MR O'REGAN AND DEFENCE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8360, 21 February 1913, Page 2

MR O'REGAN AND DEFENCE

(To the Editor “N.Z. Times.”) Sir, —What a pity it is that when Mr P. J. O’Regan takes up his pen to write about military training he should become so excited and incoherent. Ho says in the ‘Times” this morning that “a gentleman named Paries” (referring to Colonel Darios) '“is at Aldershot, or somewhere else (learning ‘military tactics’ at our own ■expense.” Ho asserts also that the colonel, on his return from South. Africa, “delivered a number of addresses in favour of conscription . . . without a word of censure from (the newspapers.” Neither of these is correct. Colonel Davies is, from the military point of view, one of the bravest and best men New Zealand has ever produced. Ho distinguished himself in ■ South Africa, ■and ho has established himself by merit as a first-class officer in England. If he is brought back eventually to take charge of affairs in New Zealand it will bo an excellent thing for this country. At present the condition of affairs is very unsatisfactory, not because compulsory training is a mistake, but because Major-General Godiey has been too extravagant. Ho has attempted ineffectually to cover too much ground, and he has spent too much money (considerably over a million of money in less than three years). Of bourse he could not hayo done this if the proper check had been put upon him by the various Ministers of Defence. When General Godiey visited Australia recently ho took with him, I understand, two officers and a body servant . from the Permanent Artillery. If he goes to England ho may require a larger retinue. That its on© reason why New Zealand should, hs far as possible, employ her own people to look after her affairs:, People bom and bred bere and knowing' our timple ways are kas prone to extravagant habits and notions. Personally II cannot so© what useful purpose Ma-" Ijor-Goneral Godiey can serve .by going ito England at the present time. England is not short of military advisers. There is lots of work to do here, firstJy in trying to, repair past bungles, and secondly in trying to restore or<der out of chaos on the spot. But none of these things justify hot-headed and erratic attacks on our military training system or upon individual offleers. I should like to know out of curiosity: (1) If Mr O’Rogan is in (favour of defending New Zealand—if Inot, why not? and (21 if ho is,in fay-. icur of defence will he explain why 'should it devolve on the voluntary workers, leaving the shirkers exempt? 1 should prefer the reply to bo lucid rather than abusive, but will leave, that to Mr O’Regnn’s discretion.—l’ am, etc., ■, PIERCE O. FRETH. Wellington, February 20th.