Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS

FURTHER STATEMENT BY GEMEItAL ItUSSBLL. Tlie opiuieu recently expressed by Major-General Sir Andrew Hussell, regarding tho release of conscientious objectors, excited a good deal of discussion. General liussell explained to a reporter yesterday that he made the statement he did in reply to a specific question which he answered, and he undertook to make his answer public, which ho had done. "I advocated the release of conscientious objectors on the ground that their imprisonment serves no useful purpose," said General liussell. "The vindictive eye-for-eye and tooth-for-tooth policy is date. As a reformative measure it is ineffective. During war the necessity for preventive punishment is imperious as a. clear warning to .others. On tho restoration of peace 6uch action, in my opinion* is no longer necessary. Tho conscientious objectors in question will not be prevented from similar action in a future war by further punishment now. l'or the future the true prevention of this abnormal view of a citizen's duty to his country is to bo sought, not by the' negative process of punishment, but by the positive process .of inculcating and fostering a true national 6pirit. There will always be found in every commuuity a few abnormal men who fail to realise that their conscientious objection is, in fact, a form of selfishness, in that it means that someone else has to take the conscientious objector's place at the front.

"As to the disfranchisement of conscientious objectors who refuse obedience to any law with which they disagree, they certainly cannot claim the right to make laws to be imposed oir others. I therefore take the view that, unless they make it perfectly clear that they-are prepared to obey tho laws of tho country, they should not receive full civil rights. In the meantime the continued imprisonment of these men involves expense ito no purpose, if my conclusions are currect." "It must be understood, of course, concluded Goneral Russell, "that the views I have thus expressed apply solely to tho genuine conscientious objectors,, and not to shirkers. Moreover, I wish you to make it clear that what I have stated is purely my own personal view."

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19200724.2.68

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 257, 24 July 1920, Page 8

Word count
Tapeke kupu
357

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 257, 24 July 1920, Page 8

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 257, 24 July 1920, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert