DEFENCE. Not Defiance.

Free Lance, Volume I, Issue 17, 27 October 1900, Page 6

DEFENCE. Not Defiance.

WHERE there is no standing army there is no defiance. There is no standing army in the system adopted by Parliament during the session. Attempts were made by some Democrats, who like to be pronounced, to prove that the system does contain a standing army in the person of the Imperial Reserve. But they knew they were talking to a Colonial Assembly which has never considered what a standing army is. Had they been before a German Assembly, which is accustomed to its million or so on a peace footing, they would have made no attempt to manufacture political capital. A reserve is not a standing army, it is simply that part in the National Defence Force which remains out of sight until an enemy appears, and then it comes in evidence. The Imperial Reserve now adopted by the last defence Act is on the same footing as the militia, under the Militia Act, which can be called out at any moment en masse. The only difference is that the reserve is trained, and the militia is not. But that is a difference of detail, not of principle. The main defence of New Zealand is the volunteer army, now to be 18,000 strong (thank God !), and it is not in any way a standing army. The Democrats, who like to be pronounced, took care not to say so, and this evidence of their thoughtfulness gave their case against the reserve away. It is, of course, manifest that if the first line of our Defence Force, which is as much with the colours as it is possible for such a force to be, is not a standing army, the Imperial Reserve which is no more with the colours cannot be a standing army either. # * # It is pleasant to be able to judge from the tone of the debate on the Defence Report and its consequent Bill, that the day has gone for throwing discredit upon the forces of the colony. For years before the war it was the fashion to heap ridicule on the citizen soldiery. It was a contemptible practice. The regular soldiers settled in the colony inaugurated it and recruited the ranks of the cheap journalists who kept it up, with an assumption of superiority without foundation, and a virulence quite uncalled for. At last the colonial soldiery went out to war, and the cheap critics disappeared. * • # What they did, has given the key to the military situation in this country. They went out with a few weeks training, they did some little work on board ship, and by the time they and their horses had got over the voyage and reached the front, they surprised the general officers of Great Britain with their soldierly efficiency on parade, and their solidarity and courage before the enemy. The trained generals could hardly believe that these young soldiers were really as young as they were. Away went the old tradition that a soldier cannot be made in less than three years. Our young soldiers

have taught a lesson to their own people as well. It is that the average citizen of their country can, after a few weeks training, face a brave and formidable enemy with courage, cohesion, and conduct. ' * # • That is the fact at the bottom of the defence system now adopted for this country. The details let experts judge of. For the public the broad fact is sufficient that the volunteer force is to be placed on a footing of numbers and training sufficient to, in time, give the colony a large reserve of trained men able to take their place in the front line in case of war. The Boers have shown the world how nobly such a system can work. We have of fighting age in this colony (between 16 and 60) 200,000 men. If the Parliament of the country gives them proper encouragement, at least half that number will in time have passed through the ranks. Just now the encouragement is provided for — the best thing to be said about the new defence system. It is also the best hope of its future.