CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.

Taranaki Daily News, 27 February 1918, Page 6

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.

.STATEMENT BY DEFENCE-.. IUNISTEK." (Our Special Cofrcspoudent). Wellington, Feb. 23. A lengthy ofliciul statement was issued to-day by the Minister for Dofenee with reference to conscientious objectors, and particularly tbo fourteen reservists who were forcibly placed aboard a "transport, and sent abroad. Charges have been made against the Government in this connection during the Wellington North contest. - The Minister explains that the only religious bodies which hav« satisfied the military service as to their right to ex» emption arc the Christadelphians, the Seventh Day Adventists and the Quakers. The "conscientious objector" who 13 not recn'nised by law "ranges from the man who has just mi9Bed satisfying th» Board that he comes within the sti'.tute to the man whose conscientious objections have been manufactured for the purpose of escaping service." There are also men defined by the Minister as "defiant objectors." They do not claim religious or conscientious' scruples; they simply refuse to serve the country and they defy the law. Every conscientious objector is given the chance to servo in the anitoulance or some other non-combatant branch and some of them accept. Others refuse This applies also to the "defiant objector," except in cases where the conduct of the men makes it impossible to offer them ambulance work. The religious objetor, if his appeal is allowed, and if ,lr is fit for work, goes to the Agriculture" Department and serves the country with put coming under military control. Mw who refuse to serve in any way after llipv Imve failed to secure exemption under the law, are given a period of dc tention first. Some of them decided tlic-ii to fall into line with the Dominion'* soldiers. Others still refuse orders, and tl ey are sentenced to terms 01 imprison mnnt. They remain soldiers and arc li able to be sent to the front. In .Tulv, HII7. five men who had expressed in some way conscientious objee-. tions and nine men who were classified > deriant 'ilirttors. were embarked on a transport for service abroad. 'That thev had an unpleasant time is quite' likely and was to be expected," states the re port. "The only method that the Defence Department can cmplqy to.avoid an unpleasant time for such men is t'i submit to their defiance of law, tiiid al low every one to rule his conduct ae onrd ; m' to his own will. It will be not- ] ed that four of the men not onlv /were _not religrous or conscientious objectors. hut wer» nrdin-rv deserters. It will to? further noted that five of them hail so little conscientious objection that at tilio time of their appeal they did raise the c|iiestions. Five of them did raise religious obicction, which was considered by a military service board and held not to be of such a character, as Ic. enable any relief under the statute." 1 During the voyage the fourteen men refused to obey any orders or to do any fat?<?ue work about the ship. Some days thev iefosed to take exercise, and earlier 1 in the voyage they refused to keep their quarters, dean. They had to be forcibly bathed; they had properly ventHtted quarters «n the starboard side at the poop, and if the atmosphere was ."indescribable," as they have stated 1n letters, the fact was due to their refusal to keep the place clean. They were given full kits, so had no reuson to complain of cold or privation. They iyere forcibly dressed in military gartneptj after the medical officer had condemned the civilian clothing they brought from New Zealand. Since their arrival, in England twelve of them have accepted duty, either in the infantry or as stretche* bearers.

In a letter to the Minister for. Defence. Genera! Oodley says he refrained from sending these objectors to' the front with drafts in the usual way, as recommended by certain officers, because they probftblr would have got shot for refusing duty in the face of the enemy and tha,t "would make martyrs of them." Some of them accepted duty as stretcher hearers. General Godlcy gave orders that those who continued to refuse duty shmiJd he (summarily punished or dealt with at the reinforcement camps instead of being sent to the front. The two who finally refused duty, with three other objeetors, were sentenced by courtmartial to five years penal servitude, which General GodW commuted to "two yeare' hard labor with ft recommendation that this may be suspended to three months if their conduct inp rison te good. Among the fourteen men sent abroad compulsorf'y were the following:

William Little: Drawn in ,the third ballot. He appealed on the grounds ot public interest, but the board, afte* hearing evidence, did not consider his retention in New Zealand essential. No question of religious or conscientious objection was raised. In camp he refused to obsv orders.

Henry Patton: Called up under' section 35 (member of a family with no son He appealed on the ground of hardships as lie was a dairy farmer. No question rtf religious or conscientious objection was -raised before \the board, which dismissed She appeal. In pamp he irefused duty. G. C. Ballantyne: in the first ballot. Appealed on of publi interest and hardship to his employers. He was represented\before the board tfy a solicitor, his case was carefully fought out, and no question of religiouß or conscientious objection was raised. His appeal was dismissed and he refused du£v. A. Baxter, A. M. L. Baxter and J. Baxter: They all appealed on•,religious grounds, but though notified of tUe hearing did not attend frefoTe the military service board to state their eases. 'The appeals consequently werf .dismissed, and the men were sent to camjfy. where they all refused duty.