The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 9, 1918. AUSTRALIA'S PROBLEM.

Taranaki Daily News, 9 January 1918, Page 4

The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 9, 1918. AUSTRALIA'S PROBLEM.

How will the Commonwealth Government solve the reinforcement problem? That is the question which is attracting attention throughout the Empire, but the answer is not in sight. Blunders are far more easily made than reoitified, and one of tlhe greatest and most regrettable blunders that the Federal Government of Australia has made was referring the decision as to conscription to u referendum, and to have repeated the error was nothing hut recklessness. It is not surprising to find that a flood of hostile criticism has 'been let loose against the Prime Minister, Mr. Hughes, who appears to have utterly failed as a leader in a time of the most grave national crisis. The question of reinforcements still remains a problem, merely because tlic Federal Government, of which Mr Hughes was the head, had not the courage to take that bold course wjiieh was adopted throughout all the countries of the Allies by instituting compulsory military service. While the other parts of the Knipire are leaving no stone unturned to win the war, shrinking from no sacrifices, and loyally backing up the men •it the front with the necessary reinforcements, the people of Australia decline to be compelled to give that service which they shirk from rendering voluntarily. Yet it is the duty of the Federal Government to keep up the strength of the divisions alreaidy sent on active service. It may he argued that the verdict of the people against compulsion is not a refusal to send reinforcements, but in face of the unwillingness of the men to volunteer there is only one construction to lie placed on the attitude of Australia's manhood. v The effect of the vote may lie regarded as an expression of a desire for a War Ministry, but not conscription. No one doubts Mr. Hughes' sincerity in the Empire's cause, but he has made the position still more difficult .by his pledge that his administration would not continue in office if the conscription proposal were defeated, and presumably that pledge must be honored and thus his leadership will be terminated. Cabinet has been closely discussing the position in which it is now placed, but evidently finds the tangle too complicated to unravel. There seems, however, to be a [strong feeling that Mr. Hughes should Lstill lead the National turtv. which was

placed in power by an immense vote of confidence, with overwhelming majorities in botli Houses. Under the,circumstances it would appeal to lie difficult to reconcile the mandate of the people at the political election with What on the referendum issue. The question is which verdict carries the greater weight, and there is no doubt that the vote at the political election more accurately expresses the views of the electors. With such majorities as the National flov<=mment possesses no other Ministers could possibly carry on, and we take it that Ihfi party, and not the referendum vote, must decide upon the members of tllic Cabinet. Jf no greater difficulty presented itself than the reconstitution of the Government by the usual method there would not be much occasion for anxiety, for the Ministers could resign ami be re-appointed, hut the reinforcement question has still to be faced, and it i 9 quite reasonable to assume that Mr. Hughes may not feel able to meet the emergency. In that case Mr. Tudor might be asked to satisfy the GovernorGeneral that lie could carry on, but there is little probability of an affirmative answer, so that in the event of Mr. Hughes' refusal another election would seem inevitable. Such a course, however, would lie only adding fuel to the present heated political atmosphere, and would not bring the reinforcement drafts any nearer accomplishment than at present, but the ferment and turmoil will be continued. Australia is really more interested in the winning of the war than any of the other Dominions, and there is no reason to doubt her whole-hearted desire that the end in view should be achieved. According to the latest cable news, the Ministry has resigned, and the question of who is to carry on is under consideration. It is interesting to note the comments made on the referendum verdict, though they give no indication as to how the problem is to be solved. The Premier of Victoria stated: i

"The whole question has been complicated by the quarrel of the official Labor Party with Mr. Hughes and bv other even more sinister influences. The simple issue of limited conscription sufficient to meet the country's needs seems to have had very little'to do with the decision. Australia will be in this war to the end. Our fighting men must and shall be reinforced. It is for our leaders to choose the

means by which this national duty shall be done." The acknowledgment of Australia's duty is commendable, but the point is howit is to he performed, and if the leaders cannot 3ee their way clear, what is going to happen? The Melbourne Age puts the position plainly by saying:

"The gravity of the whole situation has not been lessened by the vote. It may bring relief to fit and eligihle young men who shirk their duty, it may please those indifferent to' the cause of the Allies and others actively hostile, and it may be a source of comfort to timid souls who think that they have averted danger bv shutting their eyes to it. The people'of Australia., in considering means for carrying on the war, are' like a House which lias created a blank in a Bill. They have said that they will not do certain things; they have'not said what they will do. But, unlike the House, they cannot drop the Bill. . . . Great | hough the power of an Australian majority may be, it? decree does nothing for the preservation of the Entire against the greatest and most unscrupulous, the most relentjess. force the world has ever seen, Surely there is

no one 50 dull, so unimaginative as to think tliat Australia can vote herself , into a peaceful disregard of the vital and death-dealing forces which are

shaking the world, which arc levelled against this country, nnS in particular against thousands of tllie best and bravest of our men. These arp the problems which a Nationalist Purtv has to face, and which it cannot, which it dare not, shirk. The welfare of the country is the first and only consideration, and it cannot he sacrificed in a pedantic search for precedents for the

-solution of a situation for which no

precedent exists." That is the only practical, common-sense view to take. The first consideration must be the safety of the Empire as a whole and the welfare of the Commonwealth. Let the blunders and bickerings of Ihe past be relegated to oblivion, at least until victory is won. This is no time for party-mongering, but for resolute, vigorous action. A prompt, bold and courageous policy for dealing with the vitally urgent need of man power to fight the outer enemy is imperative. For the lienor of Australia and her heroic sons tihere should he no more daliyiiiff. If conscription cannot be enforced it is

tor the Government to impose such drastic conditions on the shirkers that they will have no alternative but to 4o their share in the great struggle of the Allies for civilisation, justice and freedom.

shows the serious, position with which Germany will be faced unless the complete defeat of Britain can be achieved. The following are extracts from the letter in question:—"The outcome of the Schied-mann-Krzberger recipe for peace may lie Hummed up in the words, •Renunciation of victory.' What this would mean for our economic life is hardly understood. It means neither more nor less than that we are prepared practically to abandon the economic fight with our enemies, or, more properly speaking, with England, and to resign ourselves "to England's remaining in possession of the immense advantages she has gained throughout the world. We cannot close our eyes to the fact that England has, on the whole, realised her war aims, and our brilliant military position should not blind us to (lie fact that our economic world-position is getting worse. Before the war our position as a world-power was based on our economic activity in sill parts of the world, our world commerce, our colonies, and our shipping. England's war aim was the destruction •if our world-position, and in this she Ims succeeded as none would have thought possible. Our shipuinjr ami

world commerce are mined, and il will need yearn of industrial toil to huild «j» our world position Dmiuy the last three year? England has been aide to maintain the success of her early attacks on our shipping and colonies, to saddle us continually with fresh enemies, to set herself up everywhere in hit place, and to rob us of the foundation for re-lmilding our foreign trade by the liquidation of thousands of Uerinan firms abroad. The cruellest blow was the adhesion of China and a large part of South America ts ths Entente. There is no possibility of our overseas trade taking up its former activity after the uvnehwion of peace, rior of entering info the old relations. Practically no foundations for the latter exist any longer, while the enemy has taken our place in fticli a way that lie cannot be removed from it. The German merchant who goes out into the world after peace will find everywhere ruins and a spirit of hostility. Only England's complete defeat can. force her to give up her plans and give our foreign trade free access to all parts of the world, including her colonics and spheres of influence."