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
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

GENERAL RUSSELL'S NEWS.

FURTHER IMPRISONMENT USELESS.

(Per Press Association.)

WELLINGTON, July 23,

Tk„ opinio,-i vvasj recently expressed to''sai«r r Qei&r?*l ftbßtoU &* V oure4 tho release of thp conscientious Bbinrtow. His declaration has been exciting a good deal of discussion lh« Genernl was approached and asked to make a further statement on the sub--56 General Russell explained that he had made his past statement in reply to a. specific question, which he answered, and he undertook to make his answer nu’blio, h V% d .. , y < j'have advocated the release oi the conscientious objectors on the around that their imprisonment serves no useful purpose,” said Sir Andrew. “This vjndictivp ‘eye for an H tooth’ policy is otrtptdalc as a reformative measure. It provpu ineffective during thp war, Tim eessitv for preventive punishment A«r»»»lngto On the restoration of peace, such action, in my opinion, is no longer necosrv. The conscientious objectors in question will not be prevented from similar action in the case of futuie war by any further punishment now. Tor the future, the true prevention of this abnormal view of a citizen s duty itoliis -chmiliy js'to h? s P w B h ?> a negative process’ of punishment, but L''a posßivc process of inculcating ;;,d fostering a- true national spirit, There will always bo found In every community a few abnomal men, who Li. to realise that their conscientious objections are In fact a form of selfishness in that it means that someone llse has to take the conscientious objectors’ place at tho front. As to the disfranchisement of the conscientious > ioctors who refuse obedience to any ij. with which they disagree, they certainly cannot claim the nghr to malm laws to lip ijnposed op others I fturvtorc take if.* view that pn ess Uv make it perfectly clear that they ~re prepared to obey the laws of .the country, they should not receive toll civil rights in the meantime. Hm continual imprisonment of these men SniiWcs expense to no purpose if my ' conclusions are correct.” *i It must be understood, of course, / ..-indcd Russell, “the views I have 4 tons expressed apply sohdy to genuine ' conscientious objectors, and not to fdrkcrs -Moreover, I wish you to rim lie clear that what I have stated is -...civ mv qwk P ersonal VI6W-

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19200724.2.21

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 24 July 1920, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
381

GENERAL RUSSELL'S NEWS. Hokitika Guardian, 24 July 1920, Page 3

GENERAL RUSSELL'S NEWS. Hokitika Guardian, 24 July 1920, Page 3

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