PEACE VERSUS WAR.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 313, 29 May 1911, Page 8

PEACE VERSUS WAR.

To the Editor. Sir, —That portion of the human race which is termed "civilised" is spending over £1,000,000 a day, or £40,000 each hour throughout the year, solely in order that certain numbers of men may (in plain English) be taught how to commit common murder on their fellowmen. At the same time that this extraordinary expenditure is going on, vital problems of the age, such as those of cancer, consumption, insanity, old age, poverty, misery, and endless others, are crying aloud for the funds which they sorely need and which are absolutely necessary for their solution. I contend that such a state of affairs—a state of affairs of which the military men is the representative—cannot be regarded by any knowledgable person as other than an insult to the intelligence of man. Such contention, however, according to your correspondent '"F," is an "insult to common sense." I leave your readers to decide. "F" also complains that the above contention is an insult to our veterans—in other words, we must net have international arbitration nor put an end to war, because such would cast a reflection on the men who in times past fought for their country! Now, apart from the absurdity of this, we all admire the men who fought for New Zealand in the old days, just as, I trust, we all admire the Maoris who fought for their country against. them, but to suggest that our veterans are so sensitive as to regard international disarmament as a deliberate insult to themselves, is surely hardly fair to the veterans. In conclusion, Mr. Editor, I may state that I disclaim any intention of imposing my opinions upon other people. All I want to do is to set such people thinking. If each militarist will only admit that after all he may be wrong, that perhaps he came to his present opinions before considering the adverse arguments, that possibly the weight of evidence is against him, that opinions held by the majority of men have often been wrong, that the world might really be a happier and more progressive place without militarism, and, finally, that there may after all be something in the opinions of such practical men as Roosevelt, Taft, Carnegie, and Sir Edward Grey—then such militarist, I shall know, is about to give the whole question a fair hearing, and the purpose of these poor efforts of mine will have been more than accomplished.—l am, etc., "PEACE AND PROGRESS." P.S.—Perhaps I should state that I should not think of voicing the above opinions had I come across any serious or insuperable obstacle to international arbitration. Criticism which is destructive 'only, and not constructive, is, of course, often worse than none at all. Happily, however, there is no criticism of fcne military system which cannot be made soundly constructive. Hence the above. New Plymouth, May 27.