TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE NATIONAL SERVICE CONTROVERSY. THE new movement in favour of National Service, which we desire heartily to support, has caused a singular outburst of recrimination, and we are told by the opponents of the movement that it will divide the nation, that it will shatter our unity, and that the war can never be carried on with purpose and effect if the movement is not dis- avowed. All this talk—if we may he allowed to express ourselves plainly—so far as it does not rest on a mis- understanding, is perfectly irrelevant. If there were any possibility, or any thought among the supporters of compulsory service; of dividing the nation, we should certainly not be in favour of advocating compulsion at this moment.. We recognize that if we are not united we are sure to fail in the war. All that the National Service League and the other promoters of the movement want to do, however, is to persuade the country that compulsory service is the only just and the only safe course, and to invite the people to say so, or—alternatively, on the assumption that the people are already convinced —to ask them to inform the Government at once that they are ready and anxious to submit themselves to compulsion. It is believed by many observers that the Government would introduce compulsion immediately if they thought that it would he well received throughout the country. But the Government do not want to divide the country. The National Service League, therefore, wishes to remove all doubt from the mind of the Government. There is no question here of an attack upon the Government, or of a usurpation of the functions of Government by un- authorized persons. The National Service League, admirable and far-seeing society though it is, does not govern the country, and has no pretensions whatever to do so. The country is ruled by the Government, and the decision, whatever it may be, must come from the Government. No other sort of decision, at all events, will have any hind of sanction from us. Within that reservation there is plenty of room for the work of the supporters of National Service, just as there has been room for the exhortations of those who desired that cotton should be declared contraband, or that a National Register should be drawn up, or that the Volunteer Training Corps should be recognized by the War Office.
The one and only object of us all, we may take it..— supporters and opponents of compulsory service alike—is to end the war victoriously, and to end it as quickly as possible. That being so, it is incredible that, if the Govern- ment should declare compulsory service to be necessary, any appreciable number among those who are now in loud opposition to National Service would continue that opposi- tion. We feel sure that directly the Government are able to say, on the authority of Lord Kitchener, that the time for compulsion has arrived, the Daily News, the Daily Chronicle, the Nation, and the other objectors will quietly and loyally range themselves behind the Govern- ment. At least we confidently offer that tribute to their good sense. What problem—what occasion of dividing the nation—remains ? None that we can see. Lord Derby last Saturday spoke with his ustial sturdy wisdom when, in strongly recommending National Service, he said : "I want you to understand clearly that those who support the resolution pledge themselves to support National Service when His Majesty's Government think it the proper time to impose it." He did not believe that Ministers were still discussing the question. The time for that had gone by. He would take the open line of opposing those who said that compulsion was not necessary if be believed that the Government were behind them. But in his opinion the only question now before the Government was not "Is National Service necessary?" but "When shall National Service first be imposed ? " That is our opinion too. National Service will mean a complete organization of the physical resources of the country. We do not imagine that we can bring the war to an end without that organization, and we have not got it yet. As Lord Derby said, National Service, under the conditions which are now proposed, moans putting every man in his right place to serve the country. Not every man will be wanted as a soldier, but all will he " fetched ' (in the popular phrase) to do what is Wanted of them; whether in workshops, or Government Departments, or mines, or merchant ships. The very fact that men talk so generally about "waiting to be fetched" shows what they expect of the Government. The time is ripe. And what a double virtue there would be in this plan ! It would not only be fair to all men of military age, and relieve thousands of them of the agonies of doubt in which they now pass their lives. It would be a mplendid declaration. to the world of the intention of Englishmen to increase their efforts. No friend, no enemy, no neutral Power, could ever again say that Britain was not putting forth' her whole strength. The moral effect, reaching out as a. manifesto, and reacting on our own natural resolution, would be immense.
In reading the criticisms and denunciations of the new movement we have been impressed by the fact that the critics are almost more opposed to the personality of the leaders of the movement than to the movement itself, and that in nursing the anger inspired by both they almost lose sight of the needs of their country. It is an extremely curious state of mind this, which prompts a man to turn against a, cause primarily because he dislikes the people who maintain it. Yet it is a familiar habit. We are reminded of the extraordinary wisdom and nobility of the words of the Book of Common Prayer which declare that the value of the offices of the Church are not injured by a lack of character in the priest. So we feel about this movement for National Service. We frankly confessed last week that we wished the movement had been begun by the National Service League. As it was, the National' Service League did not announce its adherence till the movement was on foot. Yet this was perfectly natural. The League, with that single-minded patriotism which has always governed its actions, felt itself estopped from pro-. pagandism when the war broke out. It placed its great resources in organization and ready labour at the disposal of the Government. Its record during the war in work.
done for voluntary recruiting at the bidding of the Govern- ment has been not the least wonderful part of its history. But when a large movement for National Service was actually in being the League did well not to look on, but to declare its interest and responsibility in a matter which is peculiarly its own. It would have been a public mis- fortune if the League had withheld its guidance and support. The cause of National Service is so right in itself, however, that no defects in leadership could really spoil it. It deserves the whole-hearted approval of the people on its merits, and this cavilling at the men who made it their business to reintroduce the subject to tho attention of the nation is only one of the numerous irrelevancies which have been very perversely imported into the discussion.
Of course, the demand now made by the National Service League is not the demand made by the League in peace—. not the demand for compulsory military training on the Swiss model which the Spectator advocated for many years. But the new demand is an absolutely necessary adaptation. It would be ridiculous to ask now for the training of our young men specially for home defence. The underlying principle of the League used to be that, while every fit man should be compulsorily trained for home defence, there would be, in the event of a great war, a magnificent. supply of trained material from which to pick volunteers, for foreign service. That the men would, volunteer for such service was, of course, not in doubt. The great, difference between the system advocated by the League and the system under which we have long lived was that the volunteers under National Service would be military material worth having, besides being men ready equipped, instead of men who have to he entirely trained after the war has begun. But everything is now changed. What. the League may advocate after the present war is a matter for later decision. The present demand, as Lord Milner, the President of the League, has explained in a publics statement, is that compulsory service should be imposedi for all military purposes for the duration of the war.. That is an absolutely right and necessary change—a, change conditioned by the unprecendented intensity of the struggle, which is beyond anything foreseen or imagined.
It might be argued on legal grounds that this country has actually been invaded—for Zeppelins have invaded it —and that therefore the conditions of the ancient right of the King to call on all his subjects to repel the invader. are in existence. But there is little need to discover legal grounds for the principle of compulsion when common- sense suggests it at every point. . We do not know whence the opponents of National Service derive their figures as to the number of recruits so far obtained voluntarily. Liberal newspapers talk of three millions, and even of four millions. If these are official figures, they have certainly been withheld from us. But in the absence of official information we venture to say that they are pure myths and legends. There is one chance, and one chance only, for voluntaryists to save the situation. We think ourselves that it were much better not saved. But it is always open to voluntaryists to make compulsion unnecessary. They have only to do what Lincoln advised his American countrymen to do when they resented his proposal to introduce the Draft. We say "advised," though as a matter of fact Lincoln did not actually issue the bracing and. inspiring arguments which be wrote in answer to the popular clamour against the Draft. We have quoted his words before, but may quote at least a few sentences again, and, with them may leave the subject of National Service for the moment. After describing the variety of motives which had caused many men to volunteer, Lincoln proceeded :— "We already have, and have had, in the service, as appears, substantially all that can be obtained upon this voluntary weigh- ing of motives. And yot we must somehow obtain more, or relinquish the original object of the contest, together with all the blood and treasure already expended in the effort to secure it. To meet this necessity the law for the draft has been enacted. You who do not wish to be soldiers do nob like this law. This is natural ; nor does it imply want of patriotism. Nothing can be so just and. necessary as to make us like it if it is disagreeable to us. We are prone, too, to find false arguments with which to excuse ourselves for opposing such disagreeable things. In this MO, those who desire the rebellion to suoceed, and others who seek reward in a. different way, are very active in accommodating us with this class of arguments. . . . The republican institutions and territorial integrity of our country cannot be maintained without the further raising and supporting of armies. There can be no army without men. Men can be had only voluntarily or involuntarily. We have ceased to obtain them voluntarily, and to obtain them involun- tarily is the draft—the conscription. If you dispute the fact, and declare that mon can still be had voluntarily in sufficient numbers, prove the assertion by yourselves volunteering in such numbers, and I shall gladly give up the draft. Or if not a sufficient number, but any one of you will volunteer, he for his single self will escape all the horrors of the draft, and will thereby do only what each one of at least a million of his manly brethren have already done. Their toil and blood have been given as much for you as for themselves. Shall it all be lost rather than that you, too, will bear your part?"
Previous page
