LETTERS TOTHE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 16, 14 October 1919, Page 6

LETTERS TOTHE EDITOR

4 HOME SERVICE GRATUITY

Sir,—Throughout Now Zealand at tho present time there are many men who iHjrrad long periods in the New Zealand camps as homo service workers, ami at that work did lony and useful service. Now that a gratuity has been granted to all men who served in any way overa'as, the above-mentioned men lind they Imvo been left out in the cold, and they consider that they have been very unfairly treated. As one who spent two years on home service, long before the (lays of tho ballot, I would like to put tho caso of tho homo service men before both Parliament and public, as 1 consider that tho homo service men have every reason to l'eel justly aggrieved at tho way the Government has ignored them. To begin with, Canada, according to Sir James Allen, granted a gratuity to home service men there, which stiowa that Canada appreciated tho work of those who worked hard at homo on military work. Great Britain followed suit by granting substantial gratuity to her homo service men, which is another precedent for New Zealand to work on, if such is needed.

However, apart from whatever other countries may have done or havo not done. I think that the Now Zealand home service men had every reason to expect that their work would have been appreciated in a practical manner, and 1 will give a fow reasons why. A great many home service men enlisted voluntarily, during the early days 08 the war, for active service. They in mam- cases gavo up excellent positions in order to get away into the firing line as soon as possible. ■ A large number of these men wero turned down as medically unfit and were not allowed to get away. Finding themselves in the position of having burnt their bridges" behind them, in their anxiety to get away to the front, they signed on for liome service, and in many cases they remained in the camps for the whole duratipn of the war. Another lot of men were classed as "indispensable," and were kept in Now Zealand at all sorts of work that tho military authorities considered they could not be spared from. Many of these men were specialists at the particular work they were employed at, and though physically fit, it was no wonder that they were held back. These men to my own knowledge applied again and again to be allowed to get away overseas, but were invariably put off on the ground that no ono was available ta take their places. In regard to their pay, a great number received the bare five shillings a day; though tho married men got the munificient sum of one shilling a day, wife ullowance, and nincpenco a day for each child. None of us were allowed any of the rights thnt were granted to tho men who went away, and I won't forget for a ■ long time tho struggle I had to keep myself, wife, and two children on seven alia sixpence per day. I have no wish to disparage tile good work done by the men who went overseas. They "did their duty and did it well. ' At tho 6amo timo it is only stating tho actual truth when I affirm that many of us did quito as much for the coiinti*y as some of tho6e did who went away. ■ Thousands of returned mi?n never got further than Egypt, England, Samoa, and other out-of-the-way places, and wero shortly returned without having been any where near a lighting zone. A legal difference has been created between tho services rendered by the men who left. New Zealand and thoso who wero compelled to stop behind, but, morally speaking, many of thoso who stopped behind did better work. L In England all men who never left for Franco wero classed as homo service, but a man who left the shores of this country. nnd never saw Prance, is classed as active service. It is said that a lino must be drawn 6omewhere, I>ut ftr my own part I rbcogniso no lino but the lino of justice, and plain justice demands that Romo recognition should bo given to the home service men of New Zealand. When I mentioned above that I considered that many home service men had rendered just as good service as many of those who went away, I know what I nm speaking about, because I mnnaged to get away overseas for twelve months, and. though. 1..wi1l draw a substantial gratuity for that period, at the same timo truth compels mo to.admit that my homo service was much the harder work, Even this gratuity would havo been much higher if I liad been allowed to get away when I fir.?t applied. When I first applied to get away, I was told that I was "indispensable." I felt flattered at the timo. but I now find that I will lose an extra year's gratuity. My own case is used only as a type of scores of others. To sum up, I can 6eo no difference between tho work of a home service mnn done in New Zealand, and the work done in Egypt, Samoa, and England by men who never .were near the fighting line. Both Canada and Britain have seen tho justice of the home service men's claim j it now remains to be seen whether our Government will rise to tho occnsion and do what is just and right. The principle behind the gratuity grant is, that tho Government desires, on behalf of tlio peoplo of New Zealand, to givo to the men who served the country well something over and above their pay as a mark of appreciation _ for services rendered. This is only as it should be, and it will be a cause for regrot if tho Government draws a line whore none should be drawn and deprives a large number of men of what is their moral right,—l