The Defence Act.

White Ribbon, Volume 18, Issue 208, 18 October 1912, Page 10

The Defence Act.

(To the Editor.) Dear Madam, — . There is one feature of our new universal militarv service scheme which I think must have been overlooked by many of the mothers of our youths. I refer to the harm that must follow in the mind and character of the Lids by the inculcation of the militate idea of maiming and killing our fellows. In the April number of the “ N.Z. Militarv Journal,” published by the military head-quar-ters authorities, under the heading of “Senior Cadet '1 raining," appears the following: “The militar\ aim must come lust, whether we like it or not. And dealing with vouths from 14 to IN, it is fortunately cas\ to make them like it, and for success it is essential so to do. The militarv must be made interesting; and here in the Dominion we labour utuhr the disadvantage of having no Regular soldiers on view ; the captivating glamour of military life is wanting. It or-lv our Cadets could see a ,r ood regiment at work, or feel the magic of a battery coming into action, the whole tone of their work would be raised in a moment.” One can hardly conceive that this ideal will commend itself to tiltwomen readers of your journal. To me it appears demoralising and degrading, and calculated to debase our youths. May I also refer to the increase of military pictures on the walls of our schools ? Do battle scenes furnish the best inspiration for our children ? Is carnage and slaughter

calculated to engender tile best kind of spirit 111 the young mind f 1 it help to foster the idea of loving helpfulness and kind.y .eeimg ? Or have we abandoned these ideals and are content to drop baca in the upward march. Yours truly, \YM. EX SOM. Dear Madam, — The amount of energy needl •_! Ssl V expended from day to day is appalling. And the p*tv is ih.it there should be such waste when Lic.c js iclt in so many departments of life. Mr. Mackie is no doubt most wishful to hasten the coining of the reign of peace, but both he and I would have had a little more time to give to the cause had lie, before putting his critic pen to 1 aper, spent a few moments in considering the article on the Defence Act published in >our last August issue. In the first place, let ire draw Mr. Mackie’s attention to the fact that tile paper was read in .March last 111 Dunedin. Its publication so many months later was without the knowledge ol the writer, who, had opportunity been j 1forded, would have revised certain 1 ortions. For instance, at the time the article was written it was not commonly known that ;he unlit ire authorities were administering a form of oath much more exacting in its obligations than that given in the Defence Act. Against this ultra vires protest lias lei 11 made. Had Mr. Mackie read mv paper a little more carefullv, lie would have s.-cn in it no plea lor war or armament, nothing but the simple statement of tile fact that New Zealanders as a whole .ire not ready to rid themselves of the idea of defence. It may appear to me that non-resistance, even to the i out of possible absorption by another nation, is the only possible ideal for disciples of the great exemplar of non-resistance, but it is very certain that the people of this Dominion are not prepared to make their practice harmonise thirewith. For the consistent few —those who do hold the life of fel-low-man (of anv co our or race) as more sacred than personal liberty or national existence—for these, I said in March, and say again now, a conscience clause should provide. But, in order that sincerity may be bevond doubt, some definite work

for the State, work that shall not primarily benefit the doer thereof, must necessarily be demanded.

Mr. M ic’vie go.s on to speak of the “ well-wcrn argument ” of Compulsion in education, etc., and savs tli.it education is good for the child, the Factory Act benefits the worker, and so on. Does it not occur to Mr. Macxie t at from the point of view of those who would resist invasion, defence is necessary 111 order to ensure the continued o| eration of the Education Act, the Factory Act, and other l>enehcvnt measures ? W hv Mr. Mackie should infer from the paper that I hold the bearing of arms to f.e t ie only wav ol serving one’s country pa>s.s my comprehension. I may hold, with Kuskin, that the man who plants a potato or sells .1 pound of sugar is doing in’ nitelv greater service to his fellows than is the man who dons thj soldier's uniform. Ne .cTtheliss, the gardener and the grocer do not usually cuter —nor are they expected to enter — upon their respective callings for the sake of country, but out of regard to theii own livelihood. Of course, anything t • t Mr. M ckie cm do to alter this r.naltruistic state of allairs will le heartily welcomed. With regard to discipline, may I repeat 111 v own words: “There are thousands of voting men ” (belonging to undisciplined fatnile*, the context show s 1 “ to whom tie training in prompt attention to duty” (not subservience) “and in healthful modes of living will be of incalculable benefit.” One important paragraph of the paper Mr. Mackie ignores. 1 suggested that, to avoid c ntlict between i>« rent d avtli r tv a <1 State enactment, the age for urolment be raised (as in Swit/erlan 1 and tiermany) to 20 or 21 years. As to school children being trained in warcraft without demur, I have still to say that at the time the paper was written little, if anv, public ••hjtction had been taken to the mnitarv training of school l>ovs. Much may have been done in this direction 111 England and America, but these countries are not New Ze tland. In this country the chiel agitation has centred in the case of youths of ift and upwards, and I still marvel that mothers have so quietly acquiesced in the familiarising of childnn with the idea of shooting

down their fellows. If the mothers would but unite in protest, no Minister, < r Premier, or Government dare resist the demands of so large a body of electors. I am, etc., 1,. M. SMITH.