, Mr Thus. Ditchfleld, who said that he had made up his mind ihat it Was his duty to enlist. He could hot do so, however, unless assured that his Wife and family would be adequately sunported during his absence, and he asked, therefore, that half pay shoula be allotted him for their upkeep while he was away. The MAYOR, whb said that all would appreciate the spirit prompting Mr Ditchfleld, remarked that the application nevertheless opened up a serious question. The cost of a married soldier was-twice that of a single, one, and he felt that while single men were available married men should not be encouraged to enlist. He. moved as follows:—“In the opinion of the Council, so long as single men of military age are available, married , men should not be encouraged to enlist', consequently the Council cannot see it way to grant the application.” Cr. HARKNeSS seconded, saying that if a married man could afford to provide for his family it was all right that he should go, but not if they were to be left dependent on others. There were lots of strapping young single men walking about the streets with their hair curled, and stealing the sweethearts of those Who lia-i already gone. These men should lie compelled* to go before married men were called upon. . In answer to Cr. Hall, the Mayor said his motion was in reference to married men in general, and of course applied to the Council's employees. Cr. THOMPSON- pointed out that !hens wore many single men with mothers dependent on them. He deoreedted applying such a motion In -'eneral-terms,,, and .considered they should send every fit man willing to go. N _

Cr. COTJLL said if single men would not go, married men must, Mr Oitchfield had had experience in the Mouth African war, was keen to go, i.nd we were asking for, more men. ?f employers took a lead from ihe Council’s motion it might seriously hamper recruiting,' Cr. LUXF’QRD thought It wv-uld be a good thing If employers \vould take such a lead. There were hundreds of- fit single men who were not. offering. Employers should put their foot down and refuse to, femploy single men and this might force the Government ro adopt conscription, wuich to his mind was the only proper and suitable .uotbod at the present time.

Cr. DUSTIM, spegklng as a married •can, opposed the motion. He agreed bat it was degrading that so many ..Ingle had not the British pluck r enlist, and were acting as cowards. ’onsdHptlpn ought to have been dopted long ago. They saw hundreds ■t young men in the streets lacking he manhood to go and fight for their country. At tne Same time, he did opt think employers or the Council hould discourage' married men froin enlisting, dr decline . to assist their ,'amilies. Such a resplufioh would have a bad'effect on recruiting. Cr. HALL considered that .the Coun■H should know the positißh of Its •uarried employees before assisting hem, otherwise it might be left with A burden on US’ hands. • At Abe same iine, when a worried than it, might, induce quite;, a number of single ’men' to go . and-, do their - duty ■iso. , .The,. iDpqM«U 'fitly to protect -the'inleresta', of ih# ratepayers. . v -

, Cr. LIFPITOM said that many iemiloy era • were .giving half-pay. ; ia both itiarried add single: men! and it seemed x -fair thing -for the , Council 'to d& -he same. They'rfhouiq. be cafeful hot io discourage recruiting.’ M -. . Cr. SPRIOOENS—“They are. dealing , with; their otfn, .Tnbn'e'y;’ we' are dealing with the ratepayers’ . money’.-” Cjv Gowhr sbid -martied- men should nbt be encouraged t»,go,, ai'the Councilmight ■ have' to- support 'their, families ■ all ikSt lives. IThere wereibundreda/ ,bf eligible 'single, mfen about -the streets. Homo certainly, bod parents,, to support', but they had to look to the inatrieqijJien to supply the fatnro geuetutibir./jf employers would do away, with .’all .single igbotfr, and employ oply .married mefa,. it would -be a good thing, and; single-mob tS.us.out of work would be glad to eaiisti while there .would be plenty, of _employr rnent for married men. ' ; Cr. Sigley said the 'quSsfibni .^as: one aspoedihgly -difficult to ' make up- pub's mind about;.' But he did' Hot tbmVthe Council. should seek to stultify theeffotie of those who were tryihg Vo get mdh.Tf ifiasrfed. iueu wanted ; to go.lstrtheni.;' ■' 'The: Mayor; ‘‘.Bat hot at our oipenFe.” Or. Sigley Said . the tVaiipgtdhMCity Council’ Was paying: a-jyear'pa (It* count'of employee*. at. ,thP. local bodies were doinv, similarly. a great; pity. tp. stop a jaaH who wanted to go, and -they' should be cqrefUlsending forth such' a resolution ;witnthe stamp.of,the Council, upon it. If married men were killed, the Government provided a liberal j^ension’scale. The Council did not have to support thejr families. ■ The Mayor: ’'We have to pay bur share." ' • ■ ■’ -r -

.'Ci 1 . Sigley. "Pro. rata, je».” He did not think the motion patriotic; He admitted the Mayor was doing; his share of patriotiedttyrbut some councillors were not. At. fajuStitfim to men going away pine .tow only' the . Mayor and. or Ihtee.rtouibillots, It .wb’ ; ii 4(to the others did not .attend to, blioWtheir sympathy. He ihoved an amendment: “That Mr IJitch' field be informed that, in the event, of his proceeding • to the_ front,, the . Council will allow his dependents Xss a- ; Week during his absence;” Cr. tiffiton seconded. . k. - - The Mayor said an important principle Was 'at stake. . Every member of /the Council' Was patriotic, and appreciated Mr Ditohfield’B wish to go to the frrint. But that, was not the point.' It Council hj duty, as representing the community, to see that it. got the best Service,, I’Ve, were told to economise, and that all wasto-.incst be stopned. Could anyone imagine a more wasteful way of waging war than to send, married men to the

front) and keep single men at, home?, Everymairicd soldier cost twice as much as a single soldier. A single mail’s pay ■was enough for himself ahd> his dependents, ■ but, a married' man’s pay must be supplemented. Aiid it wfts not only the extra expense, but also the extra.Toss if, anything happened to a married manr That was why he objected on principle to public funds being used to subsidise married men when single men were available. As to single men not going, that remained to be seen; they, were still coining forward in large numbers. When -they ceased doing so, the Government .should'take the proper steps. Cr. SigJey said that half the men in France aud" Flanders were married, and the , New Zealand camps were full of them.

The Mayor; ‘‘Yes, and every, •'fespon-' dlile newspaper ih England is waking up to the vast, mistake that has been made, and Kitchener is, now recalling large numbers of married men from the trenches, and is having the whole system reorganised. Through this, enlistment of maified men the war is costing Britain twice as much as it is other nations. Britain-is realising that a gigantic mistake, had been made, and is now rectifying it’. ' ■ • Cr. Sigley: “Where would the Empire, have been if married men had not enlisted?”

The Mayor: “How much better would it have been if the mistake had not been made at the first, and if we bad had a proper system instead of muddling along?” Cr. Sigley, objected to the phrase ‘'muddling along,” to which the Mayor replied, that that was a matter of opinion. Cr. Sigley’s amendment was then put »nd lost? bv 8 to 4, and the Mayor’s motion carried bv 7 to 5. 'On the motion of the Mayor, it was ’ h*n resolved r “That the head of each, department of the borough be requested to furnish a list of the single men emnloyed, in his department, with particulars of such men’s dependents.”

PATRIOTIC FUNDS. VICTORIA LEAGUE. The following donations to the Victoria League for the use. of our soldiers are acknowledged.:— ,; Mrs Nairn, 1 pair socks; Miss Wick*; steed, balaclava, muffler,. 2 pairs, socks, 1' pair bed socks; Mrs Horace Baylcy, 3 uit bags eqiu'pped; junior associates, 1 dosen jug covers, 6 handkerchiefs, 1 pair socks, 6 handkerchiefs, 2 'scarves, balaclava, socks, 2 pairs socks, washers, scarf, socks, 6 handkerchiefs, 33 white handkerchiefs, 10 brown' handkerchiefs, 3 pairsr socks, 3 . scarves, 36 washers, 2 balaclavas }. Mrs Hadtield, 6 pairs socks, 3 mufflers, 1 balaclava; Mrs Bolaon, 2 darts; Mrs; Elliott Elliott, paper, envelopes, tooth, paste, pencils, tooth brushes, cigarettes, 1 towels, 3 pairs socks, washers, muJflerrJ Mrs Mackenzie, books; Mrs Godwin, hooka; Mrs Liffiton, bed socks, kit bag, bags; Mrs Lethbridge, £2, kit , bags;: shirts;; Mrs and Misses Currie,' dressing’ gown, 12 sheets, 4> pair bed socks, • 2 pait socks; Mrs-Hirst, 2 pair bed socks, balaclava ; Mrs Mason, dressing goWri, bandages; Mrs LAnc© Craig, scarf, bed socks, bags; Mb-s Currie, 4 pairs socks, .balaclava; Miss Allison, 3 pairs socks; Miss Qilldllan, paper, scarf; ', Mrs Babbage. socks, 1 bandages, bed . socks.