The attendance at the meeting called in the Ivorites’ Hall, Ammanford, on Thursday evening last, to hear an address from Sir Henry Jones, professor at Glasgow University, one of Wales’ most distinguished sons, was disappointing, and contrasted sharply with the overcrowded audience at Brynamman the preceding evening.
However, those who were not present missed a delightful treat, for the personality of Sir Henry and his homely phrases in putting the case of our duty to the State captivated all who had the pleasure of hearing him.
Ald. W. N. Jones, Company Commander of the Ammanford V. T. C., who paraded in good numbers for the occasion, presided, and explained that the reason why Sir Henry was going throughout Wales was that the Voluntary System was on its trial.
He did not suppose any of them wanted Conscription or Compulsion, though there might be a difference; they wanted to feel that the Voluntary System was doing its work.
They had an appeal from Mr. Asquith and from Lord Derby that had been sent broadcast to every unstarred man, and everything had been done to satisfy the Government that the Voluntary System still held the field.
Half a dozen men were worth 20 or 30 conscripts, and so far as the war had gone to-day we have done under the Voluntary System in a few months what it had taken Germany 40 years to do under Conscription.
They had read the history of the Battle of Mons and the bravery shewn there, and they were proud and glad to know that men from Ammanford and the Amman Valley were out there fighting for us and doing well. Were they going to let them fight alone?
That was why Sir Henry Jones was there, to create a fresh spirit among the people and send out help to those who were fighting at the Front. The latter had gone out voluntarily, and suppose Conscription came, what would the men at the Front say?
When the conscript went out they would say: “You have come now that you have been obliged to come; we came fourteen months ago to save fellows like you, and you hadn’t the pluck to come until you were forced.” He felt sure none of them would try in any shape or fashion to shirk their duty. They would soon be totalling up the number of recruits they had had, and he hoped Ammanford had done well.
They believed they were fighting a righteous war, and it was worth fighting to know that in some small measure they were doing something to bring this great war to a successful issue. Some people were talking about peace, and peace at any price.
He thought after the loss they had suffered and had to bear, very few of them would say “Peace” until they had the German power trampled under their feet. (Applause).
Sir Henry Jones, who had a warm reception, observed that in Mr. Asquith’s speech he said they had a great task worthy of a great nation. What did it mean? Mr. Asquith, whatever his merits or demerits as a statesman, was certainly one who measured his words, and every sentence was weighty and great. It meant that for the accomplishment of this task every man must be in it.
Mr. Asquith wanted to leave no one out – rich, poor, wise or simple. And Lord Derby said: “In order to accomplish this task we require the manhood of the nation.” That was true. The manhood was necessary, and somehow or other the men that were necessary would be found.
This old country, with all its faults, had a wonderful way of reaching its purpose and attaining its end; in a very devious way, blundering along according to no laws of reason or logic that any man could find, but still it had the custom of reaching what it wanted.
This belief was that if it was true, as Mr. Asquith and Lord Derby say, that the country requires the manhood of the nation to serve it – each man according to his best capacity – then this country would have it. No other nation would have dreamt of entrusting this struggle to Voluntaryism.
No one would have said at this time last year that they would have had four millions of men ready, but they got their purpose, and now if there was anybody there of military age waiting for anybody else to go first, thinking the might escape, they must remember John Bull.
He had a way of reaching his end. Why did he come from Scotland? Because he felt it was infinitely better to go willingly than to be compelled. He hated Conscription, and would not support I even in this hour of danger as a permanent military method.
But conscription was a very different thing from compulsion just now. There were many forms of compulsion, and he could advocate, if necessary compulsion without in the least lessening his objection to Conscription.
Compulsion was the last resort after exhausting the last method of persuasion. If they could not save the Empire through young men not coming up in sufficient numbers, then he for one had not a word to say against compulsion.
As Abraham Lincoln said: “Special circumstances demand special treatment.” He (Sir Henry) did not advocate compulsion, but they must have it, that was, if voluntary methods failed.
He came down from Scotland to his own countrymen, because he did not want any of them to be compelled to defend the principles about which they had spoken, and because willing service was so much more valuable in every respect.
There was only one way of avoiding compulsion, and that was by themselves according to their ability. The State had every right to compel, so long as it stood for Right itself. It was said compulsion by the individual liberty. Nonsense; it was one of the many indications how little real thinking was given to those problems of social and intellectual life.
Was there any law that was not compulsory? Was there any law that said, “if you please”? Whenever workmen wanted some new rights to be made secure, what did they want? They wanted to pass it into law. Why? Not because it expressed their liberty, but because it expressed their liberty. (Applause).
In this country the great mass of the laws were such as satisfied their desire towards a higher life. Their compulsion was not hard to bear by a good citizen; but it was hard to the bad man.
The State was the instrument for the expression of the will of the citizens. He did not believe anyone in the trenches among the many thousands of young fellows who had given themselves would think it very hard if a compulsory law were passed telling them to enlist.
They would say: “We have done it already; we have given ourselves willingly,” and he believed that if our young men generally realised their debt to the State, only realised the splendour of their inheritance, they, too, would give themselves equally willingly.
What has the State done for me? some may ask. A good many of the workmen in South Wales looked upon the ----W--- as an enemy from which they had to extract their rights by force.
They said: “It is all very well for men of landed property; I am a workman who lives by the sweat of his brow; the State has done nothing for me.” what did they owe to the State; he would like to examine them on that.
It was another instance of ignorance of the most obvious things. The best way to answer that was, “What has you country not done for you?” He felt as if he could take the personality of any man there and peel it off bit by bit, lower and lower, and he thought he could show him that every bit of the structure of his soul had been borrowed by him from his country. All the contents of his mind and character he had borrowed from his country.
Bring a man up in loneliness, an would he be a rational being? They spoke the language of their country. But for their country they would have no humanity, no mentality, no religion, no worth, no distinction between right and wrong. Every one of these things they had imbibed from the community, just as the leaves of a tree take in their food from the atmosphere around them.
He thanked God for his country, for he owed it all the contents of his mind and character. (Applause).
The State that had no compulsory power would be worth nothing. There must be power in it, and on the whole our State dedicates its power to the cause of freedom. They had proof of that. So far from it being true they owed little to their country, they owed everything to it. If their country perished, none of their interests would hold.
One question more. Was war even right? Had the State any right to compel one to fight and go into war? That was another utterly foolish question universally asked by people who he wanted to convince of not thinking about these things.
That was the answer to this question. There was no answer to the abstract question – whether war was right or wrong. The same war might be wrong to one people and right to another people. This war was, he thought, for the Germans one of the greatest crimes known to human history; a crime of treacherous preparation for forty years, to carry out the most aggressive purpose that a great nation had ever entertained.
It was bad in its conception, bad in its purpose, bad in the way in which it was carried out. On the other had, it should be, and it was, to thousands of our young men if not to millions of our young men, in very truth, the service of God. The same war; fought in the service of evil on the one side, and on the other it was a holy war.
Any action depended whether it was right or wrong upon its motive, upon the principle of which action was only the outside shell. It was a fight for territory, or balance of power; we are not better than our neighbours; there is no great merit, just the old story. By and by some other country will be getting too strong and we will be fighting against them.
People, in asking what was the motive of this war, looked at some single motive. Was it our own good, or the good of Belgium, or what particular motive drove us to war? That was always our sole question; a silly enquiry. Why? Because although our motives were single, they were never simple.
They were always extraordinarily complex. Why? Because every man really threw into his action, not a single motive, but his own personality. It was the mind as a whole that did really depended upon the character that had been thrown into it.
If they wanted to judge the war they must look at the character of the two peoples. What about the Prussian character, because the Prussians were primarily responsible for this war?
Every spot in the history of the Prussian was the same cruel aggressiveness, the same utter disrespect of the rights of others, the same tyranny of disposition. Long before they were kings the Prussian nobility were called by the same name as the Royal House was to this day – Hohenzollern, which meant high taxes.
Was there any body present who for a moment doubted if the Germans got their way with us, if we don’t give ourselves to defeat them, they would tax us, and in the words of Bismarck, when speaking of the French, bleed us white.
That was what we were up against. In conclusion, he made an earnest appeal to the young men “Go like men”; to g willingly, because nothing else would support their minds than a sense of duty, and that they were fighting for a great cause. (Applause).
Madame Kate Morgan sang in Welsh, and the meeting closed with “God save the King.”
