A WORD TO THE FLAX WORKERS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 1571, 1 July 1916, Page 2

A WORD TO THE FLAX WORKERS.

CERTAIN social pests have for the time being - left the direct industrial agitation sphere to stir up the flax mill employees in opposition to the Military Service Bill. They have drawn upon their imagination and flaunted their blatant ignorance in depicting the measure as something which is going to compel the employees to lose their freedom and rigid; to select work, and goodness knows what else. They have asked the employees to sign a pledge to go on strike when the Bill becomes law. Tin's impudent threat should not be overlooked by (he authorities, and we are pleased to state that it is being investigated. In any case, the ring-leaders of this threat of defiance will know exactly where they stand in the light of the law in the course of a few weeks. If the workers would think the matter out for themselves they would refuse to be driven into a. trap. These agitators state that the measure “outRrussias Prussia/' What arrant uonsenee. Let us put the position before the wrokers from the actual farts. Before doing so we would remind the workers what Prussian militarism or conscription, really is. We will start, from Hie beginning.In a indent times, before the invention of tire-arms, all Governments were very weak. If the King became obnoxious, the peasantry revolted. Hence the risings in Britain known as the Wat Tyler rebellion and the groat upheavals of the French peasantry towards the end of the middle ages, known as the Jacquerie. Then the village blacksmith could manufacture swords and pikes as well as the King’s armourer. A great change came after I he invention of firearms, which enormously increased the powers of Governments everywhere. Gunpowder had to be imported, or rather the essentials of it, saltpetre, which was not produced in Northern Europe. Guns required skill in the making, and very soon this new and powerful weapon became the monopoly of the Governments and the armies subject to them. The result was that in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries, popular liberties disappeared on the Continent of Europe. The Kings of the French, Gentian and Spanish countries became despots. Resistance to their powers by the oppressed peoples was no longer possible. In Britain, however, this did not take place. The basic instinct of the British people for freedom always opposed the exercise of autocratic power hy (he Crown. The share in the Government Avon hy the Barons from King John at Runnymea.de, when Magna Charter was wrung from him, always survived, and udien Charles I. tried to imitate the Continental Kings by imposing unauthorised taxes and to enforce their collection by means of the Army, the great majority of the British people opposed his autocratic methods. Many in the Army sided with Parliament against the King, the result being that King Charles lost lis head and the magnificent principle avus established for all time that the British Army was to be subordinate to Parliament, and not to the King. This entirely differs from German militarism that avc hear so much about, and Avhieh ignorant people believe is about to he imposed upon us. English militarism and German militarism differ as much as light and darkness.

The complete control of the British Parliament over the Army became a fundamental constitutional principle more than two hundred years ago. It is this; Every year an Act called the Army Act or the Mutiny Act must be passed by the British Parliament. It contains authority to |)ay the Army, olheers and men, their salaries, and contains all other votes necessary to keep the army going. If it is not passed, the army ends on that day. There is no pay, there is no authority to hold the men together, there is no mutiny law, as the English Mutiny Law requires annual re-enactment hy Parliament. This is a complete answer to the piffle talked by ignorant persons as being the same .as Prussian militarism. In striking contrast to this basic constitutional principle is that of the fundamental law of the Gorman Empire. The terms of the union of the different States forming the Genuan Empire contain Ibis provision, which is known to be the most important of all: Every Slate must contribute for all time, not for one year as relates to the British Army, one per cent, of its adult manhood as soldiers. Therefore, German militarism is a permanent institution, not requiring annual authorisation. Indeed, no Parliament can suspend or revoke that. It is independent of the local or the central Parliaments —which are really only Parliaments in name. The German Emperor is the Com-mander-in-Chief of the Army. He can dissolve Parliament at any time and is quite independent of it so far as Parliament is concerned. In the Reichstag no one can introduce a Bill. Bills originate in the Reichsralh (Upper House) and must he either rejected or passed—they cannot he amended. About six years ago, one of the Conservative members of the Reichstag (elected House) in Berlin, in sneering at the remarks of the Socialists, stated that their powers as members of Parliament were merely nominal — dial the Kaiser could at any time send along a squad of soldiers, under a lieutenant, and close the House indefinitely. There was a great outcry at this, hut it is a fact. Now, Ihesc facts are not given to members of the union, probably because the agitators are ignorant of them. What would happen to the workers of this country if Prussia nism wore victorious? The workers should not lose sight of the fact that this Avar is being Avuged for their freedom against despotism. In order to crush Prussian militarism, the same Avoapon must be temporarily used. In oi’der to tight certain diseases, medical science inoculates the patient Avith disease germs, and so gains the mastery. Our Empire, in order to gain a lasting victory over Prussia nism, must take drastic steps, hut it does not folloAv that these drastic steps are to become permanent. Once the Military Service Bill has served its purpose it will cease to exist.