NATIONAL SERVICE.
[To THE EDITOR OP THE " SPECTATOR."1 SIR,—In your article on "National Service" last week you follow Lord Cromer and many others in treating the question as though it were merely one of getting the largest number of men into the Army. If this indeed were all that were necessary it would be impertinent for any one but Lord Kitchener to discuss it. He knows the number that are coming in, and if the voluntary system does not give him what he wants we may trust him to say so. But I submit that the reasons for National Service now in the midst of the war are quite different from those put forward by its advocates in time of peace, and already sad confusion has resulted and altogether unnecessary prejudice has been excited because the two problems have been mixed up.
National Service now is not wanted to give us extra numbers of soldiers. We can probably get them by volunteering, and if not we can always have resort to compulsion when it has been proved to be necessary. But National Service is essential if we are to exert our full strength in time to crush our enemy, because by National Service alone can we ensure that each man shall do what he is best fitted for. Let me enumerate a few things that National Service can give us now, but which the voluntary system cannot give us :-
(1) We can arrange now that at certain definite dates beginning several months ahead certain definite numbers of men shall come up for training. From this certainty follow "Mid= advantages: (a) We know exactly the amount of clothing, equipment, arms, and ammunition required and the date at which it will be wanted. Orders can be placed accordingly, whereas all manufacturers of munitions know how impossible it has been in the past to get any statement from the War Office of the quantities required. (b) The manufacturer knows now what men will leave him at certain dates far enough ahead to give him time to rearrange his work or obtain substitutes. At present he is liable any day to find himself deprived without notice of the services of a man whose work is indispensable and whose absence perhaps renders many others idle. This applies to the manufacturer of "exports" just as much as to the munition-maker. (e) Meanwhile the whole campaign of moral pressure, badger- ing by recruiting officers, posters and advertisements, &c., comes to an end. Every man can go about his business knowing that when he is wanted he will be sent for.
(2) In selecting the men who are to be called up we can exercise a wise discretion, and after the physical standard has been satisfied we can pick out and give certificates of exemp- tion to all men who are indispensable for the manufacture of munitions, the production of food, or any other national pur- poses. In the selection of such men the employer would of course he called upon to take part, but I would strongly advocate that representatives of the Trade Unions concerned should be invited to act with employers. I do not hesitate to affirm that by this means the output of munitions would be increased and not hindered by the working of National Service.
(3) In accordance with the excellent suggestion made by Mr. Amery in the Times, we can automatically separate out and " control " those firms whose work is really indispensable to the nation. Mr. A.mery divides the industries of the country into three groups, from which he proposes that we should take twenty-five, fifty, and seventy-five per cent. respectively of the males of fighting age, The establishments from which not more than fifty per cent, had been taken would be forthwith ."controlled"—that is, their profits limited and the wages regulated by the Munitions Minister. The " control " of factories is at present an arbitrary measure exercised by whim or by personal considerations. I have never met any manu- facturer who would complain of limitation of profits if all were treated alike, but naturally those who are picked out and penalized, although they may have rendered valuable services to the Government, resent very bitterly the unenviable distinction conferred upon them. Where a grievance exists you may be quite sure that the best work will not be done.
Sir, surely the whole lesson of the Russian retreat is that munitions are as essential as men. The output of munitions in this country has been gravely interfered with by the unco- ordinated activities of the recruiting officer, and it is for the purpose of distributing labour where it can be most usefully employed, whether on the land, in the mine, in the factory, or in the ranks, that National Service is wanted now. If the workers could be made to understand this, and be assured at the same time that there is no intention either of cutting down their pay or putting men who are not in the Army under military discipline, I cannot see that they would have any reason for opposing the adoption of National Service forth-
[We desire to emphasize one point in Mr. Neville Chamber- lain's valuable letter. It ought not to be necessary to do this, but perverse criticism has, as a matter of fact made it quite necessary for the friends of National Service to say emphatically that they have not, and never have had, any thought of recommending forced labour in the workshops. Compulsion would be applied to military service only. And it would be applied when the men who do more useful service at home at their present self-chosen occupations had been carefully exempted.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
