Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, 15 June 1916, Page 17

Current Topics

A Heavy Blow • ~ f It is not too much to say that the first feeling awakened by the staggering news of the drowning of Lord Kitchener was one of blank dismay. We had come to lean so heavily upon him that for the moment it seemed as if our one hope and mainstay in the war had been taken away. What Hindenburg is to the Germans, what Joffre is to the French, all that and more Kitchener was to us. Ever since the first thunderclap of the war burst upon us, Kitchener had been a name to conjure with, and that because of the masterful personality behind the name. Clear-brained, firmwilled, a man of action rather than of words, of rare executive and organising capacity and of utter freedom from doctrinaire fads and fancies, he was the one strong man of the British War Office ,at a time when strong men were never so urgently needed. His work and achievements both before and during the period of the war have received sympathetic and, so far as that was possible, adequate treatment at the hands of the daily press, and it is unnecessary for us to tell once more the familiar story of the great soldier’s life-long and imperishable service to the Empire. *

After the first stunning effect of the news had passed away, a little reflection served to show that there were considerations that tended materially to soften the blow, and to enable us to face the situation with unshaken hope and courage. (1) As has been commonly pointed out by the press and public men. Lord Kitchener’s main work in relation to the war was already accomplished. He was called upon to create not merely a national army but an armed nation, organised, equipped, officered, and ready to take the field, and shor.t though the period allotted to him for this tremendous work, death’s hand struck too late to prevent him from accomplishing his mission. (2) The ,War Office has full knowledge, of course, of all his aims, plans, and ideas for the future, and the machine which he created will be worked along the lines and in the spirit designed by its creator. As Colonel Repington has aptly put it, ‘ From the general direction he gave to Britain’s efforts, the country never swerved, and we will follow them inflexibly to the. end.’ (3) The immediate and direct effect of the disaster will be to steel the people of Britain to a firmer and stronger resolve to carry the great undertaking which they-have in hand to a -successful issue. The loss of gallant lives in the recent naval victory, and the calamity which has overtaken the man in whom, their hopes were so greatly centred, have brought home to the British people, as perhaps nothing else could do, the life and death nature of the struggle in which they are engaged. Kitchener was ever a man who believed in talking by deeds rather than by words. In the death which overtook him in the execution of his duty he gave his life for his country- as really as if he had fallen , on the battlefield, and in this respect he, being dead, yet speaketh.’ ' The men of Britain, we may be sure, will listen to his call. A Story with a Moral Our esteemed Boston contemporary, the Sacred Heart Review, relates that a Catholic society recently gave a banquet at which, according to a daily .paper’s account, ‘ enthusiasm ran high ’ and * the guests pledged themselves to support the Catholic press.’ Each ticket to that banquet cost two dollars average price of a. subscription to a Catholic paper. There was plenty to eat, no doubt; there was music,- there was singing, and there was dancing. Also there was speakingrand one impassioned orator dealing with the Catholic press aroused the enthusiasm -that , the daily paper -featured in ’ its headlines. - Curious to know how it ‘worked out, our excellent contemporary inquired of the editor of the local Catholic paper if he had received any new subscriptions as a result of the bah*

quet. He had not! On the contrary he had lost one. Ihe man who made the speech stopped his subsciiption because the editor did not give his remarks as much space as the orator thought they deserved ! TT The moral of this is obvious, as the hackneyed phrase goes, to the meanest understanding. Catholic papers appreciate, of course, the ringing resolutions and fine oratorical flights in which their influence and ■ virtues are extolled, but they appreciate still more the admiration and enthusiasm which are expressed in tangible practical support. .In this, as in most other matters, actions speak louder than words. German Press Fictions If it be true that the British Publicity Department is much too slow and backward in making use of the press of the world as a medium for disseminating British facts and views, it is equally the case that German press agents go to quite the opposite extreme. They appear to act on Carlyle’s dictum that ‘ Gullible, by fit apparatus, all publics are,’ and no story is too ridiculous to come within the scope of their idea of fit apparatus.’ Their latest effort is an attempt to make the worldand especially the neutral world believe that Britain and Russia were at daggers drawn at the conference held at Paris at the end of March. The news is conveyed per medium of the now somewhat notorious Karl von Wiegand, special staff correspondent of the New York World, who, under date Berlin, April 15, sends by wireless to his paper (via Sayville, L. 1.) the definite information that serious discord has broken out in the camp of the Allies over differences between Russia and England, and that the Paris conference on March 27 was marked by sharp clashes between British Prime Minister Asquith and General Shilinski, representing the Russian Government, because of Russia’s war operations and plans in Asia. statement is declared to be based on a special despatch from Geneva to the Budapest Tlirlap, the leading Hungarian newspaper. According to von Wiegand, the Tlirlap professes that this information comes from well-informed and reliable sources, and gives alleged details of what led to the conference and of the proceedings and discussions thereat. The Hirlap is advanced as authority for the following: * That only with great difficulty was Russia induced to participate in the conference. . . . Russia wanted assurances

of full freedom in Asia fact, demanded that her Asiatic operations be excluded from the conference. Also that her agreement with Japan be not touched upon. But England, the wishes of her ally having aroused distrust, hoped to persuade c" compel Russia at the conference to abandon them. In the preliminary “conversations” between Petrog’rad and London, England had urged strongly that, in the interest of a general victory for the -Allies, Russia ought to subordinate any special aims to the great general and mutual aims and goal, and- not hinder the solution of pending questions with special demands. Russia argued that England and France must long ago have come to realise that military victories are not won with diplomatic documents, but with blood and iron ; moreover, that advice of a military nature must be declined when it comes from a source which has yet to prove its military superiority; that Russia is not in a position to fight only in front of its own door, like England and that Russia fights where she can see benefit and achieve something. . . . Receiving a sharp answer from England, Russia declined to take part in the conference.. But through France’s mediation an agreement was reached which caused Russia to send a delegate. When the conference met, sharp clashes and excited scenes are alleged to have taken place. Premier Asquith insisted that the fate of Europe must be decided in Europe and therefore Russia’s armies could be used more advantageously in -Europe itself. Thereupon General Shilinski, who is the. Czar’s Aide-de-Camp, in the name of his sovereign and Government, -ironically declared that Russia canpqt permit hep strategy and operations to be dictated

by those who-were responsible for the unfortunate policy in the Orient (the Dardanelles campaign) that the crushing of Serbia was fault and mistake because her diplomacy had not prevented Bulgaria from joining the Central Powers; and that the unlucky Salonica adventure was also attributable to England. The alleged debate, in which France is said to have been inclined to with Russia, while Italy and Belgium took England’s side, became very heated.’

Thus far the veracious von Wiegand, and his sounding board, the Hirla-p. The answer to all this is to be found in the simple but significant fact that, as the sad calamity off the Orkneys has just disclosed, the Czar had but recently invited Britain’s War Chief to make a personal visit to himself of a particularly friendly and confidential kind. The truth is that while it is the case that throughout history time has tended to show weakness in alliances, the present war has reversed history in this as in many other things, and the bond between the Allies is firmer now than ever it has been. How the Soldier Feels It must be an extremely difficult matter to analyse and describe the thoughts and feelings that surge through the mind of a soldier in battle, but the task has been attempted by a German fighter with what must be regarded as very remarkable success. This profoundly- interesting psychological effort is embodied in an article which has appeared in the German papers, and which has very naturally attracted more than passing notice. The writer, a German school teacher, had participated in thirty-six battles and engagements both on the eastern and western fronts, and since penning his article has met his death on the western front. According to him—and on this point his testimony accords with that of most others who have written or spoken on the subject—soldiers suffer most just before battle, and the mixture of fear, doubt, and expectancy with which they are tortured proves unnerving to many. Here is his description of the first sensations: ‘ The troops receive orders at night to prepare for a charge the next morning. The first thought is, is this real? Somehow, it seems like a dream. It is the same thought that stirs the soul in any great event in life, be it one of joy or one of sorrow. . It does not seem real. However, when the soldier does realise that it is no nightmare, he begins to think of the likelihood of , death claiming him in that battle. A strange, indescribable fear begins to agitate the soul. The awful thought pesters him that he will go to his death and leave home and loved ones and everything that is dear in a moment of time. He ponders over the subject of immortality and wonders if death comes whether it will mean eternal darkness and annihilation. To one who is in the prime of life, who has everything to live for, hell itself cannot offer torture to equal the terrorising doubts that assail „the soul in those dreadful moments before a battle. Then, too, the thoughts come that we have not made the most of life that there is so much which we would still like to do that if only given the opportunity how different we would shape our life in the future. All night long the troops move to the front, and all night long we think of God and the uncertainty that lies directly before us.’ * When the actual moment of attack arrives, however, all this is changed, and everything is forgotten but the immediate task in hand. ‘ Morning comes. It is a most beautiful morning; the sun shining warm and bright. The notes of a German song are wafted on the still air. It is a song of the Fatherland and all join in the chorus. It is then that we forget all our doubts and fears. A new life seems to be born within us. All fear has vanished and we are ready to go down to the gates of death unafraid. And then the battle. The bullets begin to whistle. In those first inonjentp every soldier naturally 1 looks for som^ .

sheltered place for protection. • Nevertheless, the soul is remarkably calm. Though comrades are falling on all sides we never lor a moment think of being hit by a bullet ourselves. We keep on running, running toward the enemy. All feeling, all thought, all .emotion, all sensation is obliterated. In all the crash and thunder of artillery we go on, fearing nothing. Occasionally we hear a voice uttering a curse or a threat, due to the hate against the enemy, born anew in the thick of battle. That feeling of hate becomes uppermost. We are seized with a frenzy of rage, and our one thought is to meet the enemy face to face and annihilate him. As this hate is mingled with a certain feeling of patriotism and love for the Fatherland, the lust of battle is developed ,in such a manner as to quiet our nerves and we forget all about danger and death. The battle has been fought and won. The soul experiences an indescribable peace, but when we begin to see our broken ranks and make count of our fallen comrades, painful sensations follow. Then only do we realise what danger we so callously faced, and a wave of thoughtfulness warms our blood and body. The feelings and sensations on emerging from a battle are like those of convalescence from a serious illness. The tired soul longs for peace and rest, and the soldier falls into a deep, sound, dreamless sleep, in which all the fear and stress and storm of the time are forgotten.’ With the exception, we may safely say, of the outburst of hate; this doubtless represents tolerably accurately the experience of the average soldier, Ger- ■ man or otherwise. In battle, as elsewhere', the German evidently carries the palm as a good hater. The Military Service Bill Members of Parliament have evidently made up their minds to show small mercy to the ‘ conscientious objector,’ genuine or otherwise. In the Bill as originally drafted no provision whatever was made to meet such cases, unless the very general terms of clause (d) •of section 17 —allowing the right of appeal on the ground that his calling up would £ be a cause of undue hardship ’ to the appellant be stretched by a friendly board to cover the circumstances of those who object on principle to blood-shedding. When the Bill was in Committee, the Minister for Defence attempted to have the matter put on a definite footing by moving to add as a ground for exemption ‘ that he objects in good faith to military service on the ground that such service is contrary to his religious belief,’ and also another provision, ‘ That such appellant shall offer his services either to the civil or military authorities for non-combatant- service.’ The House, however, threw out both proposals, and the conscientious objector is left to take his chance. The Minister complained that it was impossible to provide a test for conscientious objectors, and no doubt this is very largely true. How far individuals' will go — left to themselvesin the matter of developing conscientious objections is illustrated by some cases recently heard before the Tribunal at Glasgow, as recorded in a Scottish daily paper. According to a Glasgow Catholic contemporary, much wonder has been caused in local Catholic circles by the spectacle of. Catholic appellants to the local Tribunal seeking exemption from military service on the ground that as Catholics they have conscientious objections to waK; and they apparently attempt to base their alleged objection on the terms of the Pope’s peace manifesto. The daily paper above referred to prints the following account of the colloquy between one of them and the Sheriff in Glasgow who presided at the Tribunal : ‘ The Pope’s Manifesto. * Another student, who is in training for the teaching profession at a Roman Catholic institution, said he was prepared to suffer death rather than desert his views on war. The Sheriff —It is not contrary to your creed to engage in war?—lt is. * The Sheriff pointed out that a large number of priests were engaged in the present war, many of them as combatants.

* Appellant urged that every Christian believed in the commandment “Thou shalt not kill.” The Pope, the head of his Church, had issued a manifesto asking them to refrain from further bloodshed.

‘ The Sheriff no, he has called upon the Governments, not the peoples, to desist from war. The Pope did not say that military service was wrong. If that is the kind of reasoning you apply to this manifesto it is no wonder you have gone so far wrong. You don’t produce any doctrine of your Church and simply say that for your own part you hold this belief. As far as I can see you have given no reason why you should be set free altogether from your national duty.’ * Whereupon the Glasgow Catholic Herald of April 22 makes the following pointed remarks: ‘The Archbishop of Glasgow, who has issued several recruiting appeals, might be expected to know something of the Fifth Commandment and of the duty it imposes on Christians. In effect these exemption claimers claim that they know more theology than the Archbishop. They interpret the Scripture for themselves. They thus go in for private judgment whether they are aware of it or not —they are consequently really Protestant in their religious position. This is not merely our view but that of reliable and accredited Catholic theological authority. Speaking for the Catholic body we unreservedly disavow the tenets advanced by these youths and declare that they speak only for themselves and not in the least degree for the Catholic Church, with which they must part company if they adopt the principle of private judgment in Scriptural interpretation.’ * These lay Catholics might very well have put in a plea for exemption on the ground that as trainers and educators of the young it was contrary to the public interest that they should be taken away from their profession, but in trying to work up a claim of conscientious objection they were basing their position on a false theological ground. The whole question of exemptions is a thorny one, and the problem will require to be handled in a judicious and reasonably considerate manner. It is obvious that, without adopting a formal list of exemptions, there are certain professions whose members cannot be bound to universal military service without serious injury to the community. Such are medical students, and to a lesser extent, perhaps, members of the teaching profession. Clergymen and theological students stand in a similar category. In respect to these, New 'Zealand will doubtless follow the lead of 'the Home Country, and grant exemption application is made—to clergy and to theological students who have entered on their special studies in immediate preparation for Holy Orders. At a time like the present the nation requires not less but more of the moral strength which religion alone can bring, and the community will need all the spiritual as well as all the militant forces at its command to bring it safely through its heavy ordeal. If Britain does not feel called upon at such a juncture to force its clergy into the ranks of the combatants, there is obviously still less reason why New Zealand Should be under any necessity to do so.