NATIONAL SERVICE

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2618, 13 November 1915, Page 4

NATIONAL SERVICE

Lord Derby's declaration that unless the number of enlistments before' the end of the present month is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the nation some form of compulsory service' will be resorted to is the most definite disclosure which has so far been made of the intentions of the British Government regarding this much-discussed question. Lord Derby has the authority of Mr, Asquith for i stating that if the young men, medically fit, and not indispensable to the national workshops, do not come forward voluntarily before November 30 the Government will redeem its pledge to take measures to oompel them to do their duty to their country. This pledge was made by Mr. AsqiftTH in the course of a speech in the House of Commons on November 2. He then said he hoped that the services of the unmarried men would be obtained by voluntary effort, but, if need be, they would be sccured by other means. Lord Derby's announcement is- an unequivocal reoogbition of the principle of compulsory national service. We are precisely told that if necessary it -vwill be aetually put into force aftor a given date. This means that the Government is of opinion that none of the objections to the compulsory system arc vital, and that if its adoption is necessary for the achievement of victory within a reasonable time there is no insuperable moral or political reasons why it should not bo put into operation. The objections which Mr. Asquith has previously urged against compulsion have been based, not on principle, but on considerations of His fear has been that it might divide the nation, yet he has frankly admitted that the voluntary method of recruiting is haphazard, capricious, and to some extent unjust. There can be no doubt that the many shortcomings and glaring defects of the existing system have, impressed themselves upon the public mind with increasing force sinco the commencement 'of the-war, and it is almost certain that Mr Asquith has been inclined to over-estimate tlio amount of opposition which the adoption of fairer and moro cffectivo methods might evoke. In this day of peril those responsible for the conduct of the war ought not' to allow themselves to be shackled by tlio hampering influences of prejudice and precedent. The Empire expeots thom to make up their minds as to the best course to pursue and to act with courage and determination. No conception of freedom can be considered adequate or satisfactory that clashes with the plain duty of every able-bodied man to fight for and work for his oountry in time of need. It is quit© a mistake to think that the principle of compulsory national service is contrary to the traditional British idea of liberty. The ancient defence of England was based on the duty of every freeman to respond in person to the call to arms. In his Constitutional History Bishop Stubbs tells us that "the host was originally the people in arms, the whole free population." Military service was a personal obligation—the obligation of freedom. Professor_ Heahnshaw states that the principle of compulsory servioe, obligatory upon 'every ablebodied male between the ages of 16 and GO, is still the fundamental principle of English law. "It has been obscured by the pernicious voluntary principle, which, in the muchabused name of liberty, has shifted a universal duty upon tho shoulders of tho patriotic few." There is,good reason to believe that this war will convince the people of Britain of the necessity of reverting to the ancient defence of England—the nation in arms. But whether tho' required number of soldiers can be obtained by tho voluntary system or not, the fact remains that the British Government has accepted the principle of national service. This is an important step forward. A great and growing section of the people of New Zealand have come to the conclusion that the present recruiting method is far from satisfactory. It has certainly enabled the Dominion to place a splendid body of fighting men in the field. Tho best of our young men are doing their duty fully and freely. But. is it rig lit or expedient that the slacker should be allowed to shirk his military obligations, and to enjoy as a matter of course, without paying the price, tho freedom for which better men aro risking their lives?