THE CASE AGAINST COMPULSION.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1078, 17 March 1911, Page 5

THE CASE AGAINST COMPULSION.

GENERAL HAMILTON'S ARGUMENTS. In an article on "Compulsory Service" in the February "Nineteenth Century, Colonel Lonsdale Hale said: "The importance of this book is great, and mainly owing to its authorship. Practically it is the joint ■ production of the Secretary of Rtato for. War, Mr. Haldahe, and of the Inspector-General- of the Oversea Forces, General Sir lan Hamilton—a very strong collaboration. The former contributes an introduction of thirty-six pages; the latter, in the form of a letter to Mr. Haldane, a hundred and six pages on the subject. Mr. Haldano writes of the letter 'as an 'unofficial' document, but the book cannot be otherwise regarded than as a Minister's official-expression of opinion, supported by the views of an official expert." ■ ■ The "Spectator," ■in .the course of its review, said:; "In this book Sir Inn Hamilton, lately Adjutant-General, and .Air. Haldane state the case against compulsory service. By 'compulsory service'. they mean the National Service League's proposals for the universal training of our youths in the rudiments of a soldier's duty, such training to include four months' recruit training for ; the infantry, and six months' for the cavalry and artillery, and to be followed by four years' service in tho Territorial Army—proposals modelled on the system w,hich.prevails in two of the most democratic countries iii the world, Switzerland and Norway. The book also contains a good deal of, criticism of another scheme, which, is hardly worth dealing with, since, so far as' wo know, it is advocated by no responsible body of. men. This is a scheme.for introducing here, not the Swiss system, but the German system. -. . .Sir lan Hamilton holds that if we adopted compulsory training and service on the Swiss model, we should destroy bur regular- Army. To use his own words, 'here is the crux of the whole matter.' At present some thirty-five thousand recruits are wanted every year to maintain the Regular Army. In his view, wo should not'obtain those recruits, or at any irate not, a sufficient, number of,them,, if every youth in the country had to undergo a four rnonths' training at eighteen—i.e., just before the time when our lads are taken for tho Regular Army.

"■How does Sir lan Hamilton prove his point? We feel sure that we are not doing his plea an injustice when we say that it can bo expressed shortly as follows: The lads who were obliged to undergo four months' training at the ago of eighteen would, he holds, be so 'fed up,' to use the Army phrase with soldiering, that they would-not as now volunteer for tho Regular Army. We may say at onco that,-we.believe this to be an ■entire delusion, based upon tho most illusory premises. • . . "We now come to Sir Inn Hamilton's best point. It is this. During the short time when we took men in the Regular Army for three years; these men, wh"n the period of service, was finished, dil appear for the most part to be 'fed up' with soldiering, and would Pot rcengase in sufficient number for service in India a.id abroad. In reality, however, this proves nothing To put the matter quite shortly. If by three, years' a man does become 'fed np' with soldiering, it,by no means follow? that he will be 'fed up' by four months' service."