Dear Sir

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 5, Issue 98, 31 August 1942, Page 4

Dear Sir

Letters to the Editor must be clearly written on one side, of the paper only and where a nora-de-plume is used the name of the writer must be included for reference purposes. The Editor reserves the right to abridge, amend or withhold any letter or letters.

CIVILIAN EVACUATION

Sir, —May I express my surprise on reading your leader and "Human Nature's" letter, egarding our civilian population, ami their evacua,-f tion. Are 1 you not aware the very mention of the word, evacuation is strictly taboo as it. is sure to panic the poor wretches? At least, that is the military view: The proper course is to enjoin tliem to "stay put," make no preparations, carry out a "denial of resources to the enemy" programme, and wait for the order to get out in about five minutes, even if it means going in their night attire, and without supplies. Like a case I read of in Malay.

The operation could then be re-* corded as another brilliant backward move, in which the casualties were estimated to be not much over 50 per cent; —a remarkably low figure in the circumstances. An exaggeration? Probably. But who could exaggerate the calamitous outcome of an enemy landing here, in this district at the present time? You speak of Home Guardsmen's concern for homes in their immediate rear: what would their feelings be, if they found their homes were in front of their lines? You know the geography of the district, and the possibilities I agree with you, and "Human Nature" that plans should have been made, giving the civilian population—the women and children, wives and families of Home Guardsmen the opportunity and help to defend themselves against enemy action, by evacuation if necessary. Some individuals, and groups have already made their plans: but what of the rest? This civilian army, working on our home front, doing its share, either directly or indirectly in providing the very sinews of war is apparently to be left largely to its fate, without the chance of escape.

That this is an error of judgement, vitally affecting the defence of the district, on the part of our High Command, is obvious. That our local authorities are lamentablyapathetic towards it is equally ohn vious. That we, the common people, the fathers of families, with the safety of our womenfolk dependant on us make no effort to bring the matter to their notice, is tragic. Most of us apparently are content to let matters take their own course, without our help or hindrance, and be ready to "blame the Government" when things go wrong. In this case however, the consequences are too grave: No amount of "placing the blame" would, make amends.

We are so very proud of our British maritime tradition of "Women and Children First." Could it not apply here? It appears to have been done in the Caucasus. However, we pride ourselves on being an. \integral part of the great democratic re,gime. Let us put our democracy to the test: Would, you, and "Human Nature" support, my suggestion that a petition signed by all those interested in the district, should be draAvn up, asking that this matter be remedied? The petition to be presented, not to a subordinate mili-« tary official, but to the Prime Min?ister himself. Surely such a course would be constitutional.^

May I ask "Huirmi Nature" whether under present, conditions he would immediately respond to his battle call, and leave his family to their fate, or obey the of his pseudonym, and try to make some provision for their safety? Probably the question is unfair, but would have to be faced, and answered by him, not to me, but to his family and himself, should the call come. That such a question has to be answered, by Home Guardsmen is the greatest military blunder of all. Surely these men Avith a most, important role to fill should be relieved of any doubt as to the safety of their families.

Yours etc., H. W. WARD. (The answer to our correspondent's query, as far as we are concerned* is most emphatically—yes; Ed). (Continued in next column)