CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16162, 16 March 1918, Page 7

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.

1 TO THE EDITOR Of "THS PBESS " Sir, —My letter of ilarch 9th, written before K. J. Fostqf's letter reached me, lias already answered _ your correspondent on one or two points; but objections so reasonably and fairly stated make one very willing to reply, and I hop© you -will allow me spaco to do so. I will" be as brief as I can, for 1 am really sorry to occupy so mucli of your rooni. , First, as to the danger of sympathy with the C O. It is the danger of nonsyinpathy with him thijt strikes me. 'lhe present situation is full of danger. From letters -which reach ine, it 1S clearty not a small or insignificant portion of the community that is oppressed by the situation. ]Vlr Miller very pc r ' t.mently points us to the figures in the Wellington Noith. election; the militarist -position is by o\;ery "martyr' it can claim, especially when they prove to be men of the typo^.

court-martialled hero tho other day; and tho attilude of Laboxir ou the subject is anything but reassuring. Mora drastic measures, according to -General Godley's statement, are out of thb question. * It looks as if something ought to be tlone in the way of milder measures, to reiicvo Hie present situation of danger. r>y the way, Sir, in a previous letter, L made, in perfect good faith, a statement, whieh L want to correct, siheo it was not true. I cited an officer's opinion as to the mischief these men do when sent Home; hut I find that lie was speaking of shirkers, not of the deportees. General Godley's statement on the subject is, however, oven weightier. Let mo add,'*that it is always dangerous to be unjust. Next, a possible test. This is a very interesting point, and I beg the assistance of your thinking readers on it. My own feeling is, that no mail can pos«ibly judgo of tho condition of another man's conscience; it can very much more easily bo seen -whether a man makes conscience his guide in business and daily life. I therefore suggest, not a conscience-test, but a char-acter-test : appellant to be required to produce adequate witness of clean, honest work and ways, from employer, family, teachers, or others. Hostile witnesses could attend. Also, it must bo remembered that tho C.O. is not at all popular, and it takes somo courage to live in the community as one branded with name. Tho ordinary shirker cculd not pass snch a test; tho cunning one would probably find his past deeds baffling him. lam hound to reflect as 1 write that many opponents of tho C.O. could not pass that test either, and the premium thus put on character would be distinctly good for us all.

.Next, as to "selfishness." I wish to say, -with all the emphasis possible, that not a s'nglc C.O. has ever squealed to me about fate. I hardly know one of them with any degree of intimacy, and their whota attitude, is uncomplaining. Mr Norman Bell begged to be sent to the trenches with his brother, just on the grounas that prison was safer :;nd more comfortable, and that it was nob danger ho wished to avoid; but "sin." And her©, Mr Editor, we come again upon that snag of conscience that X had promised us both I would try and avoid discussing here. Please let me off a moment? I will ho short.' I find continually, in connexion with all this, that."conscience, to many people, is the same as inclination, or a greedy desiro to save one's own dirty little soul. Well, what all the churches are teaching I don't know, but I know the opinion of Quakers, of Vedantists, of unsectarian seekers after truth, of thoughtful agnostics; and to every one of these, the best people I know, conscience is inner compulsion— not inclination merely, but..compulsion, what a man's whole inner nature makes him do. You can train that inner nature, of course; but its voice is imperative as no other voice is, certainly not the voice of that mass of average citizens which is the democratic State. And hero let me say, that if wo take the position that the demand <&f the State comes first; before conscience, then we take-up the Prussian position in its entirety, and I, for one, don't know what-we aro fighting about. Now, ono religious objector, who. not being -under the Act, is expiating his religious views in prison at this moment, has written that to him the -''military is the system of the Devil." Another's sister has explained that.to her brother,-as to her, the act of killing an unsanctified German and thereby, according to the creed of many • Christians, sending him to Hell, is impossible; he-would himself sooner be-shot, by far. The Commissioners let me read' out the first man's letter to -them, and at the end one of them said: "You will never make a soldier of that man." It is not "selfish" to try and do the higher duty instead

of the lower; but it often looks so. "Aren't you a little bit selfish, darling? What about me?" has been, alas! the successful cry of the seducer over over again. Every artist and author has to.go through.the mfllof family accusations of selfishness and > X have often thought how, selfish his neighbours must have considered the Nazarene when-he left hi& mother. and his carpentering and wont wandering about to teach unacceptable truths, and upset nice, comfortable Pharisees* and Sadducees. But he had to do it, for it was "His Father's business." And with the honest C.O. it is the same, though'he may have no sens© of that_ Father, as a person, bnt hears the 3>ivine voicc in his own soul as justice, love, humanitarianism, or the like, and dares not disobey., I wish we had; more such men; morally. Though, with K, J. Foster, I heartily wish the C.O.'s were not mentally in such a hot griddle, and have often laid before some of them vietvs on the subject, just like his or her own. But really, I think it is we who are the most mistaken. "Why did we not, at the start of the war. show these people thoway out of tbo "country they would not fight for? Instead, wo showed them tbo inside of the door, »ocked; and, not having let them go, wo don't even get as much out of them as wo might. 1 think wo are both unjust and foolish, and so, unlike tho C.0.. I squeal, not only for him, but for the_ community. Thank you for your patiencc, Sir.— Yours, etc., B. E. BAUGHAN. Clifton, March 11th. to the editor of "ing rmsss.'* Sir, —Lord Hugh Cecil said recently, when pleading for freedom of conscience, that he thought C.O.'s ' '.vore mistaken. But so, in his. opinion,' ho added, v. ere the Presbyterians. "Souls are not saved in bundles," and ' ll>c milienium will not be reached;by. an attempt to stamp out individuality of conscience by forcc." In "HeroWorship," Carlvle says: "By religion I do not mean here church-creed which a man professes. . . . But the thing a man does practically believe (and this is often enough without asserting it eve>i to himself, much less to others}: the a man does practically Jay to heart and know for certain concerning his vital relations to this mysterious Ii niver.se and his duty and destiny there, that is in all cases the primary thing for him and creatively determines all the rest.'? The present Act rules out all men like Or. Hoberts, recognised as sincere by those who knew them and members of a church outside the church. — Ycurs. etc., '-"'iLEN-yiCKERS H.OWELI*