SOLDIERS' PAY

Evening Post, Volume XCVIII, Issue 39, 15 August 1919, Page 4

SOLDIERS' PAY

RETROSPECTIVE ALLOWANCES CLAMS OF RETURNED SOLDIERS' ' ASSOCIATION. ;' The following letter has been sent by tho Executive of the New Zealand Returned Soldiers' Association to the' Minister of Defence:— , ' " Dear Sir, —In compliance with our promise to submit those items in respect to which this association feels justified in insisting upon the retrospective application of amended scales, I am instructed by my executive to press for the1 immediate settlement of the following items:— (a) The retrospective application (in full) to children of the amended scale of allowances which came into force on Ist January, .1918. N.B.—lt is under- . stood by the association that you ore willing to date the payment of the wife's allowance back to the dat 9of the, soldier's entering intb camp. In this matter the association is prepared to urge these payments only in resgect to those who finally left on service overseas. (b) The retrospective application of the amended scale of allowances for widowed mothers and dependents at present in force. (c) The payment.of one shilling per day unpaid during the first two years of the war for the probationary period of one month after entering camp,

"While I am instructed (following your request) to press these three insistent claims as matters o{ urgency, njy executive directa me to do bo without prejudice to the followitig matters in respect to which we affirm that the retrospective principle is equally cpund, but upon which in the meanwhile action has been suspended pending further consideration: Officers' pay, soldiers.' financial assistance, out-patients' ration allowance, and the retrospective application of amendments in thft-scale of pay and allowances -to members of the. Motor Boat Patrol and to New Zeidanders who enlisted in othe-. units than the N.Z.E.F. '"'You will appreciate- the fact that not iJ&ing in possession bf a schedule embracing all the amendments during the course of the war to scales of pay and allowances, etc., my executive is able to refer only to those attended scales of "which it is cognisant. If you would kindly make such a statement available it would be greatly appreciated by the association. "I have been definitely instructed not to press for retrospection in respect of the mufti allowance or to the amended scale of fiancees' passage money. , . "We ba'ie our claim te retrospection on simple justice for those who obeyed the country's first call) and neither waited to dictate their teflns ndr state.their

price. The fact that Ehese men .thought; their duty to the State ill our hour of need greats*1 than thfeir duty to &16$ at home with their wives and children should not be held against them asa. penalty, and favour should not thus be shown to their fortunate brothers who waited until the GoveftWnent passed their more beneficent legislation. "Wo are told by you, sir, that it is only fair to assume that married men with families, who volunteered in the early stages of the war, were in. a pesv tioii to make provision ,for their dependents. What evidence is .'there for assuming that is tho case? We do not believe that the number of those Who went in the early reinforcements in this happy position would be'greater than those who went in the closing stages; yet provision was made for tho latter irrespective of their financial position. It is fair to assume that those- who went first gave greater and longer service-, and suffered proportionately more hwdships, than the later lots. Is it a^ sound principle .of justice that the greater the service the less the roward ? Is the burden, of war, already disproportionately heaty on the ;. soldier who fought,,to be intensified, on ' those who Obeyedithe-first Call? " We* therefore, claim that evbry principle of honour and right demand that a rich and prosperous Country treat tho soldiers who first stood by her With the same justice as those who followed. "Land values alone are said to h&ve risen some 20 per cerit. on account of our *vinning the war, an nmount probably sufficient to pay the whole war cofet. Are officers and men, by whose sacrifices nlone such unearned increment1 was created, not to receive aa much' for their hardships of 1915 as the latter part bf/ 1918? Are those who performed 'the impossible on -Gallipoli, hud who fell in hundreds at Quinn'B and CourtenaV's Posts, or up tho slopes of Chanuk Bair, those Who carried Messines, who held the line round Ypres through that terrible 191647 winter, and fell before the wife, ill ■ the slaughter of PasSuhendiuile—are they not , as worthy ot the country's mofißt&ry j gratitude as those Wh6 marched With lw ttj the Rhine? ■ "We claim, sir1) that thete are honourable and just debts incurred by a rich and prosperous country towsa'd the dependents of those who, by their valour and suffering, have saved her the humiliation and ruination of defeat, and should be at once honoured.—l beg to remain, Sir ' (Signed) D. SEYMOTJR, General Secretary.,"