AUSTRALIAN COMPULSORY MILITARY TRAINING.
[To ass EDITOR or vs. "Snakrsr."7
SIB,—Captain Crosfield in his letter to your paper of May 2nd accuses use of making "wild, misleading, and gravely exag- gerated statements" in my controversy with him in the Warrington Press. Instead of Captain Crosfield replying to my last letter in the localnewepapers, he writes to the national Press, and makes vague and unsubstantiated charges without producing any evidence. This is a most unfair and undignified method of controversy.
My contention in the Warrington newspapers was (1) that, though the Australian Labour Party passed the Act, the Liberal Party framed it, and Lord Kitchener had a great deal to do with the scheme. (2) That in the Labour movement the revolt against it is growing. (3) That twenty-one thousand three hundred cases of prosecution have been conducted, and three thousand four hundred lads have been sent to gaols and mili- tary fortresses (in the language of the authorities, " military detention "). (4) That this system is costing nearly £1,000,000 more than estimated by Lord Kitchener. (5) That this system of " citizen " soldiery is conscription, inasmuch that it provides a) that all must train; (b) that conscientious objectors are sent to military fortresses, etc.; (c) that freedom of speech and Press are not allowed to the "citizen" soldier in relation to his military training ; (d) that he is liable to be tried by a Court- Martial, in times of peace as well as war (and sentence when passed is final and cannot be repealed by any civil Court); (e) that be can be ordered daring strikes to shoot down his own kith and kin; (f) that the so-called equality of sacrifice does not exist—the rich man's son does his drilling at the college during college hours ; the working man's son has to make all the sacrifice, giving up many of his nights, Saturday after- noons, and public holidays. (6) Captain Crosfield stated that only three candidates (" Revolutionary Socialists ") opposed the Defence Act at the last election, and were defeated. This statement is untrue. Fully twenty candidates, in reply to questions submitted to them by the Freedom League, said they were in opposition to compulsory military training. I admit the majority were defeated ; but Mr. Hugh Conroy, 1.1.H.R., Mr. J. Matthews, M.H.R., Senator Oakes, and Senator Clemons were returned. There are other Members more or less opposed to the defence policy, and there is a strong force in Parliament strongly criticizing the present
Administration, Is Captain Crosfield prepared to deny my
charges against Australian conscription am, Sir, &c.,
[The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Mr. Barry says the pudding is naught—indigestible, ill-cooked, and wholly vile. The people of Australia, however, not only cooked the pudding for themselves, but ninety per cent. of them say that it is excellent eating, thoroughly digestible, and will strengthen those who do not altogether like the flavour. Strange as it may seem to Mr. Barry, we believe the Australian people to be in the right, and that his effort to prove that they do not really like the pudding, though they say they do, is a piece of unctuous impertinence.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
