OUR CITIZEN SOLDIERS.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1545, 14 September 1912, Page 6

OUR CITIZEN SOLDIERS.

THE DEFENCE ESTIMATES. ANIMATED DEBATE IN THE HOUSE. ........ , . .• ~ . <' < SALARIES AND UNIFORMS. AMENDING THE OATH OF ALLEGIANC E.

In the House of Representatives yesterday afternoon the amendments • made in the 'Defence Estimates by the •Public'' Accounts Committee ■ wore introduced ."by.,..Governor's Message, and referred, at once to Committee of . Supply.'-•'• -The changes affect .the first schedule, "Imperial .General Staff and New-Zealand Staff Corps, i£28,819.'' Certain .increases have been made, but the number of ; officers has been reduced bo that the. item how stands at .£28,608. The Hon.-JAMES ALLEN (Minister for Finance). explained the purport of therecommendations of tho Accounts Committee; and moved to embody them in the General■ Estimates.... One item, of .£2250 for salaries—three colonels at■ =£750 —wouldbe reduced; one of tho colonels had gone away, and the. Government .would hot have to pay his salary for more than six months, and it was .not:proposed to reflace him by an officer of such high rank, a.place of him would be an additional staff officer at .£550. The vote, "Six majors at .£175," involved an increase, , consequent on. promotions that had been ( made. '■ - - ■ .The. Nursemaid's Idea. Mr. A:.H. HINDMARSH (Wellington South) said that- the Defence. Estimates ■ had been ' increased _far beyond Lord Kitchener's estimate, and that we would soon approach the total of *£800,000 a year which the Commander 'had said the scheme-would cost. He recalled a picture in "Punch" of a soldier "smoodging to a nursemaid.- Tho nursemaid could not resist tho (iniform; ' It seemed ■ to him th.it our Ministers had somewhat the same idea-as tho nursemaid. They absoJiitely quailed beforg/a uniform. They could not. stand against those extravagant demands. The very best means of defence we could have in New Zealand ■would be to;spend this nioney on roads. Ten years of road-making would do away with the need for' defence forces. "If this country were serious in this matter," he , asked, "why. didn't we send 6ome of our: young men to Japan or ' Germany,where war is studied as a science, instead of bringing out frequenters of clube to foist their ideas on us?" Mr. Hindmarsh continued with more criticism on similar lines, and indicated that he would move later.to ■ reduce the vote. Hβ said, too, that he felt disposed to move to reduce the vote,by £100,000, but he was advised by .his friend on the right (the Hon. R. M'Kenzie);that this'might not bo readily approved. '"' ... The.-Hon.:. J. -ALLEN, : (Minister.- in Charge):said he did not think the discussion'in order. The old Estimates should be excised.and the.:new-items put into their place, and then the items could be discussed as part of the Estimates. . ' • '

■.The CHAIRMAN did not hold that the discussion wns- out of order, but he advised tho Committee that it would.' l)e mucTT'mbre .convenient to the amendment <of ;the Estimates, and then discl.i'ssJthenteiHs.in thdrregiilar way. The' Chairman's suggestion was adopt-ed.-anti thnr Committee'went on to consider' the Estimates as/amended. ■ \The Frandi' Case.' Mr.; H. ATMORE (Nelson) asked the\ Minister why he had not laid upon the table*' the papers. • connected with the I'ra'ndi'case/ He suggested that the case showed * undoubtedly • there were grounds for believing that the caste system was being ■ introduced into tho Territorial i''brce of the Dominion. If so, the scheme was foredoomed to failure. He added that ho did not Speak as an anti-militarist. The Hon. JAS. ALLEN explained that he had received the papers not long before, and he handed them to Mr. Atmore. The Minister went on to state that Mr. Hihdmarsh appeared, to bo labouring under a misunderstanding. Hβ had never heard the General say that the scheme was going to cost ,£BOO,OOO, and denied that any such expenditure was contemplated. ; The reason that tho Estimates for jhis year exceeded: Lord Kitchener's estimate was that a large amount of equipment had been bought. The samo causa would swell- the Estimates next year, but ultimately it should not cost more than •£tpO,ooo a year to maintain the scheme. Hi.. Hindmarsh. had said that the General, instead of returning from tho Nor.th of Auckland by train had hired a motorcar at heavy cost in order to have a. week's shooting. The General had never had a motor-car in thp North of Auckland, and he had never had a day's shooting in the North of Auckland. ■ "If there are any, more of these,charges," said the Minister, "let ire hear what they are." Comparisons and Questions. Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) contended that too much was beiiig'paid'toTriilitarj" men as compared with civilians in the service of the Government. It was proposed to pay three colonels fit the rate of ,k£7so a year ench.- Against this, the Undersecretary for Native Affairs received ■ ,£675 a.yenr; the Chief Judge of the,* , Native Land Court, .£"50; the Undersecretary for Justice, .£650; the Sejiior Magistrate-: for the Dominion. .£750; the Commissioner of Police, ,£650; the Commissioner, of. Stamps, . ,£675; the Undersecretary *foi\ Internal .Aflairs, .£550; and theVpermanoiit head of the Customs Depriment;*. . Why should there be this enormous - difference between the amounts "paid to the military nnd civilian. ceryant3_ of. .tho. country? An assuranceought to be. given to-the House that no a.ttfynpf would be made to glorify ' the milHarv element at the expense of civilian's'."" ... -.!.'!

■ The Hon. F. 11. B. FlSHEß'(Minister for-Marine). a?kcd:lVhen these Estimates wefe.,r.eterred. to Ministers,, did not the honourable-gentleman- receive a copy cf them.?., .. ...

Mr. Russell: I -ajn not hero to be catschis*d'.by you. Mr. Fisher said he would like to ask, through'thc Chairman, whether the. honourable member for Avon received ft copy of the Estimates, and whether he brought beforeVhis colleague, the Minister for Defence,' the .position which he now brought before tho-House. It wns quite n different thing to bring this case before the House, and to do nothing as n Minister. .Mr. Russell: You arc quite wrong. Mr. Fisher: Then the honourable, gentleman did -not know anything! about the, Estimates? " . ' . Mr. Eussell: I am not going. to disclose what happened in Cabinet of'the Administration of which I was a member. (Laughter.) These aTe not the Estimates of Mackenzie Government; we have no responsibility for them whatever. The . present Government have fathered these Estimates, and accepted all tho responsibility for them. It is only like- the hon. gentleman to raise the email police court; style in referring to this question. ' Mr. Fisher said ho had no desire to use the' police court style, but the Estimates had.been prepared by the Administration of ivhich the lion, gentleman was a member. The Government was now bound by commitments not made by them, but the party 'now sitting in Opposition. The honourable gentleman ought to ehaTO his responsibility, and not say that he did not see th* Estimates, a lid that, therefore, he was not respon"Mr. Eussell: You're pretty good at .'taking shelter. ----■■ Salaries Justified. Mr. L. it. ISITT (Christchurch North) dissociated himself from the criticisms of tho salaries of the staff officers offered bv. Mr. Hindmarsh. He defended the saliriw paid to tho Commandant and other officers. If exoorts were required from' tho Imperial Army, they ehoujd

Mr. Buchanan eaid that he hoped that the lesson he had just received would enable the hon. gentleman to display a little more judgment than he had displayed that afternoon. What would ho have in regard to these officers? He hoped the Estimates would be passed without any more such shows of party-feeling as, that, manifested by the member for Avon. . .' ':; ■ ■ . " ..' ■ . . . ■;■ Need.for Discretion.. " Mr. A. M. MYERS (Auckland East) defended the member for Avon for having raised the question as to the basis on which salaries should be paid to officers of the forces, and' ho reproved Mr. Buchanan .for having lectured him. For his own part he was,very pijoUd to bo able to approve'.and endorse>eyerr word (hat had been spoken*'* , by 'the": Minister for Defence. He agreed with his estimate that the total cost of the scheme would not exceed ,£400,000 a year, and ho urged members to be more discreet in their criticism which, was apt possibly to affect the current of opinion'in the country. The Hon. D.-BUDDO.(Kaiapoi); said he thought that soon it would be necessary to'-release from' obligations under the Act all meff'over-the age of'2l years, with tho exception of, perhaps, one day a year. He would not propose that, and he -would not even support.it; because lie did not think that the time was yet ripe 'for change. ' Strong Supervision Necessary. Mr. J. A. HANAN (Invercargill) said it had been and it would.be necessary in tho future to keep a strong supervision over tho Defence Department to keep down expenditure. ' . Mr A. H.' niNDMARSH (Wellington South) sai.l that in business concerns in which he was interested, the member for Wairarapa might not'be ready to give such a friendly reception, to proposed increases in salaries. He made no objection to General Godley receiving ,£IOOO a year, and to three* colonels receiving a year, but he objected to paying captains .£IOO a year and lieutenants IC3OO a year, lie hoped the debate wonld-be continued until midnight on Saturday Mr. R. M'CALLTJM (Wairau) said if he were to rtiove to reduce tho vote he would move to reduce the item by £1, as an indication that the State ought to pay moro liberal salaries "to the. imported, officers. At tho same time he thought tho House shoijld enjoin caution on. the Government, and he .thought some money might bo saved by co-ordinating the defence system with tho education system, especially in the country districts."

not be expected to come out here at a financial sacrifice. Tho Hon. Jas., ALLEN said that if General Godley commanded a brigade at Home he would get" XIOGO. a year., Hie British Government was at present paying a year to a New Zealander (Col. Davies) for commanding a brigade. General Godley could get a brigade in England and iIOOO a year if he wanted it, and what would be his responsibilities at Home as compared with his responsibilities here? Ho did not think New Zenlanders were so mean' as to attempt to get'men brought out from Home at'lesser salaries than they could get at Home, and then load them, with such enormous responsibilities as rested -upon them, in carrying out tho training scheme. The Minister contended that Mr. Russell had picked out the heads of■the small Departments in order to compare their salaries with those-vof the Commandant, and the staff officers.' The head of the Treasury received .£IOOO a year, and the goneral manager of railways, .£1250. This latter salary was going to be increased, localise expert knowledge , " was required.. Was not expert knowledge required to develop this huge expenditure and great scheme. All the. Imperial officers employed in New Zealand had come out under agreement. The Minister stated that ho accepted full responsibility for the Estimates as they stood. Ho had amended them, ■ and they, were now his own Estimates. ,'•■•' Mr. T. M. WILFORD (Hntt) said that General Godley-and: the colonels associated with' liini were experts, without whom the Defence scheme could hot/have been successfully inaugurated. He considered that General Godley. was underpaid. Colonel Davies, who' received' a salary of .£IOOO a year in.England, had a sinecure as compared with General Godley.' Tho latter was a man of jmpreme tact who had already done a great deal. to successfully float : the .scheme. Mr. W. C. BUCHANAN (Wairarapa) asked Mr. Russell if he had criticised the Defence Estimates last year. Mr. Russell: That was a long while ago.

Mr G: J. ANDERSON' (Matanra) thought it was absurd 'f.i criticisp the payment of reasonable salaries to officers an'd the amount of the vote. This country had decided that it needed the niost efficient'defence forco it could afford, and in orderito Ret it the country must bo willing; to pay their officers adequate salaries. If, as a matter of fact, the scheme had not been put into working by a most tactful officer, the scheme woiild have been wrecked, for not oven all the members of the House had been loyal to it. Cost of Uniforms. 'Mr. L. M. ISITT (Christchurch North) said he admitted that officers of the .Imperial forces .ought to be paid moro rather than less for their services in New Zealand than they would receive in England. Wo should aim at doing away with gold braid, epaulettes, and other trimmings, and to strive for military efficiency alone. Not' even should an expensive dress uniform bn permitted. If it were tflere would bo competition to bo in the swim, and the officiate would be limited to the sons of the well-to-do. The Hon. P."M. B. FISHER said that as an old volunteer officer he agreed with tho last speaker that the insignia, and regalia of rank in theory ought to be done away with. But when the hon. gentleman suggested a dull drnb funeral uniform Mr. Isitt: "I don't;" Ho explained that he wanted the cost of dress uniforms limited to £a or ,£6. \ Mr. Fisher said that to cut down the cost of the uniforms of the Territorials would uiipopularise the service. Air. Isitt: I did not mention Territorial uniforms. Mr. Fisher: -Then does, the hon. gentleman desire that Imperial officers should abandon;.the uniforms of their regiments? He went on to say that, when in command of a corps at Christchurch, he had attempted to introduce the simplest possible uniform. The result was thnt ho could not get twenty men on parade. Mr. Isitt: Where was their patriotism? Mr. Fisher: It was not in a khaki drill uniform, anyway. Tho Minister contended that it was essential to pay well for efficient service in the Defence Department. Mr. Hindmarsh: Why not apply that to all Departments ? Mr. Fisher said that the hon. gentleman would not suggest that a remrdv should bo applied by* pnllin; down Falnrips in ono Doparl ment. Mr. Fisher went on to say that some Dominion officers had been promoted to positions without passing the examinations which they should have passed. Tho practice was wrong, and should never have been tolerated. The Hon. .Ta?. ALLEN said that (here had not been any promotions under the present system without examination. Some new appointments hnd been mmlo without examination. Lord Kitchener when he was here had recommended that certain salarie-3 should bo paid to officers, 'lte. GoT«VftWCiit EBS ijot liayjuj;

A Storm in a Teacup. Mr. E. P. LEE (Oamaru) .said that although it was wrong to administer the oath in a somewhat different form to that provided by the Act, if he.had his way he would not bother much about the oath at all. There had been a'storm in a teacup about it. ■ Territorials were called upon-to render a certain service to the .country. If 'they/refused to do it they ehoiild be treated as persons wilfully breakirigNthe law.- There , was always tho ono per Tent, that made'a terrible noise 'in the country. ■:•-■.- .- ■ Mr. Payne: I'll show you that thero are more than ono per. tent, in a minute! Mr. Lee; said that there , was a. "one per cent." even in.the..House,.but what was tho end of it?- -It amounted-to , nothing. Mr. G. WITTY (Riccarton)' said no more persons should be prosecuted for refusing-, to take the' illegal oath,* nnd something should bo done for thoso who had .been branded as criminals, for refusing te take this oath .in the past. Senior cadets had been compelled to take the oath. This was illegal. Mr. Lee:* Whero is the law? Mr. Witty said that - there * Was no "law L which required cadets to take the oath. It was the Minister's want, of tact that had given rise to friction. Mr. H. G; ELL (Christch'urch South) also contended that the present form of oath. was. illegal, and- should be withdrawn. iHo bad not been able, however, to understand the silence of the Minister on' the "subject "of"theyoath,' and asked him now to make it clpar that the form now used would be abandoned., The Hon. JAS. ALLEN said that he had explained that the difference between the oath in the Act and thnt .administered had been made simply for explanatory purposes. Two magistrates had said that it was illegal. Tho others had not. He was nuite prepared to say that in future the oath administered would bo the oath that mu in the Act, but ho could not admit that the oath in tho record-book wns illegal, because this would give • rise to a very' difficult position. -•■.-. : •. :■ ■• Mr. Witty said that in view .of .what tho Minister had said, he-would withdraw his amendment, nnd was permitted to ' °Mr!' A. H. HINDMAESII (Wellington South) said that he found inthe schedule of tho Defence Act men who lost both legs or both eyes. A man injured as he had mentioned was entitled under the Act to a pension of 2s. Gd. a day. The pension provided for colonels was a year, for majors .£2OO a year, and.for junior officers in proportion. He considered it unfair that such liberal inducement should be held out to officers as compared with the payments made to men -who were compelled to serve. A private's widow was to get only ;£3G a year, while a colonel's widow was to get ,£l5O a year. Was that democratic?

Dress Uniforms and Kilts. Mr. L. M. ISITT (Christchurch North) moved the reduction, of the item: "Two colonels at .£750, arid for six months only replaced by General Staff Officer, shown be10w.'.£1875,"; as an indication that in the opinion of the House a clause should bo inserted in the Defence Act forbidding dress uniforms for territorial officers. After further discussion, The Hon. Jas. ALLEN repeated his previous statement that only Hie khaki uniform was compulsory. Neither himself nor the General were in favour of dres3 uniform!i, but a number of volunteer corps irbich had been taken over as they stood, possessed dress uniforms, and it was reasonable that they should be allowed to wear them out. \ The Hon. E. M'Kenzie: Why did you do away with the kilts? (Laughter.) Mr.' Allen said that if ho could do away with the kilts he would accept the amendment with all goodwill, but the wearers of the kilts would not giro them' up, and why should they not be permitted to wear out their kilts?

Mr. Isitt said that he was quite prepared to accept the assurance of the Minister, that dress uniforms would be discouraged. The Minister: Certainly. Mr. Isitt withdrew his amendment. A Comparison of Expenditure, Mr. Laurenson said Germany spent 11 per cent, of her revenue in defence, flic- United States 41 per cent., Great Britain 3G per cent.; and the Commonwealth of Australia, 21 per cent'. The Minister: A long way more! Mr. Laurenson said that it was difficult to separate State figures from those of the Commonwealth. Now Zealand, taking into account payments to the Royal Navy, the yearly payments for the Dreadnought, and the Defence vote, expended only 11 per cent, of her revenue. It was a monstrous thing that a new country should be handing out half a million annually for defence, but while every other country was arming, this country had k> be prepared for contingencies. Ho deplored this expenditure, but it was absolutely necessary. So long as we were spending less than half in proportion of what Australia, under a Labour Government, was expending, no charge of extravagance could be laid.

Mr. A. H. HINDMARSH (Wellington South) contended that no fair comparison could be drawn between Australia and New Zealand in tho matter of defence. Australia was much more exposed. Ho decried the system almost generally. "You have disgraced this Act by giving such a small pension to the man who risks his life on the bnttipfield, and giving the officer—the officr (ho shouted)—twenty times as much."

these salaries, and'was not going to. Salaries 'paid in New Zealand were considerably lower than in Australia. Ofllcers in the; Defence Department did not enjoy the same advantages under the superannuation scheme as did other public servants. Military officers had to keep on passing examinations all their lives until they became, colonels. He repudiated the re■proaeh that caste was being introduced into the service. The aim had been io avoid it all tho time. Of four appointments to the post of lieutenant taken alphabetically,,, one was a miner, one. was a photographer, one was an accountant, and one was a post office, clerk. Surely this was proof that thero was no caste preference exercised. And the only uniform compulsory on officers of tho forces was a simple khaki uniform.

Mr. G. AV. FORBES (Huruuiii) deprecated the toi> generous display by the military of costly uniforms. He thought tho country had been 'exceedingly fortunate in securing the services of siicii men as it had to initiate the : scheme, and train the forces, and it would bo very wrong to cut down their salaries: Mr! G. WITTY (Riccarton) thought that thero was too great a gap between the high and the low ranks in the matter of salaries. . ' •* The Hon. D. BUDDO (Kaiapoi) stressed tho importance of doing away with extravagnnt dress. Mr. T. M./WILFORD (Hutt) feared that tho viewpoint of tho civilian public ■might be lost by tho Minister for Defence., who had been an enthiisir-stip volunteer officer, and was, therefore, "steeped in military law and pmctice" Ho.urged that Mr.- Hemes and Mr. Allen should chniure r>lace.<=. Mr. P. J. SMITH (Waitaki) thought the present Minister for Defence was the best tho country had had for some years—a man who knew his work, and 'was not afraid to tlo it. The Oath. . Mr. G..WlTTY' (Riccarton) wanted to know, why and by whoso authority the oath to be administered to territorials was altered to a form different from that laid down in the Act. ' The lion Jas. ALLEN said it was quite true that the bath in the record-book was n °t in the same form as-in tho Act, but tho extra'.words vera put in the- form of the oath to make it more easily-un-derstood by the youths to whom it was administered. The whole matter would be dealt with in the Defence Bill. Mr. G.. WITTY (Riccarton) moved to reduce the item "Director of Accounts, .£4so' by .£l, as an indication that the oath ought to be amended. '•' ' Mr. G, W. RUSSELL (Avon) said that if the Government intended to amend those provisions of tho Defence Act relating to the oath, it should do it at once, •s-vthat magistrates might not go on convicting under an. enactment which two magistrates had declared, to be-illegal." ■The Estimates of the present Government showed' a substantial increase *in the salaries of the-officers h?- had mentioned as compared with the Estimates of the Mackenzie. Government. ... , : '

Mr. C. K. WILSON (Taumnriiiiui) =aid that he had previously accepted (ho memher for Wellington South a? n comrade, but Mr. Hindmarsh had disappointed him &i\Si JJ.fi. .TVilsiJJi dsfcuded lbs, GJ3t«B_,

Mr. W. A. VEITCH (W.angariui)"said-he would oppose the amendment. It wns not n fact, as had been alleged, that labour organisations throughout New Zealand wero opposed to compulsory military training. At the Unity Conference of tho New Zealand Labour party, the meeting was by no means unanimous on tho subject, but it was found impossible to put a resolution through condemning compulsory military training. This talk about absolute liberty of the individual' was utter nonsense. Absolute liberty meant anarchy, and only a man who could wave a club effectively could live in the community. We had compulsory educationwhy not compulsory defence? He wished to enter his emphatic denial that the workers, of New Zealand were so disloyal to their country that they wire unwilling to fight for,it if necessary. Mr. J. A. YOUNG (Waikato) said that thero was a good deal of humbug in this talk about compulsion. In every- civilised country the.ro was' compulsion on every hand.

Mr. ISITT said that the essence of his amendment was compulsion. If he went into the lobby alone ho would divide the House in (his question. He had moved his amendment with an intense desire to conserve, and not to destroy, the defence system of 'the Dominion.

The amendment was defeated by 60 votes to. 5. Thoso who voted in favour of it were: Messrs. ■ Hindmarsh, Robertson, Laurenson, Isitt, and Payne. The first item of the class was passed at seven minutes before midnight. Martial Courts; , . ■ ■■ On the item dealing with) the Territorial force, Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) asked whether the vote of .£55,000 for uniforms would be necessary this year, in view of the fact that .£11,571 had been spent last vear. The Hon. J. ALLEN eaid he thought the whole amount would be needed. slr. L. M. ISITT (Christchurch North) moved to reduce by £1 tho first item, ,615,000, under the heading Territorial Force, as an indication to the Government that military courts should be abolished in times of peace, save for trivial offences, and that serious military offences ought to be tri?:' in the civil courts. ' The Hon. J. ALLEN said that the .whole question of court-martials would be reconsidered when the Defence Bill came down. There was, in fact, a great deal of misunderstanding about court-martials in the British Army. As a matter of fact, they were very rare occurrences. Mr. Isitt said he would withdraw his amendment, and submit it. to the House when ho brought down his Bill. Tho Defence Estimates were passed at \0.45 a.m. ' The Class, Customs and slarine and Inspection of Machinery U132,230) was'.passed after brief discussion. Tho Labour . Department vote (£26,658) was passed without a single question at 1.10 a.m. Progress was then re'ported, and the House rose. ■ . THE CHAIRMAN'S RULING. A CHALLENGING MOTION. A brief discussion took place in tho House of Representatives yesterday afternoon in reference to an incident which occurred when the Legislature Amendment Bill was under consideration on Wednesday even inc. Mr. F. W. LANG (Chairman of Committees) directed attention to the following motion (figuring on the Order-Paper), of which notice had been given by Mr. Ell:- ■■ . . "That this House disagrees with the ruling of .the Chairman of Committees, in which the Chairman omitted to rulo out of order the motion by thp honourable member for sr.it.inrn to report progress on the Legislature Amendment Bill on September 11, 1912, before any business had been transacted and immediately after a s-imilnr motion had been dealt with." Mr. Lang said that he acquitted Mr. Ell of any desire to intentionally misrepresent him, but that the motion wa9 in several particulars incorrect. The only ruling which he gave on the occasion in question was that lie could not take a motion after the bell had been rung. This liad been upheld by the Speaker. The disputed motion wa« not moved by the member for Mataura. but by the member for Clutha. He. understood that Sir. Ell was not present when the motion wn« proposed, nnd no doubt someone had misinformed him. The most serious error was in the line which stated that the second motion to report progress was proposed "immediately after" a similar malion had been dealt with. This would convey a very wrong impression to poopie outside the House. As a fact, eight members spoke between the first motion and the second. The result could not have been altered in any circumstance?. The first ruction lo report projrojs was negatived by thre,e vote.-. The second motion w.is carried by eight votes.' Mr. H.'O. KIiL (ChrisMuirr.h 'Smith) jajd that he Jp.d aoj djjirgd, to BH«pr,t.

and deprecated such criticism as that of the member for Wellington. South.

Mr. J. PAYNE (Grey I,ynn) told the House about a scheme he had for organising, a party in the country opposed to compulsory training, to throw all other political considerations aside, and vote out all other parties—mostly the jingoistic Tories. (Laughter.) Mr. A. M. M I'ERS (Auckland East) deprecated tho work of "disloyal agitators." and said that the Act was by no means unpopular as certain people now alleged. About Caste. Mr. -H. ATMORE (Nelson) referred to tho Frandi case, and said that the men who had been preferred over the heads of Captain Frandi were of less ability, less exponepce, but were all in a higher social scale. This, Mr. Atmore said, was wrong, and thero was no single extenuating circumstance. ' ■■•■"■■ Tho Hon. J. ALLEN said that Mr. Atmoro's claim that caste had interfered to influence the decision of the authorities in placing Captain Simeon senior to Captain Frandi was quite mistaken. He knew Captain Simeon as a private in the Permanent Forco in Dnnedin. From that position he rose to be a sioned officer, and then he got a commission before Mr. Frandi was an officer. When Captain. Simeon was given his commission in tho Territorials ho found himself junior to men who had formerly been junior to him, and he asked to have his commission antedated. His request was granted. It was true that Captain Frandi had passed an examination and Captain Simeon had not, but when the scheme was inaugurated it was impossible' to appointofficers to all commissions who had passed examination. "Give the R.N.Z.A. gunner a chance," said Mr. Allen, "and he'll pass his examination all right." Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) asked tho Minister whether he proposed to give tho House an opportunity of discussing tho Dominion's relations with the Imperial Government in the matter of naval defence. ■ The Hon. J. ALLEN said the House would have an opportunity of discussing naval defence on the Estimates. > Conscientious Objectors, Mr. L. Mi ISITT (Christchurch North) moved that the item, "Director of Accounts, iC-150,"'be reduced by ,£1 as an indication to the Government that, in the opinion of the House no man who was conscientiously opposed to military service should be prosecuted, provided he were willing to render somo equivalent non-military service. He submitted also in his amendment that every man must be his own judge of what was a conscientious objection. He said that he moved the amendment for the purpose of saving the Defenco Act, and not for the purpose of injuring it. The Hon. J. ALLEN said he would ask the Committee to reject tho amendment just proposed; The Act already provided fpr the exception oi' religio.us objectors; but if conscientious objectors were "allowed a great, many consciences would suddenly be developed. He had been considering the 'matter, very carefulljyand, while he sympathised with some of the objectors, ho was not 6u're that all conscientious objectors" would have reasonable consciences. Mr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon) said he was sorry the amendment had been moved. The Act should have a trial, and it would be impossible to give men work equivalent to military training. . The men would be like the hard labour gangs in the prison's. It would be compulsion of tho most,drastic typo to exact trim those men the equivalent 'of military service. "What was.proposed was an abso'.ute impossibility.. . : , . . .: . ' Mr. J.. PAYNE (Grey Lynn) said he would support'the amendment, but.he objected- to conscientious ohjectoi-s beihgcorapelled to-.render other alternative service. • ' . • . i. -... .■.. . .

Bent'the lion, gentleman. He was anxious that a precedent should not be established in connection with this matter.

Mr. Masscy: Why did you not raise the point? ' ■ ■ ■

Mr. Ell: "I was-not here." Ho added that no'ono knew the regular, course better than the l'rinic Minister. Vet before any. progress had been made the Prime Minister had suggi'-lcd I hat progress should be reported. He believed that the Chairman of Coin mil tecs had tho entire confidence The motion was not intended to reflect upou him in any way.

NO MORE PRIVATE DAYS. The Hon. W. F. II ASSET (Prime Minister) gave notice to move that on and after Wednesday next, September 18, Government business should take precedence of private member's business.