The Conscription Debate
The two images above are proper-gander posters arguing for and against Conscription. The Australian government was already able to conscript people into the army but only to fight in Australia and not overseas. In order to change this, the Labor Prime Minister at the time, William Hughes, could get a majority in the House of Representatives but not in the Senate, so in 1916, he launched the amendment to the public as an opinion poll. This vote, as it was not a referendum about the Constitution, would not mean anything to law but Hughes hoped that, if the public voted in favour, it might be change the minds of a handful of Senators making a majority. Both sides of the people began campaigning against each other with slogans like “Vote No Mum, They’ll Take Dad next” and “Vote Yes, for Free Pride, Adventure, Weapons, We Need Your Help, BE A MAN!” The former was a poster of a young boy waving a ballet paper in his mother’s face begging her to vote no. The Latter had the picture of a well-dressed soldier shouting to the voters in Australia. Both sides presented strong arguments of loyalty and morality including one claiming the others cause would end in disaster.
Strangely enough, the soldiers who were away fighting did not vote, this would have been a tactical move by Hughes to ensure that he did win the vote, because the soldiers who were there would not have wanted to have anyone else go through what they were going through. If they had been able to vote, there would have been an overwhelming majority against conscription that would possibly have swayed any senators in his favour.
Australia’s Archbishop of the time, Daniel Patrick Mannix, was a major influence of opinions one the war, he proclaimed that the war was just a trade war (which means that two countries try to damage each other’s trade by placing sanctions know as tariffs on each other). Because of his comments regarding the war he was called a traitor, but despite this he was still able to successfully argue the Catholic view of anti-conscription.
The opinion poll ended in 49 for, and 51 against. During all of WW1 and WW2 Australia did not have conscription and men were free to choose what they wanted to do. However, during the Vietnam war Australia did have conscription, but not the kind where ever man has to go, it was a random selection, as if your name was pulled out of a hat.
Jack Jensen, in a letter to his Aunt Hannah dated August 1915, wrote,
"I would not like to be sent back to Australia before the war is over. You see so many going about who will not enlist & the excuses they give would make your hair turn grey. One young chap who was asked to join said what had he got to join for. He had no wife no children & no parents depending on him so why should he fight let those fight who had something to fight for. These sort of men make you feel ashamed & you want to get away to your own men again. Of course the prospect of getting wounded again or killed is not very pleasant but I have seen some of my best mates killed & they died like men & if I can do the same I will be quite satisfied to go now. We all know we must die some time. If I am wounded again I will be able to bear it as I did the last time & if I am crippled I shall have to bear it as many another young chap is doing & I shall know at least that I have done my duty to the country which I have got my living in."
The letter of Victor Voules Brown, written much later on 19 May 1917, who is of the opposite opinion,
"Last time you wrote you wanted to know why it was the troops in France did not vote for conscription. I told you as short as I could perhaps it was censored so will tell you again. To cut it short the boys in France have had such a doing of it, that they consider it murder (or near enough to it) to compel anymore to come from Aussie. And then again they consider once conscription is brought in it is the end of a free Australia (No doubt about it John Australia is the finest country in the world to my idea. When the vote for conscrip took place I was in Codford & I voted yes, but dinkum I am like the rest now I have seen it, & wouldn't compel anyone (barring the few rotters of single chaps that wont come. And of course to get them one would have to get a lot of others, so under the circumstances let them stop at home It is no good for a peaceful life over there & I can tell you I am not looking forward to the next dose."
Strangely enough, the soldiers who were away fighting did not vote, this would have been a tactical move by Hughes to ensure that he did win the vote, because the soldiers who were there would not have wanted to have anyone else go through what they were going through. If they had been able to vote, there would have been an overwhelming majority against conscription that would possibly have swayed any senators in his favour.
Australia’s Archbishop of the time, Daniel Patrick Mannix, was a major influence of opinions one the war, he proclaimed that the war was just a trade war (which means that two countries try to damage each other’s trade by placing sanctions know as tariffs on each other). Because of his comments regarding the war he was called a traitor, but despite this he was still able to successfully argue the Catholic view of anti-conscription.
The opinion poll ended in 49 for, and 51 against. During all of WW1 and WW2 Australia did not have conscription and men were free to choose what they wanted to do. However, during the Vietnam war Australia did have conscription, but not the kind where ever man has to go, it was a random selection, as if your name was pulled out of a hat.
Jack Jensen, in a letter to his Aunt Hannah dated August 1915, wrote,
"I would not like to be sent back to Australia before the war is over. You see so many going about who will not enlist & the excuses they give would make your hair turn grey. One young chap who was asked to join said what had he got to join for. He had no wife no children & no parents depending on him so why should he fight let those fight who had something to fight for. These sort of men make you feel ashamed & you want to get away to your own men again. Of course the prospect of getting wounded again or killed is not very pleasant but I have seen some of my best mates killed & they died like men & if I can do the same I will be quite satisfied to go now. We all know we must die some time. If I am wounded again I will be able to bear it as I did the last time & if I am crippled I shall have to bear it as many another young chap is doing & I shall know at least that I have done my duty to the country which I have got my living in."
The letter of Victor Voules Brown, written much later on 19 May 1917, who is of the opposite opinion,
"Last time you wrote you wanted to know why it was the troops in France did not vote for conscription. I told you as short as I could perhaps it was censored so will tell you again. To cut it short the boys in France have had such a doing of it, that they consider it murder (or near enough to it) to compel anymore to come from Aussie. And then again they consider once conscription is brought in it is the end of a free Australia (No doubt about it John Australia is the finest country in the world to my idea. When the vote for conscrip took place I was in Codford & I voted yes, but dinkum I am like the rest now I have seen it, & wouldn't compel anyone (barring the few rotters of single chaps that wont come. And of course to get them one would have to get a lot of others, so under the circumstances let them stop at home It is no good for a peaceful life over there & I can tell you I am not looking forward to the next dose."