MARRIED AND SINGLE.

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2789, 6 June 1916, Page 6

MARRIED AND SINGLE.

Sir,—l read with interest the views expressed by your correspondent "Pliilosophus" re tho enlistment of married men, as published in your paper of Saturda) last.

"Philosophus" is talking sound, common sense. He touches 011 a subject and brings forward reasons that I have hardly studied (being only in tho twenties); but I> for one quite fail to see why a married maii who can leave his family provided for should be any less liable for active service than the boys of twenty. Too hard 011 their wives and families, you say? Then what about 'the mothers or the girls of those Gallipoli heroes? Mr. Jlassoy, I believe, said hi,s Compulsion Bill was designed largely "to gel at tho shirkers," a phrase I didn't like. However, if the Bill honestly does that, it should "get at" qui'te a lot of middle-aged gentlemen who arc guilty, sitting down behind their wives and families, calling us single men names, and demanding that we should go and light for them. I'd have thought a wife and family were worth fighting for.

Just by the by, Mr. Editor, you aro entitled to a little information nbout myself. Two brothers got ahead of me when the Main Expeditionary Force left (they being resident in towns), so I held back out of consideration to parents' wishes for a long time. However, a while back I squashed the "old man's" arguments and enlisted. I was, however, rejected by the. military doctor. The foregoing just by the way. To get back 011 to these married men of fairly independent means: We had a most en'tlwisiastic patriot up here a while back. He was married, with a family, whose respective ages were inside twenty yeai'3. Consequently they were limey/resented at the front. This man talked recruiting hard. He also talked about his .£OOO motor-car. (If he comes up here and talks recruiting again I think lie'll land up in the creek). I think, Mr. Editor, that a Compnlsory Service Bill that doesn't touch that man. and many hundreds like him, is 110 good at all. And I think that a Bill that should touch the boys of twenty would be no good. So far as the single men of my age and upwards are concerned, "Philosophus's" appeal is a liit late. There are only rejects like mo left now. But let us learn a lesson and hang 011 tight to the young ones coming 011, and don't keep'back only tho culls.—T am. etc., KEJECT.