THE OBJECTORS

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 136, 26 February 1918, Page 4

THE OBJECTORS

lisCliTlofi-li OTHERWISE

1: COMPREHENSIVE OFFICIAL U. : ;i STATEMENT ■■; ;- ";■ ; INFORMATION ABOUT THE DEPORTED )ii&. statement regarding conscientious .objectors, and particularly the fourteen -men- who were sent abroad compulsor■ily last year, was made on Saturday /by the Minister of Defence (Sir James !Allen)._ The Minister gave rorae detailed information concerning the reser- . vists who ate..'alleged in,some quarters - to have beaW'f.treated with;harshness. ■The statement was-lis follows:—?.','. '':',. ObJectors.iciassirrtfJ. i;t . In the public mind all-objectors-i'iorn Whatever cause their objections ariseseem to be regarded as "conscientious objectors." It is desirable to set cut the various categories of objectors and 'to touch upon their legal rights and liabilities. •.•'■■■ The law, as : prescribed by the Legislature, recognises only one class of ob.'jector for any measure of exceptional 'treatment, and. this, person may be .classed as the "religious' objector' {Military Service Act, Section 18, Subsection (e)). There are also objectors whose| objections are founded c-n religious grounds but who do not como -within the statute, and there are also objectors who advance objections on conscientious grounds apart from religion. All these people may be '-egard'ed as "conscientious objectors." Finally there are objectors whose objections are founded on a defiance of the law or a disinclination to serve in the (Forces; these may be called ''defiant objectors." , The "religious objector" is entitled Tinder the statute to have his appeal allowed if he proves that he was, on 'August 4, 1914, and has since been, a member of a religious body whose doc'trines declare that the bearing of a'ms ind performance of combatant service ,is contrary to Divine. revelation. He must also show his personal adherence .to the doctrines which his. _ religious : '' (body professes. The effect of-hhis iu.vst • . ibe appreciated. For instance, a niemJb'e'r of the Church of_ England having, .personal religious objection's ".to the tearing of arms is not a. "religious objector" within the meaning' of,, the . statute, because the Clvurch of: England, as a religious hody*,s-bes "hot ' ■hold those views. A ./Presbyterian is ; in the.samo psition,--and-Vo/is..every-, iperson holding personalreligipuS-;;-obr ; Sections who cannot-prove -that; his redigious body '.holds/the in j question. The only-religious ...-bodies ( •which'have so far/ satisfi.ed;tlie l .bdaids j 'as to their right-to' exemption are the i Ohristadelphians,:the Seventh-.jDayjAd-; j ventists, and the- Quakers. - The appeal , may he allowedlhyiai.^iilitary.service ; board on certain'.cohditionsj the.effect j of, which is that he'-- is -exempted from military service and'idoes service to the ] State with, and'l entirely..-.Wdcr" the, tontrol of, the Agricultural -Department -, Sn lieu of military ser.viVe-witfr'the De-: ,j fence Department. :.,/', ';■ - ( '. This is'the'fuhYmeasure of r'eiiof'.af- > 'forded to '.'religious objectors" •by the . j -statute, and there'can be no doubt that n the Legislature inarriving at'this c'_n- ; j elusion did so with full -appreciation.,. e that only those wno':'cp,hie 'withiiv the; •

'definition would have-the relief pre 'scribed bv the statute':\,The.L<?gisla 'ture provides for no'-.•other ibjectors and the "conscientious" :ob]«ctor.", is' :"< person not known to 'the law. <Th 'military authorities have no'legal righ to treat a "conscientious objector" dii jerently from -any other member of: th community, and the same may new as to the "defiant objector,". who is person who simply* defies the law sn< does not intend to serve as the lai decrees that be should. The appeals' of "religious objectors ss their cases have 'arisen: iia_ve,,i proved, been allowed by the militar; service boards as--.provided by . thl Statute, and they have been drafted of to the 'Agriculture Department to d< their service with that Department. Be Iwe'en twenty and thirty men have beer so dealt with, and are now r>t worl ~with the Agricultural Department 'These men have given no trouble, anc their religious scruples seem to hav< ibeen' worthy, of the consideration whicl 'ithe statute■;affbrds;'L.; / ~_'.,."... ; . _'" \ The "conscientious v phiector" -is ; ■ very ranges fion; jtho man who lias just missed satisfy--sng the board that he comes'within l he . statute to the man whose conscijntiou! objections have been manufactured foi •ithe purpose of escaping service. Ir -piiost cases.the "conscientious objector ■ whose objection is founded on rincen 'grounds is not a difficult person.to (lea ■with. The Defence Department does ..•what it can to meet ittoii -df- tliisilcijidj land all "conscientious objectors" arc itherefore given an opportunity to serve in; ambulance, where their duties would .fee not in fighting, but in tending [wounded and sick. Some accept.this 'iduty, but others wilh-'not 'even- go :sc ■far as to succour wounded and tend Sick, on the ground that by go doing jthey are assisting the fighting torero,The "defiant objector," if his ponVhict is such as to warrant it, is given .tho same opportunity of serving in ambulance, but he almost invariably lefuses either to fight or to succour iwounded and tend sick, or.do. anything .whatever.

Dealing With Objectors, The Defence Department has to deal with the three classes of objectors mentioned—tho religious objector, the conscientious objector, and the defiant objector. The religious objector, as above stated, if his appeal is. allowed, goes to the Agricultural Department, and is not handled by .the- Defence Department, as far as "his_ service! ' is toucerned. The conscientious objector and the defiant objector are given an opportunity to serve in the ambulance, and if they will not.take that opportunity the Department is bound to carry out the law. It generally, happens that the first conflict botween -.these persons and the law is a flat refusal to obey tho first order given •to tho man. If nothing but refusal and defiance can bo got out of the man, ■ho is taken before a.competent military authority, and is tried summarily for the first offence. That is to say, ho is tried in the same manner as a Magistrate tries a person accused of an offence which he can deal with summarily. Tho military authority is entitled to award detention,"afid" generally awards the man''a period of-de-tention, possibly 28 days. The offender' goes to the place of detention to serve his .sentence, .' and some, on reflection, see "the" error of their ways, and when itlicir sentences arc expired obey orders like other reasonable members of the community. .The greater number, however, on completion of their sentences''continue in the course'of defiance, and flatly refuse to obey the next order given. In jthat case the man is brought before n court-martial, and is tried by courtmartial for the second offence of refusing to obey orders. He has every ' opportunity to bring forward and substantiate his defence, but. in "tho majority of eases there is no defence available to him, except liis.'unwillingness to serve. The court-martial is empowered to award imprisonment with or without hard labour as a punishiflusnt for this offence, 1 ' and-' nir most' ■<*4es a substantial term,of .imprisonment is inflicted. The infliction of the punishment and the execution of the sentence does not make the man anv the less a soldier, or take him out pf'the operation of the Military Ser-

vice Ac(. Ho is-merely a soldier iinder punishment for a military crime, .and there, is . nothing to prevent, either before or on completion of his sentence, his being sent to the front likqjany other soldier. . The Fourteen Men. ; In July, 1917, fourteen men, comprisiug five men who had expressed in some way conscientious objection," and nino men who wero simply defiant, were embarked on a transport for service abroad. These men were all serving sentences of various kinds for refusal to obey orders, and it will be of interest to consider their cases individually. There have-, been 'so' many statements made in regard to these men, more or less exaggerated and untrue, but the fundamental facts are. likely to be lost sight of. It must bo. borne in mind, considering these cases, that the whole of the fonrteon men are men whom the law has.called up as soldiers, and their legal.status is that of soldiers. _If they commit one of the most serious of military crimes, that of refusal 'to -obey orders, 'any weakening in the'firm- handling of such defilint persons would immediately sap and' eventually destroy that discipline which is the very essence of military efficiency. That they had an unpleasant time is quite likely, and was to be expected. The only method that the Defence Department can employ to avoid an unpleasant time for is- to submit to their delianco • i' law, and allow every one to rule his conduct according to his own will. Details Supplied. The attached schedule sets out some particulars in regard to these nien,,in-. eluding'their names, the. locality they came from, their occupations, and their appeals.' It will.be noted that four of them not only were not religious objectors nor conscientious objectors, but were ordinary deserters;. it .will be further noted that five- 'of them bad so little conscientious objection that at the time of their appeals they did. not even raise the question, and lastly, it should be noted that five of them : did raise religious objection, which was considered by a service board and held not to be. of srtcli a character as to enable any relief under the statute.

It is quite true that'the -fourteen men wero .embarked in the' evening. ■Jt'is considered a more humane course 'to march prisoners -to a. transport in. •the ovening, rather-than to march them through tho-.crowded streets..in. the' broad daylight.' ■ There is nothing unusual or improper, in such a,course. It is ■ also- ■•■ true that the next-of-kin of these meii. wero not! notified of their impaneling departure.' The custom is to "give next-b'f : kin' of all soldiers an opportunity to seo their relatives at some time beforo-they'.cm-hark and this course, through a Departmental, error inadvertently committed, was not followed in thecaso of. the fourteen men in question. It is* admitted that this''next-of-kin of these men should have been notified .in. the same.manner, as next-of-kin of all soldiers are notified, and, it is regretted tliat the omission occurred.. If. the omission had been discovered in time tho men would not have been embarked- until the next transport. '■;/

The fourteen men wore, embarked with tho ' Twenty-eighth Reinforcements.on the transport. , and pro-' ..ceeded. hi tliab ship, as far as Gape Town, where tho troops were transshipped' into two.: other transports. Throe men, 47.814 A. M'L. Baxter, M/,813 J. Baxter;'■s3,o69 A..K Sander-, foii, were left ashore in Cape Town for isolation hy d're'etion of ...the ..'Cap?,, military authorities. Two men,' A. Baxter and L. J.. KiWan," proceeded to .England, on one of tno two transports, and'tho remaining l nine- on the ether transport.. o'. . .

■ During the voyage on the -. —•■-the fourteen men absolutely "refused io obey; orders, or. to. clo-svny-fiil-ipnio work j about the ; slrip. Some day's they/refused to take exercise, and earlier in the voyage they refused' to keep their quarters clean, .Thev refused to do anything even for tli em solves; they would not observe ordinary cleanliness, ■with the result that they had to -he forcibly bathed: their civilian outfits vera jnmlcmncd hv the medical officer, and thev had to be forcibly dressed in uniform.- They continued their defiant attitude throughout. Although, the. general attitude towards them, could not he, and was not, .one of sympathy, there was n.t least one officer who made efforts for their reformatio!;, but all' that lie could do pioved a" failure, and they. arrived at their destination as thev'had commenced their servicc--denant and re-, fusing -to obey orders. •■

AHegations Refuted. Many letters from theso men have been pubi'slied with a view to creating sympathy for persons who «ere allegedly imbued with religious or conscientious objection's,'but'who '" reality were imbued with a spirit of defiance. Garth llallaiityne has written a' letter which has been largely published complaining nmon« other things of tho ventilation of the "clink" in which they were placed, aiid of the indescribable atmosphere, and of the want of exercise, and of the lack, of utensils.

I As a matter of fact, tho guard room, or "clink," was on the starboard side of the poop; ,fho poop, which was above tho level of the "main deck, was allotted- to tho guard room, the and a small storeroom. Ventilation was provided by a doorway into tho poop, skylights above, and port-holes along the side. Only in very rough' weather were the port-holes closed, and frequently when the port-holes in the officers' quarters and the men's quarters were closed the port-holes in tho poop remained open. In tho first few days of the voyage the ship ran into bad weather and the port-holes in tho poop Vvere closed. '"When the port-boles were closed the ventilation was not insufficient, and was the same for the N.C.O.'s as for the prisoners in tho guard room. No complaints were raised by the N. 0.0.'5.

That the atmosphere was indescribable is possible; when fourteen men occupy one enclosure and wiil not do anything whatever' to keep the place clean, or observe personal cleanliness, an unpleasant atmosphere is .the natural result, and helps to explain the necessity for forcibly washing and dressing them. As to exercise, tho majority first refused to do exercise, but they afterwards tired of the want of exercise. If tlwy were short of eating utensils or blankets, it was entirely their own fault for not raising the question, as tho foil kit bad been actually issued to -.thum,'- in common with all other, men. ■■■■.■':■:

Otlior letters have appeared in ilie public Press, .'Did •nil have, shown a continuance cf the defiant attitude. Such •letters tlmt bavp appea>-pd schki without exception to have boon written by men who have advanced no claim whatever to base, their objections upon eonscicntiotu scruples uutii thev readied ■camp. : ' , General Cotiley's Report, When they arrived in inland they were treated just the same as other soldiers. No doubt, as thev seem to have continued their policy 'of defiance, they very quickly cani.i in' conflict with authority. Kventuallv they came under the notice of fierieral' (iorll'ev, who says as follows;— ' ' "The question of the disposal of conscientious objectors lias cropped up, and is a very difficult one, Generals and have both recommended that they should be, piven no special consideration, and -should be sent with drafts in the usual way. and treated like any other soldier. To this, however, I have not agreed, as flic inevitable result of it would be that one of thorn would cither desert, or else re-'

■fuse to go up to -the-trenches' when ordered, and would then be shot for recusing to do duty in the face of the enemy. This would, .of course, bo. tho. very worst thing that could possibly happen, and would make martyrs of them.

j "At present there are nine who are [ giving trouble in this country, six at | Etaplcs and throe at a divisional, reinforcements camp here. Of tho first six, Colonel Mitchell, at Etaples, by dint of patience and perseverance, for which he deserves infinite credit, has persuaded four out of tho six to go forward as stretcher-bearers. I have told Col.oncl Plngge, at . tho. reinforcement camp, to try and-induce his. three.to do the same. A proposal was made to transfer them to the Now Zealand Medical Corps, hut to this I would not agree, as they can be given the same sort of opportunity as infantry stretcher-bearers without making any snecial transfer for. them. I seo no objection to. their'.being allowed to. he stretcher-bearers if they wish, and if it will.satisfy their consciences.'.Stretcherbearers, incur just as much danger as any other soldier, and the work they do .is of equal value, and, provided they are sufficiently able-bodied "to do the work, and it is work which much more satisfied their consciences than actually weilding a rifle, I see no reason why they should not do it,, as they are performing equally valua'ble and equally dangerous work for the. Force. Failing their agreeing to' act as infantry stretcher-bearers, I have given orders ■(hat they are to-be summarily pun-, ished, or dealt with at the reinforcement camps whore they now are, and that they are not to be sent up to the front as recommended by Generals and , my reason being, as I have explained to you, that if they arc sent up it is an absolute certainty that they will be made martyrs of. while if they have to be punished where tliev are now, they will only receive ordinary punishment or imprisonment, or whatever it may he, such as would he meted out to any other soldier who refuses duty. Objectors Accept Duty, u hi a report dated a week later, General Godlcy says:—'All tho conscientious objectors sent from New Zealand except two have agreed to do duty either in the infantry or as stretcher-bearers. A special report on tho two men who still refuse duty, and who are at Etaples, will bo made later.

"'I attribute .'the''conversion to a reasonable attitude of the majority of these men, chiefly to 'the fact that they were separated and-posted/to different companies and units, and to their not being- court-martiallcd in England.'

."Iu ■■ addition to the two';• conscientious ..objectors mentioned;-- there have •been-three others who have been treated like any other soldier, and have had to be tried- by court-martial in France on a charge, of disobedience to an order. The Court found them 'guilty' and condemned them to five years' penal servitude'... I,have, commuted the/sentence to two years' hard labour, with a re-commendation-that, this may! ho suspended to three months if their con-' duct in pr/son is good." Statements have been made in the Press that'it-is not intended to-dis-patch abroad.any more'of.the soldier's whohayo been''nuiiishcd for refusing to obey orders!."These statements have been made without'foundation and no such, decision has been reached. "A Clear>cut Issue."

The question presents.a. clear-cut .issue for the people of this country to 'consider:— "... '~' ... ..'

(a) Whether tho laws solemnly and deliberately enacted .by Parliament aro to bo-obeyed, or (b) Whether defiance of the law is to be permitted, and those persons who know no-rule .hut their own inclination-are. to'bo practically, exempted froin_niilitary service, 'wliilo the citizens and sons of citi-

Zens who recogniso and obey tho

laiv, aro to serve, and possibly suffer wounds and death, in the interests of the nation.

The military authorities aro, responsible for administering the Military Service Act, and what they have done has been legally doiie. Tho question may be asked: "What has tho Defenco Department done which it should not have done " It is not conceivable that the people of this country would approve of. a. .course permitting persons who set the law at defiance to bo absolved from tho law, and bo governed by their own inclination. If responsible authority is to knuckle under to .insubordination, tho whole fabric of .the British Empire would crumble into chaos.

The following is tho schedulo previously mentioned: —

. 51,273 David Robert Gray .-•Was called u]i under Section 35, there being several brothers who had not served. Appealed on the ground of religious objection. The military service board found that the religious body to which he belonged (the Testimony, of Jesus) was not a body which camo within the statute, and dismissed his appeal and sent liim to camp. He is one of tho persons who has missed satisfying the board that he comes wi'thiu ihe status of the religious objector, and can only bo classed as a conscientious objector, and nothing remains but for him. to obey the law.

51,720 Thomas Percy Harland —This man was drawn in the third ballot. He did riot appeal or make an effort to make bis conscientious scruples (if any) known, but treated.the law with contemptuous disregard. He was arrested ai a deserter and sent into camp. In camp ho refused to chey orVlers. This man cannot be classed as a conscientious objector, but is :i defiant objector. 47,597 William Lbt!e.--'lliis man was drawn in the third I allot. He appealed on the grounds, of piMic interest, but the board, after healing the evidence adduced, did not :«nsider his retention in New Zealand essential, and dismissed the appeal. No question of religious or conscientious objection was raised. In camp he refused to obey orders. He cannot be classed, i«s a conscientious objector, but is a defiant objector.. 53.883 Henry Patton. —This man was called up under Section 35. He appealed on the ground of hardship, as he was a dairy farmer. No question of. religious or conscientious objection was raised on tho hearing of the appeal, which was dismissed by the board. Ho was sent into camp, and refused to obey orders. He cannot be classed as a conscientious objector, but is a defiant objector. 51,620, Frederick Adin.—This man was drawn in the sixth ballot, and was also called up under Section 35. He appealed on all available grounds, and claimed in addition to be of foreign extraction. No religious or conscientious objections were referred to at tho hear- , ing of the appeal, and the solicitor appearing for -the man eventually withdrew tho appeal altogether. The military service board dismissed, the appeal and sent him into camp, aild on arrival there he lcfused to obey orders.'-This man cannot be classed as. a. conscientious objector, but as a defiant'objector. 51..G21 Garth Carslcy ' Pallantyno.— This man was drawn in the first ballot. He appealed on the grounds that his calling up was contrary to public interest' because of his occupation, and a case of hardship to his employers, a firm of surveyors. He was represented by a prominent "Wellington solicitor, his case was carefully fought out, ami tho question of religious or conscieii; tions objection was never raised. The military service beard dismissed the appeal and sent the man into camp, where ho refused to obey orders. This man cannot bo classed as a- conscientious objector, but as a defiant objector. This man wrote" a letter which has been largely published and which lias been mentioned above.

n2,356 Daniel jUnjuiirc— Tins man

was'drawn in the fourth ballot, did not take the trouble to appeal, was arrested as a deserter, and sent into camp,. where he refused to obey orders. Ho cannot be classed as a conscientious objector, but as a defiant objector. 51,619 Alexander Baxter, 47,814 Archibald M'Coll Learmoml Baxter, 47.813 John Baxter.—These men were called up under Section 35, and Alexander Baxter was in addition drawn in the first ballot. They all appealed on religious grounds, but, though notified of the hearing, did not take the trouble to attend and place their cases before tho hoard. Their appeals were consequently dismissedj and they were sent into camp, where they refused to obey orders.' ' These men cannot be classed as conscientious objectors who have failed to satisfy the board that they are religious objectors within the statute because tliey did not attempt to satisfy the board, and nothing remains for them but to obey the law; if they do not, they 'must be classed as defiant objectors. . 53,369 Lawrence Joseph Kinvan.— This man was drawn in the fourth ballot, did not take-the trouble to appeal, was arrested as a deserter, and sent into camp, where he refused orders. He cannot be classed as a. conscientious ohjtctor, hut as a delimit objector. 51,629 Mark Briggs.—This man was drawn in. the. third ballot. Ho appealed on -ill available grounds, but, did not think it worth while, to appear in support of his appeal, which the board dismissed. He was sent, into camp .and lefus-cd to obey orders, lie cannot bo classed as a conscientious objector, but as a defiant objector.

.51,626 Lewis Edward Poiiwright.— This man was drawn in.the first ballot, did not take the trouble to appeal, and was arrested as a deserter. Lie was sent into camp, where he refused to obey orders. He :is a defiant cbiector.. _:' ....'.,

53,969 Albert Ernest Sanderson.— This man was drawn in the third ballot; he appealed on the- grounds of religious objection, but did not take tho trouble lo appear at the hearing of the appeal, which was dismissed for want' of evidence. Ho was sent into camp, where he refused to obey orders. Ho cannot be classed as a conscientious objector, but is a defiant objector.

"Political Purposes and Disloyal Purposes."

These, then, are the "fourteen lads" whose experiences arc being used for political purposes and disloyal purposes, as if they were suffoicrs'for conscience sake. Most of them are merely defiant law-boakers. Some raised no conscientious scruples until I'.tced in camp with the actual necessity of military service; others did not take the opportunity open to them to make their cases good before the Military Service Board. '' ■ Tho addresses of these men are similar, to ilui addresses of ;iny other soldier, and letters addressed as. follows : — k No. r 28th 'Reinforcement;;, N'.Z. Expeditionary Force, G.P.0.. Wellington, N.Z,' will find any of them, and.a similar address will find any soldier wherever he may he. It has been suggested that the Defence Department should know all about these men and what has happened :n them. It knows no more about them than about anv other soldier. What it knows about every soldier is entered upon his historysheet at Base Records, and is as follows:—!. The' date he embarks. ■ 2 Tho date hn arrives in Sling Camn, England. 3. The date he arrives in any other camp in England. 4. Tho date he proceeds overseas from England. 5. The date ho is post'l to a unit. 6. Promotions. 7. Punishments notified in orders. (All tho .above, except date of embarkation, arc extracted from routine orders received by mail long after the actual event.) 8. Any casualties. 3. Any admissions to hospital Tlieso come, except in cases of slijrhi illness, bv cablegram, and are notified to next-of-kin and the Press.

No information is received in NewZealand to show where this man's unit is, or what his actual location is when in France No personal information is available, such as whether a man arrived in irons or whether ho was dispatched to Franco in custody or in irons, and 'if any suok informarion were required special cable inquiries would ba necessitated. The only knowledge usually available as to a man's personal adventures comes from the personal letters which he writes to New Zealand. No individual' record can possibly bo kept-in Now Zealand .of.'every man's movements in France, for at the baso and in the field every man's locations are constantly changing. So much of the above 'information as has arrived by mail or cablegram can be obtained from Base Records in regard to tho fourteen men in .question or in regard to any soldier of the New Zealand Expeditionary Force abroad.