Page:Facts about conscription.djvu/1

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.

Facts About
Conscription.


Attempts have been—and are—made to disguise an objectionable system by such names as "national service," "compulsory military training," "universal service," and "universal training." The "United Service Gazette," England,[1] states: "In a general and non-technical sense, all methods of compulsory enlistment are conscriptive, especially where the liability to service is legally established, as it would be under the National Service League's proposals, or under those of the promoters of Universal Military Service." While General Sir Ian Hamilton wrote: "Armies are divided materially into two categories, Regular and Militia; morally also into two categories, Voluntary or Conscript. These divisions are perfectly clear, and cannot be confounded by the invention of question-begging epithets."[2]

Conscription is no new thing. Every Roman citizen, with few exceptions, was liable for service between the ages of 17 and 46; every foot soldier had to serve in 20, and every horseman in 10, campaigns. The modern systems may be said to date from 1733, when Frederick William I, the father of Frederick the Great, made service in the Prussian royal regiments compulsory. In 1798 conscription was introduced in France in place of Requisition, exceedingly heavy penalties being provided for breaches or evasions of the law. The system, in one form or another, is now general on the Continent of Europe.

The main arguments advanced in favour of conscription, apart from the obvious purpose of all armies and navies, are four:—

(1) That it tends to prevent war.
(2) That it is democratic, as all have to serve.
(3) That it is beneficial morally.
(4) That it is beneficial physically.

1. That conscription tends to prevent war. This assertion is based on the theory that if every man is a soldier or a potential soldier, the men of a country will do their utmost to escape the horrors of war and so will use their influence against it. The argument only needs to be mentioned, for it carries its own refutation in view of the present European situation. Not only does conscription not prevent war but it actually fosters the war system, for, if men were not forced to become part of the enormous fighting machines of to-day, armies would tend to decrease naturally as international relations improved. Conscription operates to prevent this, and the existence of huge armies and navies engenders suspicion and fear, with the consequently greater possibilities of armed conflict.


  1. February 5, 1914.
  2. "Compulsory Service," p. 61.