PRODUCTION OR MEN?

Taranaki Daily News, 20 October 1917, Page 7

PRODUCTION OR MEN?

THE MEMORANDUM RE THIO LAST SON. NEED FOR DISCRETIONARY POWERS The memorandum from the National Recruiting Board with reference to the last man on the farm was mentioned yesterday at the New Plymouth sittings of the No. 1 Wellington Military Appeal Board. Prior to commencing the. business of the day, the chairman (Mr, 1). G. A. Cooper, S.M.), made the following statement: "With reference to the National Recruiting Board's memorandum relating to the appeals of men engaged in farming it has been wrongly inferred by a number of critics that this lioard has taken exception to the Government, declaring a national policy with respect thereto. This is all entire mifSeon>eptioii. My Board takes no exception to the Government declaring a national policy, as that would be absurd. There is a wide difference, however, between ihe Governmnt defining a national policy and its directing the Military Service' Board as to what determination the Boards shall give in any particular class of cases, without consideration, of the evidence presented in such cases. For the military service hoards to give determinations without regard to evidence would be for the boards to take the position of mere recording machines. It is within the knowledge of my board that farm? have been divided up evidently with the object of saving members of a family from being taken for military service; that in other cases sons are on farms, but their production is trifling, and that in some instances the application of the general rjde set out in the memorandum referred to would result in sheltering family shirkers of the worst kind. My board cannot see how any general rule can justly be applied which ignores the special circumstances of individual cases."

Captain Walker, military representative, stated that as representative;, of the Crown, he supposed his duty -was quite plain and that was to carry out the instructions contained in the memorandum, as far as it was possible to do so. He would only say that the memorandum was far more wide reaching than it appeared to be at first glance. Paragraph three states: ''lt is considered absolutely essential, therefore, that each farm should be left wi(Ji labor to work it and that in no case should the man who i s doing the whole of the work of his own farm or the last son on the farm of parents who are unable through age or inability to do the work themselves or skilled agricultural laborers be taken for military service unless with respect to the last named effieieiit labor is availabbs to replace them. I am, therefore, directed to say that the Government deem 5 it necessary to advise your board to adjourn sine die all cases where the appellant comes within the foregoing category in order he that ho may continue in work that is now as important and as essential aa military service." That wag a very important statement it said in effect, as well as in words, that farm labor was just as important as military service, and, be that farm labor ever so good or ever so bad, it must be .exempt from military service, because the farm laborer was doing as much eood ploughing and milking as by serving at the front. He was not quite sure and wanted enlightenment on the point as to whether the Government wanted the memorandum read as strictly as the wording implied. There was an exception as to the replacement of skilled agricultural labor only. The paragraph was divided into three categories: (1) The man who is doing the whole work of his farm; (2) the last son of infirm parents; and (3) the skilled agricultural laborer. The remarkable part of the memorandum was that provision was only made for the replacement of the third category. In other words, even although the Board was absolutely satisfied in the case of the last son that thai son can be replaced by efficient labor, yet he has to be exempted from military service. That was pretty far reaching,'because it left the way open to a father who was so minded to have his last single son exempted, by the simple process that they had seen repeatedly done. A farmer might have his two sons oil the farm. One could possibly do all the work, neither being worked to their fullest extent. One was perhaps turned down as unfit "for military service, and the other lit one was drawn in the ballot. Immediately the father said to the first named or to a married son: "Get work on the roads or elsewhere; go for a holiday, or refuse to work for me." The father then lodges an appeal on the grounds that he was the last son on the father's farm. Which would be the truth, though the other son was doing some unessential work. The board, acording to the memorandum, would have to grant exemption sine die, and he, as Government representative, would have to agree. It might be said that this was an exceptional case, continued Captain Walker, but it had been, done and would be done' more when the door was left open. He, therefore, wanted enlightenment as to whether the memorandum was to be read as strictly as it •was writen, because if it did, then it was'only necessary for the Government to put a clause to the Act through exempting all those farming, and the Board would not lose time hearing the appeals, but would exempt them as a matter of course. A man need only prove that lie was doing ploughing or milking and he would be exempted the same as a lad under age. He (Captain Walker) had telegraphed for enlightenment on the point, but had not been enlightened so far. He cited a case where a healthy fit father, owning 1000 acres, on which he ran 1-200 sheep and had done so for a long time, admitted that he had subdivided the farm into three and had leased portions to two married sons, retaining the single son on his own portion. I He had asked for exemption for that son. According to the present memorandum that son should have been exempted. The Board, after hearing the evidence, had dismissed the appeal, and properly so, and lie, !>s military representative, had asked that this should be done. Concluding, he said the position was a very serious one if the memorandum was to be read literally. He would not say whether it was to be taken literally or not, or whether the Hoard was to continue to exercise its discretion in certain cases of evasions of military responsibilities. He took it, as a matter ot fact, that the Board had exercised its discretion and had refused exemptions when satisfied that the appellant had taken steps in an endeavor to evade his militaryduties. Mr. McLaren said that some of the public journals had evidently misread the text of the memorandum when basing their criticism. They had made the replacement of cflicii-nt'labor annly to all classes instead of to only one. The chairman: They have left out the words: "With respect to the last named."

Captain Walker: That is go. I have seen at least two leading articles that have missed that point. Mr. McLaren said that the Board had been surprised at the number of ca6os in which young men liable for military service had been kept at home for years, and since the outbreak of the war, for no other reason that could be seen than to evade military service, had scattered all over the Dominion. Had this memorandum been in force since the Act came in, there would havi- been a great deal of that to face. The Board had always felt it necessary to exercise its fullest judgment and examine nil evidence careUilly.