Cadet Training.

Press, Volume L, Issue 14983, 2 June 1914, Page 6

Cadet Training.

Sir lan Hamilton must be a sad disappointment to the anti-militarists. Beforo he came to New Zealand, thinking to score by citing so distinguished a soldier, they made free use of his book on compulsory service in England. Then Sir lan explained that the existence of England's professional Army in his opinion mado compulsory service at Home a different thing from sucli B_lfeg3i3«aj^^s^^

service in tlio colbnics, and indicated quito clearly that ho appror-d of tbe principlo on which our system is based. Now an interviewer at "Wellington has asked Sir lan whether, having seen cadet training in Australia and Now Zealand, ho *--_uld advocate it for England. "Yes, warmly." was his reply, " in the full conviction that I was doing " a patriotic act. One of tho main " objections to compulsion disappears " entirely in tho caso of Cadets, who "are. and have been, since thc days of "Solomon, subject to compulsion." Xo one except the, anti-militarists will bo sin-prised that Sir lan Hamilton should Inve come to the conclusion that da_ot. training is an admirable thins.;. He has seen in Australia and New Zealand thousands ef well-set-up smart boys, trained in habits of discipline and learning to work together for the common f-ood, and he must early in his tour havo wished that he could transport a whole parade to England to make people there acf|iiaintcd with this branch of our defence system, and show them what fine specimens of young manhood it ha? to lick into shape. We look* forward to the time when the English public will see a detachment of colonial cadets at work. It would do moro than I anything else to c-ountpraet the misrepresentations and falsehoods of the anil-militarist party. Tn the meantime Sir Jan Hamilton will toll the English public that ho saw, not a lot of driven conscripts, but battalions of willing boys whose heart was in their work, and if ho has an opportunity he will tell them that this is the very thing for England. If the Liberals remain in offico they may pluck up courage to displease a section of tho Itadical Party by instituting cadet training in schools. Some such proposal was made in a Government Bill shortly afror they took office, but was promptly vetoed by the Party that hns such a morbid horror of anything calculated to teach a citizen ono of his primary duties. There have been signs recently that the Government is again thinking cf cadets as an auxiliary to tho Territorials. If so, Sir lan Hamilton's report on New Zealand wiU come in very handy.

•The other day wo mentioned, in a discussion of the land settlement question, that under tho Ward Admini-tr-i----tion the, percentage of "landless" men increased. Tin's fact, of couree, may havo some reasonable explanation. We do not say it has not. But it certainly ou,ght to act as a cheek upon the "Liberals' " fondne&s for dealing in these percentages. If, however, it is foolish of the averago "Liberal" to talk of landless men and land monopoly, it i:worse than foolish for tho memrjer for Avon to do so. Mr Massey made this clear in one of his southern speeches when he said: -~

Mr Russell, in his speech, went on to complain that Of, per cent, of the population were landless, titter twenty-one years' legislation. (Laughter.), And why? .Because a f*reat many people owned more land than they wero entitled to own. He (Mr Ma_sey) know of one man who owned 60,000 acres of land in the North Islr.nd, and his name was Russell. (Laughter and applause.)

Tno member for .lvon explained to a delighted Houso, it is only fair to say. that ho . bought his estate for philanthropic motives; hut it requires either an enormous reputation for philanthropy, or else an enormous broadmindodness on tho part of the avorage elector, to make Mr Russell's denunciations of the large landowner appear really convincing.

The tragic end of Mr Laurence Irving will recall to some the similar fate of another fitje actor, G.-V. Brooke, ono Of tho leading tragedians of the midVictorian times. Brooke went down in the London, a steamer bound for Australia, which foundered in the Bay of Biscay on January 11th, 186-5. The London left Plymouth on January 4fb heavily laden, and with many passengers. On tho 7th a fierce galo sprang up which carried away the masts, and on tho night of tho 10th a huge sea broke over tho vessel, smashing tho engineroom skylight and putting out tbe fires. Tho vessel took in more and more water, and despite the efforts of all on board—the passengers holping tho crew —became unmanageable. Next day the captain announced to the passengers that thero was no hope, an announce ment extremolv rare at sea, where the rulo is that pa-vsengnrs shall never he encouraged to give way to despair. A boat was got away with tho chief ci; gineer and eighteen others, and had hardly cloared the ship when a wave was fcoen to «*weep some fifty passengers from the ship's poop into the sea, ana a. moment later tho ship sank stern first Tho boat was picked up and the castaways reached Falmouth. Brooke bad gono down with the ship after playing a man's part in trying to 6avo her.

Some of Sir J. G. Ward's apologists seom not to realise that in some of thoir attempts to ridicule tho Roform Government's naval proposals they are ridiculing their own leader. Tho other day for instance, the local organ of the Party had something to say about Mr Hcrdman's references to tho proposals. After describing theso as nonsense it said:—

.\[r Herdman knows that New Zealand is defended not by a cruiser or two in local waters, but by tho mighty battle _tjuad_ona of the Imperial Fleet. He knows that the reason the Admiralty will net eend any of its modem warships to Auckland or Welliagton i 3 tbat there- is no use for them in this corner cf tho world, thousands cf mi'es avrar from thc possible bat tic-grounds. Ho is well aware that if the need for a local flwt 'existed, it would be ludicrous to talk about suardins. the coasts end protecting the trade routes with one Bristol cruiser or a dozen such ships.

In other words, Mr .-Hen is bereft of intelligence, and Mr Herdman is dishonest in supporting him. But if we turn to the Defence Conference of 1909 wo find Sir Joseph Ward proposing just such a despatch and stationing of ship? as is ridiculed in this passage.

Writing to the First Lord of the Admiralty about the Imperial fleet unit in Eastern waters, of which it was proposed that our gift Dreadnought should be the flagship, Sir Joseph Ward said:

I, however, consider it is desirable that a portion of the Chi_»-P_ci_c unit should remain in New Zealand waters, and I would suggest that two of the new '"Bristol - ' cruisers, together with three destroyers and two submarines, should bo detached from the China station in time of peaco and stationed in New Zealand: that these vessels should come under thc flag of the Admir_l of the China unit: that the flagship should make -periodical visits to New Zealand waters; and that there should be an interchange in the service of thc cruisers between New Zsaiand and China, under conditions to be laid down.

To these suggestions, which, from the point of view expressed in the above

comment, must be considered the height of folly, the Admiralty agreed. Sir Joseph Ward asked them to send "modem warships to Auckland and Wellington," though "there is no use for them in this corner of tho world," and the Admiralty fell in with this proposal. At that timo the Opposition Press thought such disposition of ships highly statesmanlike, but then Sir Joseph Ward was Prime Minister. Now Mr Massey is Prime Minister. So what was wisdom then i 3 lunacy now.

Some of the Government's opponents havo not taken very kindly our approval of tho Government's refusal to follow the "Liberal" dovico of inflating tho surplus by including in it the receipts from land sales. Perhaps tuis was natural, but we aro surprised that they should defend what we called, and what wo still call, the shady bookkeeping trick of the"Liberal Administrations. Thc defence takes this form: "It i s all a matter of book-keeping. If Mr x_llon puts the proceeds of land sales into a land-purchase account instead of into tho revenue account, to simply reduces tho amount of money required to be borrowed for the landpurchase account." Conversely, our contemporary will adiuft, it followH that if tho Minister put tho proceeds into tho revenue account, he would have to borrow more for land purchase. Which means that that part of tho old "Liberal" surpluses whicii came from land sale, was virtually loan money. But we are really Ten- reluctant to believe that the free-and-easy doctrine of financial jugglery which we havequoted is seriously meant. If it were "merely a matter of book-keeping," it would not nmtter if the Government charged, let us say, the railway working expenses against loan money. Tho Government could show a surplus of three or four millions if it did that. Jt would simply mean that moro money would have to be borrowed. Such a doctrine would enablo a Uovcrnmont to mislead the country to any extent it chose. The present Government's strict and straightforward way may not make for .howiness, but it makes lor what is au excellent thing in finance, and that is soundness.