MILITARY MATTERS

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2704, 25 February 1916, Page 6

MILITARY MATTERS

-'VARIOUS NEWS ■

FHE- GREAT NEED OF MEN

CAMP.MWS

• : The following temporary appointments .' . have.been approved by the Camp Coni- ]. inandant at Featherston:— ~ ..'-. [':'. Sergt.'E. .It. Woledge, Headquarters i;.' Staff, Camp Commandant's Office, 1 to 'be quartermaster-sergeant; Sergt.' L. i-, R. Shaw, Headquarters Staff, Camp \.\; Commandant's Office, to be iquarter-•'.master-sergeant; Pto. . A.! J. Kelly, .' Headquarters Staff; to be corporal; F Corpl. J. E.- Tittleton, Headquarters, V Q.M. Storesj to be corporal cook; Pte. S A; M'Diarmid, iHeadquarters Staff, to :-:'. -be corporal; Lce.-Corpl. R. Veysey, H : Company, lltb, to be corporal. • Allowance for Mufti. [■'■-' 'A definite refusal lias been given by I-' the Minister of Defence to the request j.7 that ai larger allowance for '_ mufti f- .slothing should be made to soldiers on t ■ discharge (says the Auckland I "Herald"). The regulations > provide ; that every soldier shall receive a suit >?-.. of mufti or 30s. The 'Mayor of Auck- ' land recently -wrote to the Minister aJski . ing if he could see his -way to increase :"' the allowance to £3.'

In his reply, Mr. ! " Allen ' States that when a soldier goes into camp, the Defence Department intimates to him that it will send, at tho'expense of the Government, his clothings to his next-of-kin, to bo ready for liim whoh he returns, and in most instances■ this is done. The Minister sets forth in detail the list of clothing provided for the sol'dier. on his discharge, comprising two military uniforms and underclothing, -and.adds' that while the Commonwealth authorities provide. only' £1 in lieu of mufti, New Zealand has provided' 30s; "You ask that it should be increased to £3," the letter continues. "1 regret that-I am unable to comply with your request, nor do I believe for a moment that' if 'the "request were' it would stop grumbling from?some. 'It must be perfectly plain to you that-the suit of mufti that would suit one soldier would iiot suit another in our democratic army. Some would not wear any mufti probably that would cost less than' £5. In view of the facts, I cannot, see that anything more can be demanded of the Defence Department."