“WE MAY NOT BE GOLIATH BUT WE HAVE DAVID'S SLING

“WE MAY NOT BE GOLIATH BUT WE HAVE DAVID’S SLING”: MEDIA AND

THE PERCEPTION OF THE NEW ZEALAND HOME GUARD, 1940-1942.

Noah Szajowitz

A thesis

submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts in History

Boise State University

May 2021

Noah Szajowitz

BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE COLLEGE

DEFENSE COMMITTEE AND FINAL READING APPROVALS

of the thesis submitted by

Noah Szajowitz

Thesis Title: “We May Not Be Goliath but We Have David’s Sling”- Media and The

Perception of the New Zealand Home Guard, 1940-1942

Date of Final Oral Examination: 26 February 2021

The following individuals read and discussed the thesis submitted by student, Noah

Szajowitz, and they evaluated the student’s presentation and response to questions during

the final oral examination. They found that the student passed the final oral examination.

Erik Hadley, Ph.D. Chair, Supervisory Committee

Raymond Krohn, Ph.D. Member, Supervisory Committee

David Walker, Ph.D. Member, Supervisory Committee

The final reading approval of the thesis was granted by Erik Hadley Ph.D., Chair of the

Supervisory Committee. The thesis was approved by the Graduate College.

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to my major sources of inspiration in New Zealand.

To “Mum” and “Dad” otherwise known as Dr. Lauren Stangl and Dr. Jeffery

Stangl, there is frankly not enough room on this page to chronicle everything I could say.

What began as a simple trip to see my family in New Zealand, has blossomed into a

passion for the history of your nation, one directly responsible for this specialized thesis.

Thank you for allowing your Torbay home to become my own since 2013, one always

characterized by a warm atmosphere, incredible home cooking, and constant laughter.

Summer camping trips on the boat to Mahurangi, the long drive up to Cape Reinga,

afternoons at the Bach in Matarangi, weekly trips down the street to Waiake Beach with

takeaway, and evenings along the waterfront in Auckland, all helped to inspire this thesis.

To Nathan, thanks for being a sounding board for my ideas, the constant drives around

the North Shore, and introducing me to that legendary strawberry ice cream in Kumeu.

To Isabelle, thanks for your nonstop motivation and reminding me that no matter what

may be happening in the world, you can always find something positive to be your guide.

Lastly, this thesis is dedicated to New Zealanders during the Second World War.

Your tenacity in the face of such adversity, your nearly nonstop commentary, and humor

remains an utter privilege to have chronicled as part of my primary sources for this thesis.

It is my earnest hope, that this thesis may serve as an accurate record of some of your

candid reflections during the darkest parts of the Second World War for your Dominion.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This thesis would not have been accomplished without considerable help and

support from colleagues, friends, family, and many archives across the Pacific Ocean.

Within the United States, first and foremost, I would like to thank my entire

family: my father Dr. Saby, mother Kara, brother Jonas, and Moch for their support.

Heartfelt thanks to the rest of my incredible family in San Diego and the Bay Area:

Elizabeth, Tim, Jenny, Andrew, John, Pauline, Lisa, and Susan for their encouragement.

At Boise State, I cannot thank my fantastic committee enough for their constant support:

my chair Dr. Erik Hadley and committee members Dr. Raymond Krohn and Dr. David

Walker. For your endless patience, sense of humor, and feedback, I am eternally grateful.

Additional thanks to everyone in L-169: Kole, Autumn, Greg, Todd, Eli, Erik, and Nate.

Special thanks to “The Sandlot”: Josh, Carter, and Kevin, it’s almost baseball time boys.

Within Australia, I would like to thank my other alma matter of the University of

Wollongong for in part inspiring this thesis, and all of my fellow Weerona B3 residents.

In particular Rebecca Jackson, for your iconic laugh and support over the years since I’ve

been away from New South Wales, here’s to seeing you in Sydney within the near future.

Within New Zealand, massive thanks are due to the New Zealand government,

National Library of New Zealand, Te Papa Tongarewa, The Auckland War Memorial,

and especially all of the newspapers of New Zealand within the Papers Past Project.

Special thanks to Professors Glyn Harper and Peter Lineham at Massey University for

their conversations about New Zealand history and for their excellent advice on sources.

This thesis title is a direct quote from the propaganda film New Zealand is Ready (1941).

ABSTRACT

This thesis focuses on New Zealanders’ perception of the Home Guard through a

specific lens of culture demonstrated through wartime printed newspapers across New

Zealand. These newspapers allowed for a public forum for New Zealander’s thoughts on

the Home Guard, enabling a national debate on the purpose of the Home Guard over the

course of the Second World War. Critically, these print newspapers and public opinion

drastically influenced the direction of the Home Guard, illuminated the problems the

Home Guard faced, and often received a response from the New Zealand Government.

The Home Guard’s initial difficulty with recruitment, the impressment of private rifles by

the New Zealand government after a failed voluntary campaign, and the later enactment

of compulsory enrollment, firmly question the realistic effectiveness of the Home Guard.

Competing narratives between the New Zealand government and New Zealanders, both

involved in the Home Guard and not affiliated, collectively influenced the Home Guard

from 1940 until 1942, as New Zealand feared invasion by the larger Japanese Empire.

 
 
vii 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................... iv 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................... v 
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... vi 
CHAPTER 1- 1931-1940: INTRODUCTION.................................................................. 1 
CHAPTER 2 – MID-LATE 1940: THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE HOME GUARD 
AND INITIAL RECRUITMENT EFFORTS ................................................................. 11 
CHAPTER 3 – EARLY-MID 1941: RIFLES, COL. ALDRED, AND MINISTER 
SEMPLE: THE INCORPORATION OF THE HOME GUARD INTO THE ARMY ..... 24 
CHAPTER 4 – MID-LATE 1941: CONTROL AND TRAINING OF THE HOME 
GUARD ........................................................................................................................ 61 
CHAPTER 5 – EARLY-MID 1942: MAJOR MELROSE, EQUIPMENT, AND 
COMPULSORY ENROLLMENT: HOME GUARD EXPANSION .............................. 81 
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION ..................................................................................... 105 
REFRENCES .............................................................................................................. 116 

CHAPTER 1- 1931-1940: INTRODUCTION

The Home Guard is a voluntary, unpaid, part-time force, having its origin in the

desire of patriotic citi-zens engaged in ordinary civil occu-pations to make some

active and volun-tary contribution to defense, especially to the defense of their

own localities. -The Evening Post, October 30, 1941

Throughout the far-flung British Empire in the early twentieth century, no nation

was further removed from Britain by sheer distance than the island Dominion of New

Zealand. Separated by over eleven thousand miles and no fewer than two oceans in each

direction, this geographical isolation from Britain has bestowed upon New Zealand both

blessings and curses in the tumultuous times of war. The First World War left the nation

scarred yet proud of its own military and imperial contributions within the British Empire

with respect to the recent global conflict. With the rising threat of fascism in Europe

twenty-one years later, New Zealanders found themselves in a very familiar situation of

supporting the defense of the British Empire. Once again, New Zealand sent its sons

away to the sundrenched Mediterranean where their fathers had fought, mobilizing its

resources and people at home for this new worldwide conflict. However, the Second

World War would force New Zealanders to face a very different threat much closer to

their doorstep in the form of the Japanese Empire. Far to the north of New Zealand, the

rapid territorial expansion of the Japanese Empire loomed as a serious threat to the

nation. With the majority of its soldiers fighting in the Mediterranean Theater, New

Zealand’s citizens now found themselves employed in a shared national defense.

Evening Post, Volume CXXXII, Issue 105, 30 October 1941, Page 11. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19411030.2.105

The expansion of New Zealand’s history of the Second World War in recent years

has taken a detailed look at the experiences of civilians on the home front. One lens that

has gained interest among New Zealanders in the past twenty years is the stories of

women both at home and serving abroad with the New Zealand Expeditionary Force.

These books are a mix of both oral history compilations and studies done using available

documents on the subject. Megan Hutching’s book, Last Line of Defense: New

Zealanders Remember The War At Home, views the experiences of women serving in the

Auxiliary Services of the Royal New Zealand Air Force and their contributions to the war

effort as pilots.

Other books on the role of women in the war detail interviews and

correspondence; Jim Sullivan’s Doing Our Bit: New Zealand Women tell their stories of

World War II, uses the interviews of fifty women who participated in various elements of

the home front and active service.

Eve Ebbett’s While the boys were away: New Zealand

Women in World War II, takes a much broader view of the role of women on the home

front looking at women’s roles through military and civilian perspectives.

Books such as

these that focus on smaller social histories such as women during the war begin to

uncover what New Zealand military historian Deborah Montgomery describes as, “the

intricate agendas and unconscious desires that shape oral history narratives of wartime

experiences.”

Megan Hutching, Last Line of Defense: New Zealanders Remember The War At Home, (Auckland: Harper

Collins Publishing, 2007)

Jim Sullivan, Doing Our Bit: New Zealand Women tell their stories of World War II, (Auckland: Harper

Collins Press, 2002)

Eve Ebbett, While the boys were away: New Zealand Women in World War II, (Wellington: Reed

Publishing, 1984)

Deborah Montgomerie, “Reconnaissance, Twentieth Century New Zealand War History at Centuries

Turn” New Zealand Journal of History 37, No. 1, (2003) 72

Lesser known experiences are just beginning to receive the attention they need in

the Second World War’s overall narrative. The experiences in particular of New

Zealanders who opposed the war itself, and found themselves harshly punished for doing

so, have received some literary attention in the past ten years. Allen Handyside’s book,

Indeterminate Sentence, describes the experiences of those that refused to fight during the

war in New Zealand due to personal or religious beliefs.

In addition, David Grant and

Michael Morrissey delve further into the topic with, Out in the Cold: Pacifists and

Conscientious Objectors in New Zealand during World War II, delving into the plight of

men who were held in isolated camps in North Island and their dealings with a

government largely unsympathetic to their objections.

These examples of home front

social histories make up a slowly expanding scholarship about the impact of the war on

average New Zealanders, ranging from micro-histories about smaller groups to larger

narratives about society as a whole such as Stevan and Hugh-Eldred Grigg’s book,

Phoney Wars: New Zealand Society in the Second World War.

Regarding the history of

New Zealand’s Home Guard, New Zealand historian Nancy Taylor’s Home Front

Volume I, is the only twentieth century secondary work on the topic of the Home Guard.

Yet, even Taylor herself devotes only a small section to the Home Guard within her

voluminous study, with much of the book magnifying other elements of the home front.

While Taylor’s book discusses the Home Guard, through an excellent general overview

of the organization, she does not specifically deal with the relationship of the Home

Allen Handyside, Indeterminate Sentence (Wellington: Philip Garside Publishing, 2005)

David Grant and Michael Morrissey, Out in the Cold: Pacifists and Conscientious Objectors in New

Zealand during World War II (Auckland: Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind, 2014)

Stevan and Hugh Eldred Grigg, Phoney Wars: New Zealand Society in the Second World War (Dunedin:

Otago University Press, 2017)

Guard and New Zealand’s media.

Penny Summerfield and Corinna Peniston-Bird’s

cultural history on the British Home Guard, Contesting Home Defense: Men, Women,

and the Home Guard in the Second World War, is a groundbreaking and multi-faceted

look at the British Home Guard, which deals with the impact of Britain's Home Guard on

its media, albeit with more of an emphasis on the postwar period and popular memory.

This thesis on New Zealanders' perception of the Home Guard uses a cultural

lens, focusing on New Zealand’s newspaper print media, forming a cross section of New

Zealand society through the point of view of multiple newspapers across North and South

Island during the war. Home Guardsmen and even those uninvolved with the

organization found an eager outlet for their thoughts through newspapers, encompassing

both complementary and critical commentary of the organization. Additionally, the

formal perspective of the New Zealand government and its officials towards the Home

Guard is displayed through New Zealand Police Gazette gazetted orders, formal

Parliamentary Papers, and detailed newspaper articles that mirror both the shifting

situation in the war and the government’s reaction regarding changing public opinion

towards the Home Guard. Moreover, the Home Guard’s perception not only shifted over

the course of the Second World War, but contrasted sharply with the organization’s

reality. Key moments for the Home Guard, such as the initial difficulties with

recruitment, the later impressment of rifles by the government, and the enactment of

compulsory enrollment, offer insight onto the realistic effectiveness of the Home Guard

to defend New Zealand. Unfortunately, this study has been limited due to the COVID-19

Nancy M. Taylor, The New Zealand People at War: The Home Front Volume I (Wellington: Historical

Publications Branch, Dept. of Internal Affairs, 1986)

Penny Summerfield & Corinna Peniston-Bird, Contesting Home Defense: Men, Women, and the Home

Guard in the Second World War (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2007)

pandemic, such as the inability to access Home Guard documents in the National

Archives of New Zealand alongside oral history interviews with any surviving Home

Guardsmen. Such interviews would have been an excellent complement to many opinion

articles used in this thesis. As a result, this perception of the Home Guard is based on

newspapers, using both factual reporting and opinion articles, concluding with the Home

Guard’s realistic capability in the annual reports of the National Service Department.

Particularly concerning its perception, the usage of newspapers as a public forum

shows that New Zealanders, of many varying opinions, collectively influenced the

development of the Home Guard during the Second World War, as impassioned debates

in New Zealand's newspapers exploited both the Home Guard’s failures and its triumphs

alike. From opinion columns to main articles, it is clear that the Home Guard was by no

means universally supported, nor detested, by the citizens of New Zealand. The drama of

an inept and ill-equipped Home Guard played out on the pages of New Zealand’s

newspapers. Additionally, a mixed public perception of New Zealand’s defensive needs,

the lack of decisive leadership from the New Zealand government pertaining to the Home

Guard, and woefully inadequate material resources for the Home Guard, severely

hampered its realistic military capabilities as New Zealand’s final line of home defense.

The first glimpses of the reasoning for the Home Guard are noticeable in the years

just before the outbreak of the Second World War, with the formation of imperial defense

policies and the changing status of New Zealand that would influence its wartime

defensive strategy. Within its own corner of the world, New Zealand contemplated its

future in the aftermath of the granting of Royal Assent to the 1931 Statute of

Westminster. Until this point New Zealand had remained simply another outpost of the

British Empire, but with the stroke of a pen New Zealand’s status within the British

Empire shifted. The autonomy granted by the Statute of Westminster elevated New

Zealand’s status, affording greater independence within the Commonwealth of Nations.

However, New Zealand displayed a remarkable hesitancy to accept these new changes, as

evidenced by a specific clause inserted into the statute allowing New Zealand to delay

independence outlines pertaining to the dominion until as late as 1947.

However, this increased independence did not imply that New Zealand would

become independent of its connections to Britain. On the eve of the Second World War,

New Zealanders affirmed their resolve in the strategically important center of Singapore.

New Zealand’s faith in Singapore for its defensive needs was due to an inability to

operate effectively on its own, especially without the critical element of British naval

superiority in the Pacific backing New Zealand’s troops.

New Zealand’s stance towards

the Singapore Naval Base was even a quantifiable statistic, as the Dominion invested

over one million pounds into the development of the Singapore Naval Base, in the hope

that the Royal Navy would continue to project its power and ensure the Far East defense

of New Zealand and other British possessions.

Prewar defensive arrangements called

for the formation of a strategic perimeter around New Zealand. Consisting of the islands

of New Hebrides, Fiji, Tonga, and other important islands, they would form a buffer

around New Zealand and Australia and ensure a strong sense of security.

New

Ashley Jackson, The British Empire and the Second World War (London: Hambledon Continuum, 2006)

471

J.B Condliffe and W.T.G Airey, A Short History of New Zealand (Christchurch: Whitcombe and Tombs

Ltd, 1966) 257

Ashley Jackson, The British Empire and the Second World War, 476

Ibid, 485.

Ibid, 476.

Zealand’s military again found itself operating within the bounds of imperial forces, but

now as part of the British Empire’s overseas defensive plan, one that wagered much on

the mighty Singapore Naval Base.

The certitude placed in British imperial strategy would be put to the test with the

outbreak of the Second World War on September 1, 1939 with the German invasion of

Poland. Quickly following the French and British declarations of war on September 1

was New Zealand’s own independent declaration of war on Germany on September 3,

1939. The mindset of Britain’s island dominion was one of resolute belief in the ability of

the British Empire to wage an effective war, as documented by Prime Minister Michael

Savage in his September 5, 1939 broadcast to the nation, “With gratitude towards the past

and confidence in the future we range ourselves without fear besides Britain. Where she

goes, we go, where she stands, we stand.”

This level of confidence in the ability of the

British Empire to triumph in this conflict was significant within New Zealand, as

demonstrated by the number of soldiers who quickly volunteered for overseas service.

In the days following New Zealand’s formal declaration of war, thousands of

young New Zealanders seeking to do their part met the nation’s call for overseas service.

In contrast to the First World War, the New Zealand government did not simply commit

troops to the imperial war effort. It offered an expeditionary force on the condition that it

remained a unique entity, and that its commander Major-General Bernard Freyberg was

only responsible to the New Zealand Government.

With these provisions secured, the

first waves of soldiers departed on January 5 and May 2, 1940, respectively, for the

Michael King, The Penguin History of New Zealand (Auckland: Penguin Publishing, 2003) 392

Ibid, 393.

Mediterranean, and with New Zealand’s first rate fighting forces away, the New Zealand

government looked to its civilians to begin the nation’s preparation for defense.

With the New Zealand Expeditionary Force away in the Mediterranean, the nation

watched the events unfolding in Europe closely following Germany’s invasion of Poland.

The following months would see the stalemate on the western front shattered, as Belgium

and the Netherlands fell to German aggression. The ultimate shock to New Zealanders

came with the Fall of France in June 1940, as the pre-war defensive plans that relied on

the strength of the Royal Navy grew increasingly unlikely with Britain under threat.

The influence of the Fall of France and the subsequent Battle of Britain on New

Zealand’s police is undeniable, as the strategic chaos created by the humiliating

capitulation of France deeply disturbed the New Zealand government. This unease was

reflected by the National Service Department in 1945, “The strategic emergency caused

by the fall of France in 1940 called for every possible assistance in actual combat

zones.”

Given the yet unseen Japanese aggression towards New Zealand, the acute

threat Germany posed to Britain itself formed the backbone of the New Zealand

government’s military response, also viewed in hindsight by the National Service

Department, this time in 1943, “At this time the dominant factors of the war situation had

been the collapse of France and the Battle of Britain. There was an immediate need to

dispatch troops overseas to save what might have been a world-wide disaster. This urgent

call was felt throughout New Zealand, and the whole spirit of the Dominion’s war effort

Ibid, 401.

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER THE NATIONAL SERVICE

EMERGENCY REGULATIONS 1940, AND THE INDUSTRIAL MAN-POWER EMERGENCY REGULATIONS 1944,

Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1945 Session I, H-11a, Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/parliamentary/AJHR1945-I.2.2.5.12

reflected the strategic emergency of England and the Empire as a whole.”

Despite the

urgency of the war in Europe, months leading up to the establishment of the Home Guard

saw North Island, and by extension New Zealand itself, directly threatened by the

otherwise distant war abroad in Europe.

New Zealanders undoubtedly woke up with horror on the morning of June 20,

1940, hearing the news that the liner Niagara had been sunk just a few hours after

leaving Auckland destined for Vancouver, the culprit of its sinking being a mine laid just

outside the Auckland waters.

The New Zealand Herald noted miraculously there was no

loss of life and all passengers and crew aboard had been rescued with considerable

assistance, alongside the discovery of a second mine off Auckland.

Addressing the

visible security concerns, Prime Minister Peter Frasier attempted to allay New Zealanders

fears, declaring that such mines were not unusual and provided convincing evidence the

sinking was not a deliberate act of “internal treachery.”

Regardless, the following day

saw outward shipping exceeding five hundred tons from the Port of Auckland closed in

lieu of security concerns due to the potential threat of unseen costal mines.

emotional editorial following the sinking appearing in the New Zealand Herald

eloquently spoke to its implication on New Zealand itself: “The next thought, the only

NATIONAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT REPORTS OF THE NATIONAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT AND OF THE

INDUSTRIAL MAN-POWER DIVISION ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE NATIONAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT UNDER

THE NATIONAL SERVICE EMERGENCY REGULATIONS 1940, THE EMERGENCY RESERVE CORPS

REGULATIONS 1941, AND THE INDUSTRIAL MAN-POWER EMERGENCY REGULATIONS 1942, Appendix to

the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1943 Session I, H-11a. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/parliamentary/AJHR1944-I.2.2.5.12

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23687, 20 June 1940, Page 11. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19400620.2.81.1

Ibid, 11.

Ibid, 11

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23688, 21 June 1940, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19400621.2.73

one that counts, is that the grim fact of war has been brought to the very gateway of New

Zea-land…New Zealand is at war, and in war there is no half-way house. These islands

are enemy territory to a ruthless, daring and resourceful foe, and are open to attack by any

means offering.”

The editorial further implored New Zealanders to dive headfirst into

the war, with the sinking galvanizing the nation to action against an unrelenting enemy,

“Realisation of that fact should spur the country first to cast into the Empire pool every

resource that can usefully be contributed, and second, to look for its own ramparts. This

is the plain lesson of the war brought near by the loss of the Niagara.”

This loss would resonate in the coming months, as the auxiliary cruisers such as

the German Orion operated off the coast of New Zealand, the aforementioned vessel

sinking the Turakina on August 20, 1940, near Cape Egmont and well within New

Zealand’s own territorial waters.

The New Zealand government undoubtedly kept these

incidences in mind in the closing weeks of August 1940, as the decision was made to

form a home defense force upon which New Zealanders could actively contribute

towards, a volunteer organization that would give New Zealanders a sense of purpose and

serve as a deterrent towards any further foreign aggression.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23687, 20 June 1940, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19400620.2.37

Ibid, 8.

Ashley Jackson, The British Empire and the Second World War, 486

CHAPTER 2 – MID-LATE 1940: THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE HOME GUARD

AND INITIAL RECRUITMENT EFFORTS

This chapter concerns the formation of the Home Guard from August 1940 to the

end of December 1940, specifically focusing on recruitment efforts targeting New

Zealanders not eligible for service overseas to join the Home Guard. Additionally, the

positions of several government officials towards the Home Guard and its recruitment

drive, encompassing primarily patriotic rhetoric, are unveiled for the first time in New

Zealand’s newspapers. Finally, the initial opinions of prominent government officials and

New Zealander citizens, towards the recruitment drive and the Home Guard itself, are

displayed within the pages of early newspaper coverage of the fledgling defensive

organization over the course of its turbulent first six months.

Led by the Governor-General of New Zealand, the Executive Council enacted the

Emergency Reserve Corps Regulations 1940 to govern the establishment of a plan for

home defense. The regulations founded the Emergency Reserve Corps, the umbrella

organization made up of the Home Guard, Emergency Precautions Organizations, The

Women’s War Service Auxiliary, and other necessary organizations approved by the

Minister of National Service.

The Minister of National Service, the Hon. R. Semple,

governed these organizations, although local authorities under Semple’s oversight would

primarily operate the decision-making process. Regulation Five, Six, Seven, and Eight

New Zealand Police Gazette, Volume LXV, Issue 35, 28 August 1940, Page 694. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/periodicals/NZPG19400828.2.13

dealt specifically with the operation of the Home Guard, and most importantly of all,

established its official duties with regards to the wartime defense of New Zealand.

The duties of the Home Guard formally consisted of three critical elements. First,

the promotion of physical and military fitness along with efficiency of its members.

Second, providing various functions such as guarding the coastline, sentry duties, pickets

and patrols, and guarding other strategically important areas. Finally, organizing its own

members into specialist positions or other expert duties, for the purpose of cooperating

with any branch of armed forces or emergency precaution organization that necessitated

the involvement of the Home Guard.

In addition, Regulation Eight, established by direct

order of the Governor-General, could formally mobilize the Home Guard for active

military defense service.

While not directly referenced in the aforementioned

regulations, the Home Guard fell below the Territorial Force, itself the reserve of the

New Zealand Army, in the greater defensive hierarchy of New Zealand.

To address the

needs of the nation, the Home Guard was divided into subdivisions with a chain of

command stretching from the Minister of National Service down to Dominion

Commander, District Commander, and Area Commanders in charge of their specific

locality.

Within each locality, an established committee would govern specific elements,

such as parades, provisioning, places of assembly, and matters not explicitly mentioned

New Zealand Police Gazette, Volume LXV, Issue 35, 28 August 1940, Page 694. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/periodicacommanderZPG19400828.2.13

Ibid, 694.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23738, 19 August 1940, Page 9. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19400819.2.71

Ibid, 694.

in the regulations.

Enrollment in the Home Guard, for males over the age of sixteen, was

as simple as signing a form and swearing an oath of allegiance in front of a designated

official, such as a commissioned officer, subdivision commander, or justice of the peace.

Upon completion of the form and swearing of the oath, the member became an official

member of the Home Guard subject to the orders of their commanders and other officers.

With these regulations formally adopted by the New Zealand government, it

would still take some time for them to be put into practice across New Zealand. Over the

following months in late 1940, the nation’s newspapers and citizens reacted to the

establishment of the Home Guard and the government’s scheme for national defense

amidst a determined recruiting drive. From the pages of the New Zealand Herald, the first

public coverage of the establishment of the Home Guard and the New Zealand

government’s defensive scheme emerged in August, 1940.

The New Zealand Herald and Press offered some of the first comprehensive

analysis of the government’s plan for home defense, dedicating articles on August 19,

1940, to the public broadcast by Prime Minister Peter Fraser and Minister Semple. The

New Zealand Herald concentrated its article on the wide-reaching impact of the

regulations with regards to the emergency precaution organizations, dedicating two

paragraphs on the Home Guard. While reiterating the Emergency Reserve Corps

Regulations to its subscribers, the New Zealand Herald noted that service in the Home

Guard was “entirely voluntary” and “enrollment of members of the guard would be made

Ibid, 694.

through local authorities.”

The article published by Press, by comparison, focused on

Minister Semple’s similar speech and the technical outline of the Home Guard under the

aforementioned regulations. However, Press took particular interest in Minister Semple’s

comments on Home Guard recruitment. “I feel confident,” said Minister Semple, “that

there is no need for me to make any appeal for physically fit men to join up with the

Home Guard when it is established in their districts. It is already abundantly evident that

there are thousands of people in New Zealand who have only been awaiting a lead of this

nature to enable them to take an active part in the war effort.”

The August 20, 1940 edition of the New Zealand Herald further detailed the

broadcast made by Minister Semple the previous night, with a specific focus on the

reactions of local Auckland union groups to the prospect of enrollment in the Home

Guard.

The New Zealand Herald broke down the speech given by Semple into a

concise summary: the framework of the Home Guard would be an opportunity for men to

train in their community, the organization would be similar to the army system, and the

drilling of members would be in the hands of the local leaders.

The paper emphasized to

its readers the added role of local Returned Soldiers’ Association chapters to drilling new

members in Auckland: “This is where the Returned Soldiers’ Association would be able

to pull its weight.”

In addition, the paper informed its readers that Minister Semple

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23738, 19 August 1940, Page 9. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19400819.2.71

Press, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23102, 19 August 1940, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19400819.2.39

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23739, 20 August 1940, Page 9. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19400820.2.89

Ibid, 9.

would begin visiting local areas to assist in the setting up of Home Guard committees,

alongside discussing the Home Guard with local officials and citizens. However,

Semple’s recruitment drive would be somewhat tempered, as the paper noted “It will be

early next month before they will be able to enroll members of the Home Guard.”

The Vice-President of the Farmers Union, A.C.A Sexton, displayed one notable

civilian reaction to Semple’s speech, declaring immediate action would follow the Prime

Minister’s words. Sexton observed that other members of the community, who had

advocated for an auxiliary defensive force, hoped that the government in Wellington

would not rush into creating the group without first consulting the knowledge of local

officials.

Sexton advocated to the paper’s readers that calling meetings in every possible

locality and forming those areas into military districts in conjunction with the army

would be an excellent course of action.

Where Mr. Sexton’s comments strike an

interesting chord is his opinion that the Home Guard should be in close cooperation with

the army. While technically under Regulation 5C, the Home Guard could be called to

assist His Majesty’s Forces, or be mobilized for national defense under the Defense Act

of 1909 and Regulation 8, it still functioned independently under the Emergency

Precaution Scheme and its own commanders. This position was later clarified by Minister

Semple to the Northern Advocate on August 28, 1940: “It would, in fact, be a civil army

that would be given training in such activities that it would be able to co-operate with the

army if called upon.”

Cooperation with the army functioned as a major point of

Ibid, 9.

Northern Advocate, 27 August 1940, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19400827.2.99

discussion between civilians and Home Guard members, this topic would later resurface

in 1941 when the proposition of absorbing the Home Guard into the army developed into

a major issue for the organization itself and the New Zealand government.

With enrollments in the Home Guard officially starting in September, Minister

Semple found himself addressing a variety of audiences, such as Labor Party meetings

and public town hall events. Wellington’s Evening Post documented one of his notable

appearances on October 3, 1940, at an address to the inter-branch committee of the Labor

Party, where Semple discussed the Home Guard in detail. Semple’s address opened with

the threat faced by New Zealand now that it was at war and in the middle of a “danger

zone” that required the nation to “fight themselves out” to survive. The Evening Post

stressed that due to these circumstances, Semple’s job was to “organize the 300,000 men

in New Zealand not eligible for overseas or territorial service” into a fighting force.

The

Evening Post discussed the specifics of Semple’s plan to organize the men of the Home

Guard into a fighting force with local terrain knowledge, learning how to fight, and how

to shoot should an invasion come. What stood out and warranted its own section, titled

“Cannot Survive Alone,” was Semple’s comments regarding New Zealand’s war

mentality and shared common ties with Great Britain.

The Evening Post viewed with interest Semple’s comments that anyone who

thought New Zealand could not be held without British aid “had something wrong with

their mentality” and that New Zealand’s working people had more to defend compared to

Ibid, 13.

any worldwide nation.

The Evening Post rounded out Semple’s speech by highlighting

his comments that members who joined the Home Guard would be trained by the

Physical Welfare organization, and that “young people that went through training would

emerge better for it” after their enrollment.

Semple’s somewhat insightful comments

apparently sought to highlight New Zealanders connections with Britain in the form of

imperial patriotism. His comment, of “We realize that if the Mother Country goes down,

we go down with her,” appealed to this same sense of common patriotism.

Indeed, the

clouds of war in the Pacific seemed to only be growing closer with the announcement

weeks earlier of the signing of the Tripartite between Germany, Italy, and the Japanese

Empire. The New Zealand Herald described the visible nervousness in New Zealand

surrounding the announcement of the pact. In weighing its options, the paper examined

the situation, “If the news should prove to be correct, its implications will call for the

most serious examination. Japan’s alliance with Britain’s enemies does not put Japan at

war with Britain, although it must increase the risk of such a development. It is

suggested, in fact, that the pact provides against Japan’s entrance into the European

war.”

The effectiveness of Semple’s patriotic rhetoric would remain to be seen in the

coming months, with the figures from the initial Home Guard recruitment offering a

clearer picture of his impact.

Ibid, 13.

Evening Post, Volume c, Issue 82, 3 October 1940, Page 13. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19401003.2.136

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23773, 28 September 1940, Page 10. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19400928.2.44

With the government's recruiting drive now underway, New Zealanders

motivation to join the Home Guard increased with the closing of reserve enlistment

opportunities in November 1940. The Northern Advocate from Whangarei published the

story on November 19, 1940 via a distance report from Wellington by the Press

Association.

Reporting on a formal announcement by the Minister for Defense, the

Hon. Fred Jones, the Northern Advocate informed its readers that the government would

no longer be accepting Class II enlistments for the National Military Reserve.

This

report brought added significance, as the Home Guard now remained the only viable

option for those seeking to aid the New Zealand war effort. The Northern Advocate

contemplated, that even though various horseback units had been deployed to defend

their assigned communities, there remained a large section of coastline that was open to

the opportunity of invasion by New Zealand’s enemies. Jones employed a very specific

pitch to aid in his effort to recruit additional men to the Home Guard, by focusing on

returned soldiers that had not enlisted in the National Military Reserve. By framing their

contributions as instructors and leaders, Jones sought to convince returned soldiers that,

even though the Home Guard was not the only option for them, it would nonetheless be

an excellent choice.

What drew the attention of the Northern Advocate’s editors, however, was the

comment Jones expressed as a representative of the government on the role of the Home

Guard in an emergency. The Home Guard, he expanded, would not “form part of the

Northern Advocate, 19 November 1940, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19401119.2.120

Ibid, 8.

military forces at this stage,” but “should it be necessary…units or sub-units of the Home

Guard would be absorbed into the army.”

This draws an interesting parallel to the

comments of A.C.A Sexton, who, in the months before, had advocated for closer

cooperation with the army. While this cooperation through absorption was only

warranted in the event of an emergency, the specific recruitment of returned military

soldiers to aid in the development of the Home Guard demonstrated non-emergency

cooperation occurring nonetheless.

While Minister Jones carried out his own form of recruitment, Minister Semple

was in the midst of his own patriotic drive across the nation. In addition to his national

radio broadcasts drumming up support for the Home Guard, Semple appeared at multiple

town hall meetings across New Zealand. Attempting to speak directly and personally to

citizens he sought to recruit into the Home Guard, these meetings drew responses from

citizens in published media. In the same manner in which government ministers Semple

and Jones used New Zealand’s media to voice support for the Home Guard, the citizens

of New Zealand found a common forum in published media to express their support,

advice, and even criticism of the Home Guard.

In the closing days of November 1940, Semple spoke to a town hall meeting in

Auckland in a manner similar to his speech delivered in Wellington the previous month.

This meeting was not documented directly by the New Zealand Herald, but instead

described by a citizen attendee named Stanley Fowler. He had deemed the message

impactful enough to write to the New Zealand Herald, his thoughts appearing in print on

Ibid, 8.

November 30, 1940.

Fowler expressed his approval of the speech given by Semple, and

gave a specific reference to Semple’s comments on the necessity of a Home Guard of

volunteers. Fowler implored the editor and readers that if, “The potential dangers are so

great…that only a compulsory Home Guard will meet the need…an organization of this

kind will allow every man to take his part in defense.”

A solution in the manner

provided by Fowler would certainly provide a remedy to the recruiting situation the New

Zealand government found itself in December 1940, one that appeared to be troublesome.

In December 1940, the work of the past four months by the New Zealand

government to convince New Zealanders of the Home Guard’s value became known. The

New Zealand Herald reported on the recruiting situation in Auckland on December 12,

1940, at a meeting led by Sir Ernest Davis, the chairman of the Auckland Home Guard

Committee. The New Zealand Herald led its article with an emboldened title

proclaiming, “Only 1000 City Men…Committee Disappointed.” The paper described the

reaction of Davis to the numbers as “apathy was inexplicable in view of the potential

dangers in which the country was faced” in addition to a sense of disbelief.

Representing the Auckland Home Guard Committee, Davis stated to the New Zealand

Herald that both its own planning and the Home Guard defensive scheme satisfied the

Home Guard committee.

The New Zealand Herald reflected on Davis’s statement to its readers: that the

response to the Home Guard enrollment had been poor, efforts would likely redouble to

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23827, 30 November 1940, Page 14. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19401130.2.133.9

Ibid, 14.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23837, 12 December 1940, Page 12. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19401212.2.103

recruit more members, and could include a publicity campaign directed towards potential

recruits. The numbers stated by the committee were truly disheartening, with only one-

thousand enlistments coming from the city of Auckland itself, and a meager four-hundred

recruits from the surrounding countryside.

The appeal of the committee to recruit

another one-thousand guardsmen by the following week, in light of the aforementioned

one-hundred recruits enlisted a day, seems to have been a lofty goal for the Auckland

Home Guard committee. The New Zealand Herald noted with interest that the committee

declared its indebtedness to the Women’s National Service Corps, Women’s War Service

Auxiliary, and Justices of the Peace for their support in the recruitment campaign. The

work of these defensive services in assisting Home Guard recruitment, along with the

poor number turnout in Auckland, brings serious doubts on the supposed “planning and

defensive preparations” on behalf of the Home Guard as a national organization. A closer

look at why recruitment was struggling, is visible with the reactions of local potential

Home Guard recruits in suburban and town hall meetings in the final weeks of December.

These reactions were carefully recorded by the New Zealand Herald through multiple

independent accounts published in the same article on December 12, 1940.

At an evening meeting of local Otahuhu railwaymen interested in joining the

Home Guard, a flyer circulated by the government during the recruitment effort delivered

a contradictory message to its readers. The letter had stated to the railwaymen that their

work constituted a sufficient level of importance to warrant continuing, despite any

national emergency. The clarifying question asked to Davis concerning the flyer itself,

Ibid, 12.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23837, 12 December 1940, Page 12. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19401212.2.103

received a response from the chairman that “he had not heard of the flyer previously” and

that he would figure out the information immediately. This comment drew a strong

reaction of surprised laughter from the crowd of railwaymen, who then expressed their

puzzlement at the minister’s confused answer.

This blunder on the part of the New

Zealand government may have turned some Home Guard members away, but considering

the New Zealand Herald noted large attendance at the meeting, it is clear that within town

halls, there evidently was support for the Home Guard from New Zealanders.

New Zealander’s initiative with home defense was demonstrated in one bizarre

example, when local confusion in another flyer came to a head in the subdivision of

Waikato. Where an already established organization called the Waikato Mobile Force had

existed for some time before establishment of the Home Guard. The enthusiasm of the

members of the mobile force was something that the New Zealand government tried to

capitalize on by encouraging them to join the Home Guard. The New Zealand Herald

remarked that General Sir Andrew Russel had attempted to clarify the confusion felt by

mobile force members the month previously. However, this incident led to demands for a

statement from the Minister of National Service on the perplexing situation.

On the contrary to this confusion in the countryside, various other town hall

events demonstrated the results of the New Zealand government’s recruitment drive.

Meetings throughout Auckland subdivisions implied to yield encouraging recruitment

numbers, especially in the face of the government’s failure to recruit a substantial number

Ibid, 12.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23837, 12 December 1940, Page 12. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19401212.2.103

of guardsmen. A town hall meeting in the suburb of Papatoetoe received fifty new

recruits, while in Mount Albert forty of the one-hundred fifty attendees enlisted

immediately, and in Mount Eden forty-five citizens enlisted in the Home Guard.

These

numbers had surpassed the daily average of one-hundred members reported earlier,

although it was not immediately clear if this trend would last, especially in light of the

very recent deficit of Home Guard recruits Sir Ernest Davis had dealt with in Auckland.

Valid concerns among New Zealanders regarding Home Guard recruitment

remained present as 1940 drew to a close, but these concerns were not limited to only

recruitment, and expanded to more visible issues pertaining to the guardsmen themselves.

The perception of the Home Guard was also beginning to take shape publically in these

newspapers, ranging from a patriotic organization spurred on by an eager government, to

a difference perception of governmental officials unable to respond to basic questions

concerning the operation of the Home Guard, the latter very amusing to New Zealanders.

As the Home Guard took a more definite physical shape outside of formal regulations,

the voices of New Zealand’s citizens in this discussion grew ever louder, as greater issues

such as rifle impressment and army incorporation joined the fray in this blossoming

national conversation regarding the Home Guard. Moreover, the realistic military

capability of the Home Guard would be seen more visibly, as issues over arming the

Home Guard would dominate New Zealand’s newspaper pages the following year,

alongside governmental officials and Home Guard officers offering their own thoughts.

Ibid, 12.

CHAPTER 3 – EARLY-MID 1941: RIFLES, COL. ALDRED, AND MINISTER

SEMPLE: THE INCORPORATION OF THE HOME GUARD INTO THE ARMY

This chapter will analyze the heated discussion over the course of the first six

months pertaining to the issues of arming the Home Guard. Additionally, the willingness

of the New Zealand government to exercise its authority, to ensure the Home Guard had

weapons to defend against Japanese invasion, would be cast into serious doubt through its

apathetic response. The response was covered in extensive detail though newspapers,

many of them providing a platform for New Zealanders to decry governmental apathy, in

addition to criticizing governmental officials such as Minister Semple for their treatment

of the Home Guard. Appealing to New Zealanders' shared sense of common defense

proved to be a challenge for the government, which seemed willing to display its

authority with regard to the war effort, yet sought to appeal to citizens to contribute

willingly in areas where the government was unable to provide the means. Finally, these

published debates would expand to matters of formal organization and cooperation as the

Home Guard grew in size over the course of 1941.

In November 1940, Col. M. Aldred, the Home Guard Commander for the

Auckland District, journeyed to Papakura to speak to community members interested in

joining the Home Guard.

Interestingly, Aldred’s address carried the same sentiments

Minister Semple had employed: working to stir the patriotic feelings of those present, and

Franklin Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 135, 22 November 1940, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/FRTIM19401122.2.42

emphasizing the very real danger New Zealand faced as a nation from invasion. These

comments were noted by the Franklin Times, which had dispatched one of its reporters to

cover the Home Guard meeting, in short paragraph bulletins focusing on key elements of

Aldred’s speech. Whether by sheer coincidence or deliberate act, Col. Aldred reinforced

the yet to be seen December 1940 appeals of Sir Ernest Davis and the Auckland Home

Guard Committee. Aldred, responding to a question on the importance the Home Guard’s

manpower: “The more men that join up, the less likely any enemy is going to come to our

shores. The more we defend, and let the enemy know we are going to defend New

Zealand, the more likely he is to say ‘it’s not worth it.’ To stay out of the Home Guard

and refuse to defend your own country is simply asking the enemy to come here.”

Aldred’s tone captured immediate interest from the reporter from the Franklin

Times, who described the former’s address as, “straight from the shoulder com-mon

sense.” Aldred’s willingness to be forthright with responding to Home Guard questions

was tested later in the meeting, the concerns of one citizen regarding the availability of

rifles deemed important enough by the reporter from the Franklin Times to warrant its

own section, alongside a detailed response from Aldred on the urgent matter. Aldred’s

reply to the question of rifles for the Home Guard was tempered somewhat by a

reluctance to divulge sensitive wartime information, noted by the Franklin Times as “he

knew how many rifles were in New Zealand but he could not divulge the information.”

Aldred continued his answer by divulging, “there are 30,000 privately owned rifles in the

country and I am putting it up to the powers-that-be that these rifles should be made

available to the Home Guard...if a man won’t come into the Home Guard then we should

Ibid, 6.

get his ‘bally’ rifle.” This resounding ending to Aldred’s response was met by audible

cheers by present Papakura residents and general public, alongside a special notation of

their reactions by the reporter from the Franklin Times as the gathering ended.

Col.

Aldred’s discussion of rifles for the Home Guard at the Papakura could hardly have been

more relevant considering the state of rifle distribution. Only two days prior, readers of

the New Zealand Herald were greeted with what must have been a concerning image, a

picture taken by a New Zealand Herald photographer of members of the Hukerenui

Home Guard at assembly with the caption, “"NORTH AUCKLAND HOME GUARD:

Some of the 60 members of the Hukerenui Home Guard. They are drilling with sticks

until rifles are available."

Conversations such as Aldred’s with Papakura community

members offer one of the first calls by an individual, in Aldred’s case a Home Guard

officer, for decisive governmental action on this issue of rifles.

A Home Guard member under the pseudonym Signalman wrote to the New

Zealand Herald on February 6, 1941, in response to a long brewing Home Guard debate.

Signalman identified himself as the originator of the ongoing discussion, and wanted the

New Zealand Herald’s editor and readers to know that his only motive was to offer

constructive criticism.

Signalman immediately decried previous respondents for insisting

on “orthodox drill” for the Home Guard without giving any reason for why it should be

necessary. Signalman noted that a respondent’s suggestion that “a Home Guardsman

Ibid, 6.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23818, 20 November 1940, Page 11. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19401120.2.99.1

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23883, 6 February 1941, Page 11. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410206.2.119.4

Ibid, 11.

should be able to present arms” provided a purely ceremonial function, and that such

instruction offered nothing “appropriate to the Home Guard” in terms of useful combat

training.

Despite Signalman’s remarks in response to Home Guard observers, he

enunciated to the New Zealand Herald’s readers that his primary argument had not been

dealt with by anyone. Signalman asserted that if the Home Guard were called on, many

of the “specialist” jobs they sought to accomplish would have to be improvised, and to

counter such a deficiency, guardsmen should be assessed for their particular skills.

Each

man’s civilian trained profession could sort the guardsmen out: such as farmers handling

barbed wire, equestrians to establish transportation, and experienced workers to handle

high explosives. Signalman finished his statement with a strong declaration to his fellow

guardsmen, that by following this method, they could avoid the Home Guard becoming

“a pale imitation of the Territorial Force and National Military Reserve,” and instead be a

competent force to defend New Zealand.

Later that month, on February 27, 1941, Col. Aldred’s address in Papakura on the

issue of rifles for the Home Guard found new life with a published statement by Prime

Minister Peter Fraser. The Waikato Independent carried the story to its readers, taking

care to denote the urgency with which the Prime Minister used during his appeal. The

status of rifles in New Zealand has reached a critical stage, according to the Prime

Minister, “with the increased arms requirements of the continually joining numbers of

men joining up, it had been found impracticable to make an adequate supply available to

Ibid, 11.

the Home Guard.”

This lack of supply presents an explanation for Aldred’s hesitancy

to divulge information regarding government held available rifles. The Prime Minister

insisted rifles would be needed not only for practical fighting purposes but also to train

members of the Home Guard. In this regard, he was directing his appeal to rifle club

members and private firearms owners, to consider making their rifles available for use.

The Prime Minister spoke in an encouraging manner, making it clear he trusted New

Zealanders to respond to the government’s call for arms, “The government was

empowered to requisition rifles under war regulations, but I feel confident that all owners

who could would respond.” This included the issuance of amnesty from any police

action, to individuals owning rifles that could be considered illegal or subject to penalties,

“Under the circumstances, can assure you that action will not be taken against you.”

The Waikato Independent emphasized the conclusion of the Prime Minister’s overture to

rifle owners, one that echoed Col. Aldred’s statement months earlier, that “if they could

not lend their services, he would at least ask them to lend their rifles” to assist the Home

Guard’s efforts.

The Prime Minister’s plea to the public was not the only visible example of the

government’s solicitation to New Zealanders to contribute rifles for home defense.

Another notice had been published by the Opotiki News two weeks earlier to the south, in

Wanganui. Reflecting a statement made by the commanding officer of the Wanganui

Home Guard, General R.D Hardie, D.S.O, this bid was directed towards persons with

Waikato Independent, Volume XLI, Issue 3820, 24 February 1941, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAIKIN19410224.2.38

Ibid, 7.

unregistered firearms. This included a statement from Inspector J.A Dempsey of the

Wanganui Police declaring with regards to rifles changing hands under the Arms Act of

1920, “it was desired now to have all of these brought forward and registered as soon as

possible.” Hardie attempted to soothe the concerns of citizens that they would be

prosecuted for their firearms, he said according to the Opotiki News, “that the Home

Guard was in need of arms and ammunition, and no doubt many people would be willing

to hand unregister-ed rifles over the guard but were afraid of police action for having

them in their possession. The police had agreed not to prosecute anyone handing fire-

arms or ammunition to the Home Guard.”

In a fashion similar to Minister Semple’s

comments on August 19, 1940 to Press, and Prime Minister Fraser’s statement

documented by the Waikato Independent on February 27, 1941, General Hardie displayed

the same sense of calm that New Zealanders would step forward and do their duty

without having to be motivated otherwise.

Minister Semple displayed a remarkable frankness in working to assure the New

Zealand public the Home Guard was being taken seriously by the government, chronicled

through an interview by the Otago Daily Times during the minister’s visit to Invercargill

on March 5, 1941. The Otago Daily Times noted that there was no evidence yet for the

necessity of conscription, as enrollments in the Home Guard totaled “70,000, and within

the next few weeks it is expected membership will reach 100,000, a position regarded by

the authorities as very satisfactory

Representing the government in his capacity as

Opotiki News, Volume IV, Issue 254, 10 February 1941, Page 3. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OPNEWS19410210.2.27

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24549, 6 March 1941, Page 9. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19410306.2.102

Minister of National Service, Semple reiterated, “With 100,000 armed members of the

Home Guard in various parts of the country, and a strong force of organized territorials,

there will be a good defense organization in New Zealand.” The minister further

elaborated that no cost would be spared in preparing the nation for defense as, “the

prosecution of the war comes first, and the cost second, provided there is no

extravagance.”

While providing solid evidence the government was taking the Home Guard

seriously in its role as a defensive organization, the questionable ability of the

government to adequately provide for the Home Guard, in the same manner as the

aforementioned rifle issue, conjured a surprising admission of governmental uncertainty.

Demonstrated vividly through Minister Semple’s admission that to, “provide the men

with uniforms and equipment will be a problem, but everything possible is being done in

that direction.”

Semple’s reply that the government was having issues with arming and

equipping the Home Guard drew not only the interest of the Otago Daily Times, but the

nearby Lake Wakatip Mail. Both papers found a common theme not only through the

minister’s comment regarding uniforms and equipment, but a suggestion made that the

Home Guard should be equipped and cooperate fully with the army.

The Lake Wakatip Mail’s March 11, 1941, issue took a different stance compared

to the Otago Daily Times regarding the minister’s comments, instead examining his

answer to suggestions of conscription, alongside army cooperation, and even the

minister’s thoughts on the Home Guard. The paper detailed that the minister’s insistence

Ibid, 9.

that conscription was not necessary was a response to, “a question whether compul-sory

membership; as suggested in a letter forwarded to every municipal-ity by the Stratford

Borough Council, was under consideration by the government.”

The minister reiterated

that “each man was as important as the next,” and reinforced the government's position

that conscription for the Home Guard was not necessary at the moment. The Lake

Wakatip Mail observed with interest where the Otago Daily Times had not, the minister’s

complementary comments on the Home Guard, “These men are doing a real job of work,

and it would be impossible to defend the country without them. In addition to the Home

Guard there is a strong force of trained territorials and together they will make a good

defense organization.”

Comparisons to the training of the territorials blended into previous discussion of

army incorporation. The minister admitted that the Home Guard would “receive only

spasmodic training, whereas men to be drawn in the fifth ballot for territorial service

would receive a thorough and in-tensive training to equip them fully for any emergency.”

The Lake Wakatip Mail examined alongside the Otago Daily Times a suggestion that had

called for “members of the Home Guard to be drilled and equipped by the army

department to bring them to the highest standard of efficiency” This combination of drill,

army incorporation, and rifle issues would come to occupy the published thoughts of

anxious and increasingly vocal New Zealanders as 1941 advanced onward.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 4509, 11 March 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/LWM19410311.2.22

Ibid, 4.

The various responses of government officials to the aforementioned issues and a

lack of firm direction from the government did not go unnoticed by both the New

Zealand media and citizens and guardsmen alike. Only days after the Lake Wakatip Mail

detailed Minister Semple’s comments, the New Zealand Herald reported, with noticeable

worry, on the meeting of Home Guard subcommittees and members of the central

committee in Auckland on March 14, 1941. The committee members strongly vocalized,

“the view that the apathy of the government was killing the Home Guard movement”

alongside a frustration towards the New Zealand government for its apathetic stance.

This apathy was noticeable in the statistics of enrollment and distribution of Emergency

Precautions Scheme personnel in Auckland, which according to those present, consisted

of 18,000 persons enrolled, while the active duty Home Guard only contained 6,000

names “of whom only 60 per cent were effectives.”

This was in direct response to a government proposal to “withdraw men from the

ranks of the Home Guard men for specialist work, such as police auxiliaries, traffic

control, and other duties” that the assembled members protested would have “a serious

effect on the guard.” These citizens produced a resolution to the government in response

requesting that such auxiliaries not come from the Home Guard and instead “procure

them from volunteers in the emergency organization, excluding key and technical men,

with a view to them being trained specially for the tasks to be performed.”

This

pushback from New Zealanders offers a clear demonstration of this brewing frustration

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23914, 14 March 1941, Page 9. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410314.2.120

Ibid, 9.

by non-governmental citizens and Home Guard committee members alike, one that later

at the same meeting; would reach what can only be described as a boiling point.

The New Zealand Herald took an immediate interest in the proposed resolution

those present proposed to the government, one that clearly displayed their collective

frustration, “A resolution was put forward that the Government should be asked to state

whether it wanted the Home Guard to function or not.” This outpouring of frustration in

the original statement was tempered somewhat by a revision of the proposition to the

government, instead asking that the “associate-Minister of National Service. The Hon. D.

Wilson, to visit Auckland at the earliest pos-sible moment for the purpose of dis-cussing

with the central committee and sub-comittiees the Government’s attitude towards the

movement.”

This demand from those serving in the movement, and those actively

involved in coordinating it, for the government to be absolutely clear on its attitude

towards the Home Guard, found an eager outlet in some New Zealander’s editorials.

Under the pseudonym Home Guardsman, one member of the organization

criticized the recent regulations made to the original Emergency Reserve Corps

Regulations of 1940 to the New Zealand Herald on March 19, 1941. Referring to the

previous published March 11, 1941, article concerning the new powers granted to

Minister Semple, Home Guardsman loudly called out the hypocrisy of the new changes

in light of the original terms. The New Zealand Herald allotted Home Guardsman a

generous amount of space to voice his anger towards the Minister’s new powers,

“Change with changing circumstances is understood, but drastic breach of contract

Ibid, 9.

without consultation with those concerned is neither wise nor courteous, and we feel sure

is not in accord with the policy of proper authorities. No regulation or change should be

made that has the tendency to check enthusiasm or encourage apathy.”

This sense of apathy referenced by Sir Ernest Davis in December 1940 and now

by Home Guardsman in 1941, only seemed to be reinforced by the notices regarding the

provision of rifles to members of the Home Guard, indicating that this apathy was present

in other Home Guard circles aside from recruitment. The issuance of rifles in particular

offered the most striking example given the government’s recent encouragement of the

civilian population to lend their rifles to the government for usage by the Home Guard.

The Lake Wakatip Mail covered the address of Colonel W.I.K Jennings, staff officer of

Wellington Home Guard, to an assembled parade of guardsmen at Garrison Hall in which

he voiced encouragement and disappointment. The Lake Wakatip Mail described

Jennings' comments with clear curiosity given his stance towards the Home Guard:

“Colonel Jennings said the appeal for rifles had received a disappointing response. In an

effort to demonstrate the Home Guard’s appeal, owners of rifles in the Home Guard

learned they would have the use of their own rifles in the guard, and in the event of their

having more than one, they could nominate the use of the other rifles they possessed.”

Concerning the distribution of these firearms, Colonel Jennings, “advised owners

if not already members to join the Home Guard, or if unfit or over age, to hand over the

rifle or nominate it to a friend in the guard.”

Jennings did not dedicate his entire address

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23918, 19 March 1941, Page 10. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410319.2.131.2

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 4510, 18 March 1941, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/LWM19410318.2.13

Ibid, 2.

to illustrating his point further, with the Lake Wakatip Mail noting, “He expressed his

pleasure at the bearing of the local guardsmen and spoke in encouraging terms of the

possibilities of achieving something worthwhile in the defense of the country.”

Jennings' remarks offer an almost direct comparison to Col. Aldred’s statement in

Papakura on November 22, 1940, in working to drum up as much practical enthusiasm

for the Home Guard as possible, while bluntly noting the government’s urgent need for

rifles for the Home Guard for both training and practical usage.

The New Zealand Herald reported on March 20, 1941, the progress of the

distribution of rifles for the Home Guard in Wellington, an indicator both of the

government’s promises alongside the encouraged enthusiasm on the part of New

Zealanders. The paper opined that the authorities in Wellington had “issued 200 rifles to

members of the Home Guard in Wellington City and suburbs. These rifles are to be used

for drill purposes only and not to be employed in musketry. In addition, approximately 50

rifles which were handed in by private owners to the police have been issued to the Home

Guard.”

The demarcation of 200 rifles for training and not for active usage speaks

loudly regarding the state of rifles in the Home Guard, leaving a serious doubt on both

the adequate supply of rifles for the government, a statement Col. Aldred declined to

delve into, and the enthusiasm, or in this case, hesitancy, of New Zealanders to give up

their privately owned rifles.

Ibid, 2.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23919, 20 March 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410320.2.53

This hesitancy to participate in collective home defense efforts, alongside rifle

donations, found an extremely vocal critic in the Mayor of Hamilton, Mr. H.D. Caro,

whose incensed comments recorded by the New Zealand Herald at a Home Guard

enrollment meeting included, “Unless or until we get a bomb or two dropped on the

town, the people will not wake up to their obligations.” The New Zealand Herald noted

the mayor's exasperation as “what he described as the appalling apathy of people with

regard to defense measures, at a meeting held in East Hamilton last night” alongside a

poor attendance of “40 many of whom had already enrolled.” While Mayor Caro’s

statement that “the people of New Zealand were too well fed and cared for, and they had

become lazy and careless” was not shared by other government officials, frustration with

New Zealanders defense involvement would be tested significantly in the coming

months.

Despite this bleak outlook of New Zealanders defensive obligations, at least as

Mayor Caro’s fiery comments implied, there seemed to be a ray of hope with Home

Guard recruitment. Minister Semple’s announcement that Home Guard recruitment was

approaching the goal of 100,000 members was detailed through the New Zealand Herald

on March 25, 1941. Semple’s enthusiasm for this increase was clearly visible, “the

interest being shown all over the Dominion is very gratifying” giving special attention to

efforts at “Palmerston North, Dunedin, Hamilton, Rotorua, Napier, and Wellington.”

This contrasts interestingly with Mayor Caro’s comments in Hamilton only days before

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23920, 21 March 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410321.2.62

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23923, 25 March 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410325.2.42

Semple’s announcement, where it seemed recruitment was lacking in Hamilton. Semple

described the greatest increases in recruitment as, “the position is generally better in the

country districts than in the larger centres” but despite this urban areas such as

Wellington and even Auckland, with its document recruitment issues, recorded an

increase from 7,500 to 8635 members from January 31 to February 28.

The New Zealand Herald observed this increase was possible despite that

“Certain key men previously in the Home Guard had been transferred to the emergency

precautions services, as they were regarded as essential men in the main-tenance of

public services.”

This seems to have been an effrontery to the assembled Auckland

committee members and Home Guard subcommittees who, on March 14, 1941, had

submitted a resolution calling for the exact opposite. Despite optimistic recruitment

numbers, in his own address, Minister Jones reinforced Semple’s comments on March 6,

1941 in stating provisioning of Home Guard uniforms would be delayed due to overseas

commitments, somewhat dampening this surge of Home Guard positivity.

With the advent of April 1941, the outcome of the government’s appeal to New

Zealanders for serviceable rifles for the Home Guard fast approached a boiling point of

its own. The Ashburton Guardian deconstructed Minister Semple’s somewhat alarming

statement to its readers on April 2, 1941, as “the response to the appeal to owners of

serviceable .303 rifles to give them for use by the Home Guard had been so amazingly

Ibid, 6.

poor that he could see no alternative to impressment.”

In a more abbreviated manner

compared to the coverage by the Waikato Independent of Prime Minister’s statement on

February 24, 1941, the Ashburton Guardian made clear the sense of appeal by the

government again to New Zealanders through Semple’s paraphrased statement, “It was

necessary to have the rifles in the interests of the defense of the country.” This would be

accomplished through impressment of private rifles from New Zealanders, “when

circumstances warranted, the rifles would be returned to owners, and if loss or damage

occurred the owners would be compensated.”

Coverage such as this from New

Zealand’s newspapers displayed an frustrated and somewhat nervous government

concerning the response to rifle impressment, the government’s attitude towards

impressment resembling the enactment of a last ditch effort, due to civilian apathy.

Impressment seemed inevitable with additional coverage from the Gisborne

Herald on April 23, 1941 confirming a lackluster response, “So poor has been the

response to the Prime Minister’s appeal made in February for serviceable .303 rifles for

use by the Home Guard that so far only 50 have been handed in at police stations

throughout the Auckland police district.”

This number exactly matched the amount of

rifles handed in to police stations in Wellington reported by the New Zealand Herald on

March 24, 1941, showcasing a dismal failure of the government’s effort to convince New

Zealanders to offer up their rifles for national defense. While ample commentary found

its way into New Zealand’s newspapers, patriotic rhetoric and calls for unity seemed to

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 61, Issue 146, 2 April 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG19410402.2.52

Ibid, 6.

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20537, 23 April 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19410423.2.34

do little to persuade New Zealanders to surrender their rifles for Home Guard usage.

While impressment coverage by New Zealand’s newspapers reaffirmed the seriousness of

the situation through documentation of government officials such as Minister Semple and

the Prime Minster, the response of the public remained surprisingly apathetic, as

evidenced by the number of rifles voluntarily surrendered despite a plethora of articles.

The first coverage of the impressment of rifles came from the Ashburton

Guardian at the start of the month on April 1, 1941. This limited coverage, however,

came in the form of the analysis of a letter received by area commander Captain E. A.

Cockroft from the National Service Department. The paraphrased letter vaguely detailed

the upcoming mechanism by which conscription would be enacted, as the Ashburton

Guardian commented, “Every Home Guardsman owning or possessing a rifle, states the

letter, must formally hand it in so that he may come under the compensation provisions of

the regulation, and, more-over, this will be necessary in order that all rifles will be under

effective control.” The Ashburton Guardian further described Cockroft’s remarks that

both Home Guardsmen in possession of rifles and civilians alike would each receive a

receipt, denoting their rifle had been impressed for defensive purposes.

Comprehensive coverage of this major announcement came from multiple papers

across North Island in the final weeks of April and beginning of May, through an

announcement by the Prime Minister concerning rifle impressment. The day following

Anzac Day saw shared coverage by the Auckland Star, Ashburton Guardian, and Evening

Post, on the aforementioned announcement, with each newspaper maintaining the core of

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 61, Issue 145, 1 April 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG19410401.2.24

the announcement, but varying greatly with their coverage of the more specific elements

of the Prime Minister’s announcement. The Auckland Star covered the basics of rifle

impressment: all .303 rifles and parts were needed by the government, alongside

explanation of the government's reasoning, by noting “the impressment order covered all

privately-owned .303 rifles of all makes, and unserviceable rifles of this caliber should

also be handed in as it was quite possible they might be repaired.”

The Ashburton Guardian quickly followed behind the Auckland Star with its own

coverage in a more succinct manner compared to the other papers, drawing its readers

attention to the soon to be gazetted rifle impressment order. The Ashburton Guardian

focusing on the urgency of the Prime Minister’s message in its brief update to its readers.

Specifically, regarding swelling Home Guard ranks and the government’s failure to arm

them, “In existing circumstances it presented a major problem and that it was therefore

impera-tive that every rifle in the country should be made available to ensure that as far

as humanly possible the Home Guard would be adequately trained and equipped to meet

any situation that may arise.”

The Evening Post provided the most substantial coverage of the papers published

on April 26, 1941, beginning with the Prime Minister’s comments that “Mr Fraser stated

that the situation regarding the supply of rifles to the home defense forces had been

carefully considered and in light of existing circumstances the Government deemed it

Auckland Star, Volume LXXII, Issue 97, 26 April 1941, Page 3 (Supplement). Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19410426.2.211.52

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 61, Issue 165, 26 April 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG19410426.2.48

necessary to obtain the use of all privately owned .303 rifles.”

However, what caught

the attention of the Evening Post editors was the government's stance towards citizens

concerned with giving up their rifles, especially those in the Home Guard and needing

rifles for animal control, “Any applications for retention on these grounds or on the

ground of national interest will be investigated by competent department officers and will

receive careful consideration.”

In closing, the Evening Post stressed the Prime

Minister’s now familiar appeal to contribute their arms, “By doing this they will greatly

assist the Government and will be contributing towards the national war effort.”

Following the initial coverage by the Auckland Star, Ashburton Guardian, and

Evening Post, the news of the official call for the impressment of rifles traveled at

incredible speed through newspapers across the country. Almost all newspapers carried

the same sense of urgency to their readers, the matter of rifle impressment was of critical

importance and New Zealanders cooperation was not only needed, but now mandated by

the government. Many of the papers emphasized the Prime Minister’s assurance that “All

rifles impressed would be held on loan and would be returned in good order or be

replaced” alongside the Prime Minister’s plea that “urged all who had rifles in their

possession to take them to the nearest police station without delay.”

The advent of April 28, 1941 saw a large wave of published newspaper material

in light of the Prime Minister’s appeal, with the Evening Star, Gisborne Herald, Otago

Daily Times, New Zealand Herald, and Press all printing articles on rifle impressment,

Evening Post, Volume CXXXI, Issue 97, 26 April 1941, Page 10. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19410426.2.70

Ibid, 10.

alongside follow up articles in greater detail compared to their first bulletins, by both the

Auckland Star and Northern Advocate.

Many of the papers carefully reassured their

readers, their rifles would be on loan, and those seeking exceptions to the impressment

order, would each have their individual cases reviewed under careful consideration with

regards to the Minister’s judgment.

This first wave of published material was soon surpassed by an avalanche of

newspaper articles on May 3, 1941, detailing both the formal impressment order in

writing and directions from many newspapers to their readers on how to proceed with the

impressment process. The formal notice appeared in sections for both public notice and

advertising, with some newspapers taking out multiple articles to alert their readers to this

critical national defensive development. The long impressment order began with notable

governmental formality, uniformly repeated across New Zealand’s newspapers:

By notice published in the N.Z Gazette dated 1/5/41, pursuant to the Emergency

Reserve Corps Regulations, 1940 (Amendment No. 1). ALL PER-SONS

HAVING IN THEIR POSES-SION .303 RIFLES OF ANY MAKE, DESIGN OR

PATTERN, WHETHER SERVICEABLE OR UNSERVICE-ABLE, AND

WHETHER OWNED BY THEM OR BY SOME OTHER PER-SON, are

required to give up possession of such Rifles to the Government on loan for Home

Defence purposes on or before THE 15TH DAY OF MAY 1941.

Evening Star, Issue 23870, 28 April 1941, Page 10. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19410428.2.85 ;

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20540, 28 April 1941, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19410428.2.77;

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24592, 28 April 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19410428.2.37 ;

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23950, 28 April 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410428.2.49 ;

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23314, 28 April 1941, Page 10. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19410428.2.74 ;

Auckland Star, Volume LXXII, Issue 98, 28 April 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19410428.2.100 ;

Northern Advocate, 28 April 1941, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19410428.2.103

The entire text of the order appeared in multiple papers, with different sections

either in all capital letters or in lowercase, depending on editorial discretion. The Evening

Post, Evening Star, Press, Otago Daily Times, Gisborne Herald, Manawatu Standard,

Northern Advocate, and Ashburton Guardian all provided the full text of the order as

public notice on behalf of the government.

Many of the aforementioned newspapers

broke down the context of the order, informed their readers of the fast approaching May

15, 1941 compliance deadline, or provided information for local residents on compliance.

The Evening Star, Auckland Star, Manawatu Standard, and Northern Advocate each also

published short paragraphs directing their readers attention to their advertising columns,

before informing them further that registered owners would each be receiving individual

notices the following week.

The articles reinforced the Prime Minister's assertion that

failure to receive a notice did not excuse New Zealanders from compliance, alongside

Evening Post, Volume CXXXI, Issue 103, 3 May 1941, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19410503.2.18 ;

Evening Star, Issue 23875, 3 May 1941, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19410503.2.5.5 ;

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23319, 3 May 1941, Page 15. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19410503.2.89.4 ;

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24597, 3 May 1941, Page 1. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19410503.2.7.7 ;

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20545, 3 May 1941, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19410503.2.11.3 ;

Manawatu Standard, Volume LXI, Issue 130, 3 May 1941, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MS19410503.2.8.6 ;

Northern Advocate, 3 May 1941, Page 1. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19410503.2.2.6 ;

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 61, Issue 171, 3 May 1941, Page 1. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG19410503.2.3.3

Evening Star, Issue 23875, 3 May 1941, Page 7. Papers Past, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19410503.2.31 ;

Auckland Star, Volume LXXII, Issue 103, 3 May 1941, Page 8. Papers Past, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19410503.2.51 ;

Manawatu Standard, Volume LXI, Issue 130, 3 May 1941, Page 10. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MS19410503.2.84 ;

Northern Advocate, 3 May 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19410503.2.48

noting that all rifles whether owned by the person or not, serviceable or not, and

registered or not, would need to be turned in to the authorities by May 15. The New

Zealand Herald and Northern Advocate (now its third article on May 3 relating to

impressment) each published short bulletins informing the 1,000 owners of registered

rifles in the Auckland area they would soon be receiving their notices.

The Gisborne

Herald addressed the issuance of notices in Gisborne, while Press sorted the

technicalities of Home Guardsmen retaining their impressed rifles through a direct

enquiry to area commander Major D. S. Murchison, for further clarification from the

government.

The physical process of handing ones rifles in was relatively simple, the Gisborne

Herald described the four methods by which one could comply with the order:

“On or before May 15, 1941, you are required to either- “(1) Hand in the rifles or

rifles in your possession to the nearest police-station, if you have not already done

so; or “(2) Lodge with the nearest police officer a written application for leave to

retain posses-sion; or “(3) notify the police officer that you are an active member

of the Home Guard and desire to have exclusive use of your rifle; or “(4) if the

rifle is not now in your possession you should notify the local police officer of the

name and address of the person whom you have either trans-ferred or loaned it.”

With four options open for New Zealanders to demonstrate their compliance with

the impressment order, the dust began to settle after the sudden fury of published

newspaper articles. The days following the formal announcement and gazetting of the

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23955, 3 May 1941, Page 10. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410503.2.73 ;

Northern Advocate, 3 May 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19410503.2.45

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20545, 3 May 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19410503.2.43 ;

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23319, 3 May 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19410503.2.47

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20545, 3 May 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19410503.2.43

rifle impressment order saw the public begin to respond to the order, both in the form of

letters to the editor and compliance. Anonymous author “Common Sense'' wrote to the

New Zealand Herald on May 7, 1941 to provide their thoughts, establishing their

credentials as a west Auckland wife whose husband and brothers both owned rifles.

Common Sense declared “should there be any threat of inv-asion our rifles could be put

to much better use in the hands of the men who have been using them for years than in

other hands.” After offering her thoughts that the country should be defended from both

coasts by men familiar with the terrain, Common Sense expressed her hope that farmers'

usage of rifles to euthanize sick or injured animals would be taken into account, “that the

Government’s impress-ment scheme will not be applied without due consideration.”

As the public's response to the impressment order now began to take on steam, the

Manawatu Standard provided commentary on Palmerston North’s progress on May 8,

1941. The article opened optimistically: “There has been a fair response to date in

Palmerston North in the de-livery of .303 rifles to the police fol-lowing the issuing of the

impressment order, which was received by most owners on Monday. In all, over 1500

impressment notices were sent out.”

As to the quality of the rifles, the Manawatu

Standard dryly noted that “a wide variety of types has been received, some being in

excellent condition and others not as good.”

While the amount of notices sent out to

those residing in the area was concrete, the statistics of the number of rifles surrendered

were evidently still unknown.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23958, 7 May 1941, Page 13. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410507.2.129.6

Manawatu Standard, Volume LXI, Issue 134, 8 May 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MS19410508.2.28

Ibid, 6.

The Manawatu Standard attempted to explain this unknown factor as best it

could, “A large pro-portion of these rifles held in this po-lice district are in the country

and no reports have yet made up as to the number of rifles which have come in from

those areas to the district police stations.”

Communication delays and travel time could

also easily have slowed the response of many rifle owners and this was not limited to

owners, “The impressment orders had to be sent out with only two days’ notice and the

assistance of a number of typists from the departments of Public Service was co-opted.”

This hurried response to expedite impressment notices alongside the government’s short

turnaround deadline of May 15, 1941, presented a difficult quandary for New Zealanders.

Calling into question the government’s trust of its citizens given previous events,

alongside the urgency of rifles necessitating quick action on behalf of the government.

The Bay of Plenty Beacon offered a small insight into this question through its

own reporting on the progress of the rifle impressment order and citizens' reactions on

May 12, 1941. The local news section of the paper took a markedly different stance

compared to the informative style many of the aforementioned papers had chosen, instead

choosing to call out the behavior of citizens who had not surrendered their rifles. The Bay

of Plenty Beacon opened with reminding its readers, “Those people in the Whakatane

district who have in their possession rifles or a rifle are reminded these must be handed

into the local Police Station before May 15.”

This helpful attitude quickly shifted on the

very next line, calling out both the authorities and residents to the “fact that the circular

Ibid, 6.

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 4, Issue 304, 12 May 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/BPB19410512.2.14

issued did not make this request absolutely clear has been responsible has been

responsible for the re-sponse being very slow, and also has left what some selfish people

consider a loophole to hold their rifles so that they may continue to enjoy shooting for

sport.”

The Bay of Plenty Beacon then took it upon itself to explain the circumstances

that allowed an active Home Guardsman to keep their rifle and the application that

needed to also be filled out.

The Bay of Plenty Beacon offers a sharp retort to the smooth progress noted by

the Manawatu Standard, albeit in a different region: laying blame on both the authorities

for not making their instructions clear and selfish residents of Whakatane District not

willing to comply with the order. Apathy on the part of these “selfish people” and neglect

of the impressment order offers an interesting example that would be tested across New

Zealand in the following weeks. One that would offer the most compelling evidence yet

of the success or failure of the government’s bold plan to galvanize New Zealanders

behind a common ideal of home defense.

As the May 15, 1941, impressment deadline drew within the 72-hour mark, the

Ellesmere Guardian appealed to its readers on May 13, 1941, to turn in their rifles to the

police. The Ellesmere Guardian took on an encouraging tone in light of the coming

deadline that contrasted notably with the Bay of Plenty Beacon: “In connexion with the

impress-ment of .303 rifles, ordered by the Government, it would greatly assist the police

if owners would deliver their rifles to the Police Stations at Leeston or Southbridge as

Ibid, 4.

soon as possible. It is understood that any owner of a .303 rifle who is a member of the

Home Guard will have his own weapon handed back to him for use as a guardsman.”

The following day the Gisborne Herald detailed the announcement that rifles

owned by members of the Home Guard “may be re-issued to their owners on the

recommendation of the platoon and com-pany commanders, if approved by unit

commanders.” Stringent conditions followed the explanation, alongside commentary

from the Gisborne Herald that, “As far as possible, these wishes should be given effect

to, states the area commander’s memorandum.”

After dealing with these technicalities,

the Gisborne Herald described the state of impressment as being to the satisfaction of

local authorities: “‘The rifles are coming in quite well in Gisborne, but there are still a

few outstanding,’ said the officer in charge of the impressment of .303in. calibre rifles at

the Gisborne Police Station this morning.”

The article's closing paragraph gently

reminded readers of the Gisborne Herald, failure to turn in rifles by the deadline would

entail action “liable to be taken against persons holding outstanding rifles in their

possession.”

With the impressment deadline within 24 hours, the Ashburton Guardian offered

one final afternoon update on the progress within the city on May 14, 1941. Focusing on

the efforts by the Ashburton Police, the paper opened its article with an analysis of the

situation. “One hundred and fifty rifles,” it announced, “had been dealt with at the

Ellesmere Guardian, Volume LXII, Issue 37, 13 May 1941, Page 3. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EG19410513.2.11

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20554, 14 May 1941, Page 11. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19410514.2.147

Ibid, 11.

Ashburton Police Station under the impressment of .303 rifles up to early this

afternoon...One Hundred and eleven rifles have been actually handed in at the Police

Station, while the police have been no-tified that 38 have been dealt with by the unit

commanders of the Home Guard.”

This was followed by an appeal by Senior-Sergeant

J.F. Cleary to “persons who are not in the Home Guard but who desire to hand in their

rifles over to Home Guardsmen should first hand their weapons into the police station

and receive a receipt.”

This appeal was made to clear up the realization that if they did

so, the police would not have a formal record of their weapons and then be unable to

return them. Further details regarding the rifle nomination for the Home Guard were

provided by the Ashburton Guardian, demonstrating a hope for all rifles to be accounted

for before the deadline. As the deadline passed for the impressment of rifles on May 15,

1941, there still remained little tangible evidence to be seen from across the country of

New Zealanders compliance with the order, despite a bombardment of information in

New Zealand’s newspapers and persistent reminders from the New Zealand government.

Scattered evidence in Ashburton and Gisborne offered a small sample of New Zealanders

willingness to contribute under compliance orders before the deadline. In the months that

followed, this evidence can be plainly seen from newspapers across New Zealand,

expanding beyond Ashburton and Gisborne, alongside earlier contributions in Wellington

and Auckland well before the government’s formal announcement of impressment.

Following the wave of impressment notices sent out in Palmerston North, the

Manawatu Standard resumed its coverage of rifle impressment on May 19, 1941. Despite

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 61, Issue 180, 14 May 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG19410514.2.68

Ibid, 6.

eleven days having elapsed since its previous update, the Manawatu Standard remained

noticeably vague in its assessment of the situation:

The majority of the 1500 or more .303 rifle which were the subject of

impressment orders in the Palmerston North police district have now been handed

in. Apart from these are a number which are the subject of ap-peals to the

Minister of National Ser-vice, for under the regulation gov-erning the

impressment a rifle may be retained if it is required for the des-truction of deer or

of vermin, such as wild pigs. The returns from the coun-try police stations have

not yet been received, but 375 rifles have been handed in at Palmerston North.

The collection of 375 rifles hardly seems to fit the “majority of the 1500 or more

.303 rifles” the Manawatu Standard claimed were surrendered in response to the

impressment order, despite the still awaited returns from more rural districts and

exemptions. In the weeks that followed, the Opotiki News released its own update for

Gisborne that seemed much more optimistic: “Only a few rifles of .303in. Caliber remain

outstanding in Gisborne as a result of the impressment regulation, and the police are

making further enquiries regarding those arms. In the Gisborne police dis-trict 100 rifles

have not been hand-ed in, but of that number about 80 are registered in the names of

residents in Taneatua, Whakatane and Opotiki districts.”

Regardless of the lack of

statistics, the reporting from both the Manawatu Standard and Opotiki News

demonstrated that New Zealanders were now, grudgingly or willingly, complying in

notable numbers with the impressment order, as the Northern Advocate would soon

confirm on its own.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LXI, Issue 143, 19 May 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MS19410519.2.34

Opotiki News, Volume IV, Issue 293, 3 June 1941, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OPNEWS19410603.2.10

The Northern Advocate added its coverage to the impressment statistics on June

10, 1941, now a full month after the government deadline had passed. The paper reported

that, under the “News of the Day” column: “Under the impressment regula-tions, 450

rifles from the Whangarei police district, which embraces the whole of Northland, have

been sur-rendered. Twenty owners have made application for retention of their rifles,

principally for the destruction of deer, wild pigs, and wild cattle, and they have been

forwarded to the Director of National Service for con-sideration. Home Guardsmen own-

ing rifles have surrendered them, but have had them returned.”

Interestingly, is direct mention by The Northern Advocate of New Zealanders that

made applications for exemption to the impressment order, an overlooked aspect in other

impressment articles. New Zealanders such as “Common Sense'' who wrote to the New

Zealand Herald on May 7, 1941, and the unnamed twenty owners who applied for

consideration of their exemptions, as noted by The Northern Advocate, offer perhaps the

most intriguing element of rifle impressment. The need to retain rifles to defend New

Zealanders livestock and deter wild animals is clearly visible, however, there remains

very little statistical information regarding the success or failure of their applications to

the Director of National Service. Despite this lack of statistical evidence, some New

Zealanders evidently desired to keep their weapons in private possession, be it for

livestock means, or as the Bay of Plenty Beacon grumbled, “selfish people consider a

loophole to hold their rifles so that they may continue to enjoy shooting for sport.”

One

Northern Advocate, 10 June 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19410610.2.41

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 4, Issue 304, 12 May 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/BPB19410512.2.14

New Zealander broke this mold on June 16, 1941, choosing a very radical response to

rifle impressment.

Keir Hardie Samms’ radical action in violation of the impressment order

captivated the attention of the Auckland Star, Evening Post, New Zealand Herald,

Northern Advocate, Manawatu Standard and Gisborne Herald, featuring as a story of

national significance with coverage across New Zealand on June 16-19, 1941.

The

incident began when Samms responded to the government, writing to the authorities

notifying them he had destroyed his .303 rifle in anticipation of the rifle impressment

order being issued across New Zealand. The incident was immediately prosecuted under

Sub-Inspector E.T.C. Turner of the Christchurch Police, who noted the government

contacted Samms after issuance of his impressment notice.

Samms claimed in his

defense, “he had not been aware that he had to notify the de-struction of the rifle. He did

so im-mediately [after] the impressment notice was sent.”

Turner in a statement to the

press described, “Inquiries were made and Samms made a statement to the police in

which he said that, be-cause of his holding conscientious views, he had anticipated the

im-pressment notice and destroyed the rifle, throwing it in pieces into the Heathcote

Auckland Star, Volume LXXII, Issue 140, 16 June 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19410616.2.102 ;

Evening Post, Volume CXXXI, Issue 140, 16 June 1941, Page 3. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19410616.2.10 ;

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23992, 16 June 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410616.2.46 ;

Manawatu Standard, Volume LXI, Issue 167, 17 June 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MS19410617.2.73 ;

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20585, 19 June 1941, Page 3. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19410619.2.16

Ibid, 3.

River.”

Simms’ arraignment in court received detailed coverage, as every newspaper

eagerly awaited the government’s response to a blatant disregard for New Zealanders to

unify behind home defense.

Keir Hardie Simms’ day in court found him fined 20s and costs for the destruction

of his rifle, a small sum considering the impact he immediately made through national

newspapers.

While Simms did not face prison time for his actions of particular

significance is the exact charge on which Simms was arraigned, not for having destroyed

his rifle, but instead for having failed to notify the authorized arms officer of the

destruction of his rifle, a very different matter. Simms could easily have been made an

example of by the government, the establishment of a much sterner financial penalty for

the destruction of an impressed rifle, would have offered stark warning to any New

Zealanders who considered following Keir Hardie Simms bold action. Nonetheless,

Simms exceptional case, of a New Zealander openly refusing to comply with the

impressment order through the destruction of his rifle, is certainly not the standard by

which impressment refusal can be judged.

New Zealanders in July 1941 again offered their thoughts in print on

impressment, although with a different stance compared to Common Sense, now

advocating for greater effort and contribution on the part of those who may have slipped

underneath the nose of the order’s text. In addition to the words of its citizens, the acting-

Prime Minister and the government offered its own commentary on the rifle impressment

Northern Advocate, 16 June 1941, Page 3. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19410616.2.20

Evening Post, Volume CXXXI, Issue 140, 16 June 1941, Page 3. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19410616.2.10

issue through official statements to the media concerning the Home Guard, increasing in

frequency as the winter months passed by. Although the rifle impressment order had

captivated New Zealand’s newspapers for the previous two months, the issue of

recruitment for the Home Guard still quietly simmered in the background. Furthermore,

two new divisive issues would dominate the national stage for the foreseeable future:

equipment for the Home Guard and the volatile army incorporation issue.

The arrival of July 5, 1941 marked almost two months since the formal deadline

for New Zealanders to surrender their rifles under the impressment order had passed.

Although the impressment issue certainly did not receive active monitoring in New

Zealand’s domestic print media, citizens still sought to make their voices heard. “7 M.M”

represented one of these concerned citizens seeking to add to the continuing impressment

conversation in writing to Press. 7 M.M opened his letter to Press affirming the

contributions of his fellow citizens, before launching into exposing the .303 rifles left

untouched by the order “All patriotic owners of .303 rifles were willing to hand in their

arms without complaint, believing that a shortage of weapons was preventing the arming

of the Home Guard. It now transpires that the order applied only to private owners: arms

dealers were and are exempted. These dealers throughout the Dominion have a larger

number of rifles on their shelves which are almost without exception standard military

.303’s, with military sights, magazines, safety catches, etc.”

7 M.M’s frustration soon became plainly visible regarding the government’s

stance towards impressment, “Inquiry from the Police Department elicits information that

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23373, 5 July 1941, Page 5. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19410705.2.29.3

if one were to now buy a .303 weapon from the commandeered stocks of the deal-ers, one

would have to hand it in, under the order of impressment, This makes it seem that the

Home Guard is still short of rifles; but, if that is so, why not impress the dealers’

rifles?”

Attacking what they believed to be exemptions to impressment order, 7 M.M

continued their barrage, “Perhaps the powers dear an out-cry of “confiscation” from an

organised body of businessmen (con-trasted with unorganized citizens) and would sooner

private persons footed the bill. Against this, the police say that it is unlikely that a permit

to buy a .303 would be issued.”

7 M.M’s grew even more critical of the government, ending with an attack on the

specifics of the impressment order and the government's stance towards private owners,

“Perhaps there is an objection to pri-vate persons owning firearms; but, if so, why are

other high-power arm, such as 7 m.m. or .250 calibre, allowed?”

Decrying the

technical confusion 7 M.M concluded, “Truly the policy of the authorities is a mystery or

a muddle. The muddle is illustrated by the example of the .303 savage rifle. Although this

wea-pon cannot use .303 military ammuni-tion, it is nevertheless included in the order.”

This supposed sense of inequality among citizens and business owners regarding

impressment was not limited to 7 M.M, and within days a second citizen wrote to Press

to express their own thoughts on the government’s confusing impressment position.

On July 8, 1941, another New Zealander, under the pseudonym “Army Rifle,”

expressed an extremely vocal agreement with the earlier statement made by 7 M.M:

Ibid, 5.

“‘7mm’s’ letter exposes the ridiculous and unfair position caused by the impressment of

rifles. It is ridiculous that rifles should remain in dealers’ hands if the Home Guard needs

them, particularly if, as ‘7mm’ states, non-standard arms have been issued to guards.”

Army Rifle expanded this sense of inequality to those who used their rifles to keep deer

and other pests away, alongside advocating for weapons instructors, “It is unfair to the

Army instructor who has to teach rifle shooting to men issued with bolt ac-tions, lever

actions, and single shot rifles while the genuine article lies idle on the dealers shelf.”

The frustrations of Army Rifle and 7 M.M directed at the government appeared to be a

shot in the dark the government would not respond to directly, however, evidence

demonstrating these complaints influenced a policy change are clearly visible.

The following day on July 9, 1941 the Patea Mail excitedly covered the

announcement by the acting-Prime Minister the Hon. W. Nash, regarding improvements

for the Home Guard. The Patea Mail focused on the statement by the acting-Prime

Minister, paraphrasing the majority of his comments for its readers relating to the Home

Guard, “Mr. Nash said the impressment of privately-owned rifles had been except-ionally

valuable to the Home Guard movement, and, in order to enable full use of the weapons to

be secured at the earliest possible moment, arrangements had been made for the

inspection and repair of the impressed rifles to be car-ried out by private gunsmith firms

throughout the Dominion.”

The impressment situation seemed to only improve further

with the declaration by Nash that “adequate supplies of .303 and .22 ammunition is to be

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23375, 8 July 1941, Page 10. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19410708.2.85.7

Ibid, 10.

Patea Mail, 9 July 1941, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PATM19410709.2.8

issued for Home Guard training, and immediate arrangements were being made for the

necessary quota to be released.” This release of ammunition, in tandem with additional

army rifles that were to soon be distributed by the army, offered immense promise for

improvement for the Home Guard’s arms shortage.

The Patea Mail commentary of Nash’s statement reverberated with almost

limitless potential regarding other Home Guard neglected elements, “From discussions

with the Home Guard authorities, the War Cabinet was convinced that supplies of boots,

rifles, and ammunition would give the greatest measure of satisfaction to members of the

Home Guard, as well as constituting very valuable assistance in training.”

However,

this statement by the acting-Prime Minister was not without fault. Despite this notable

and commendable effort, Nash confided to New Zealand's domestic print media that this

optimistic outlook was not without its own issues.

While the situation for the Home Guard was supposedly improving significantly,

the Patea Mail drew its readers attention to Nash’s comments regarding the government’s

reserves: “Mr. Nash added that he regretted that unforeseen demands on stocks of

material were continually rising, and it was utterly impossible at present to make any

definite prom-ise as to when any material issue could be looked for, but no stone was

being unturned to enable the promise of uniforms for the Home Guard to be kept with it

was humanly possible to do so.”

This remark draws an interesting concern, as Mr.

Ibid, 2.

Nash’s comments seem to only muddle the situation for the Home Guard regarding

supplies of ammunition, rifles, and equipment.

As a representative of the government, the acting-Prime Minister’s comments do

very little to reassure both Home Guardsmen and the readers of the Patea Mail that the

situation was under control. These supplies were available for distribution perhaps, but

there remained much to be seen regarding both the quality and quantity of the supplies

the government could release. In addition, Mr. Nash’s comments that “it being utterly

impossible at present to make any definite promises” regarding supplies for the Home

Guard, seems to contradict his assurances that these supplies were available at all.

Furthermore, his closing comments regarding the distribution of uniforms that “no stone

was being left unturned to enable the promise of uniforms for the Home Guard to be kept

when it was humanly possible to do so” reverberates as a hollow promise. This ambiguity

is perhaps best summarized in Mr. Nash’s own words, words that readers of the Patea

Mail saw immediately upon reading this very article, “the Government is not yet in a

position to make a comprehensive statement covering the control and training of the

Home Guard.”

Updates in New Zealand’s domestic print media decrease in frequency with the

advent of the winter months, as the original excitement and rapid updates gradually eased

across the country. The New Zealand Herald provided one of the final progress updates

on July 25, 1941, through its documentation of the rifles impressed in Auckland. The

paper observed, “More than 1200 rifles of .303 type have been received by stations in the

Ibid, 2.

Auckland police district, but about 100 remain unaccounted for. Included in those not yet

impressed are a number of rifles held by guardsmen who are not aware of the new

provision.”

This provision required an almost trivial surrender of rifles, by members of

the Home Guard, who were immediately handed back their rifles with a receipt in case of

damage sustained during their service, “Although the original regulations stated that

owners in the Home Guard did not have to comply with the im-pressment order it is now

provided that their rifles should be impressed.”

Auckland was evidently having better

progress compared to the 375 rifles surrendered in Palmerston North and 450 rifles from

the Whangarei police district, but uncertainty remained regarding if these rifles were

enough to fit the sizable needs of the Home Guard. A strong answer to this question of

uncertainty emerged on September 15, 1941 and later formally on September 17.

This

answer provided by a note in a “Home Guard News and Notes” section of the Waikato

Independent, “There is provision for the impressment of firearms for the Home Guard.

Any firearm impressed from the stock-in-trade of a licen-sed dealer under the Arms Act

will become property of the Crown, instead of being taken on loan, and the owner is to

receive compensation agreed upon or fixed by arbi-tration.”

The ongoing issue of rifle impressment for the Home Guard by the New Zealand

government unveiled a significant underlying problem: the government seriously lacked a

definite position regarding arming the Home Guard. The initial optimism regarding rifles

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 24026, 25 July 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410725.2.48

Ibid, 6.

New Zealand Police Gazette, Volume LXVI, Issue 37, 17 September 1941, Page 693. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/periodicals/NZPG19410917.2.11

Waikato Independent, Volume XLI, Issue 3905, 15 September 1941, Page 5. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAIKIN19410915.2.28

in early 1941 that was motivated by an electric mixture of volunteerism and patriotism,

then replaced by a merciful tone that attempted to reassure New Zealanders they had

nothing to fear surrendering their rifles, and lastly impressing the rifles forcefully to make

up the notable shortage, functions as a tremendous example of the government’s

apathetic outlook towards the Home Guard. The forceful impressment of rifles can,

understandably so, be viewed as an option of last resort on behalf of the government that

was selected out of necessity for the defense of New Zealand.

However, critical evidence of the government’s apathy towards rifle impressment

is plainly visible on two separate occasions months before the impressment order. On

February 27, 1941, through Prime Minister Peter Frasier’s comments recorded by the

Waikato Independent that “it was impractical to make an adequate supply available to the

Home Guard.”

With an even earlier example occurring on November 22, 1940, with

Col. Aldred’s direct appeal to the government “there are 30,000 privately owned rifles in

the country and I am putting it up to the powers-that-be that these rifles should be made

available to the Home Guard.”

Given the critical urgency of the situation, the

government’s failure to take decisive action allowed the rifle issue to fester until May

1941, when it then appeared, through statements by government officials such as Minister

Semple in April 1941, that the government’s hand had forced by citizen noncompliance

and a lackluster response to a call for citizens to voluntarily surrender their private rifles.

Waikato Independent, Volume XLI, Issue 3820, 24 February 1941, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAIKIN19410224.2.38

Franklin Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 135, 22 November 1940, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/FRTIM19401122.2.42

CHAPTER 4 – MID-LATE 1941: CONTROL AND TRAINING OF THE HOME

GUARD

This chapter will analyze the confrontation between Col. Aldred and Minister

Semple that occurred over the course of the final six months of 1941, a significant

confrontation that offered the spark for monumental changes regarding the overall control

and training of the Home Guard. This conflict saw a deluge of coverage in New

Zealand’s newspapers, encompassing extremely critical commentary of the New Zealand

government, commentary that directly influenced the Home Guard’s shift in direction.

Additionally, material issues regarding the clothing and equipping of the Home Guard are

expanded in the latter half of 1941 as the reorganization of the Home Guard commenced.

Finally, the relationship between New Zealanders and the government pertaining to the

Home Guard, in light of the incorporation of the Home Guard into New Zealand’s

Defense Forces, is reevaluated. This reevaluation encompassed the formal transfer of the

Home Guard from the National Service Department to army control, alongside shifting

public perception of the government’s attitude towards the Home Guard, away from

benevolent oversight and instead towards an apathetic one.

Despite this clear evidence of apathy, the issue of rifle impressment offers a single

window onto the New Zealand government’s attitude towards the Home Guard. The

words of the acting-Prime Minister speak extraordinarily loudly towards two key

underlying issues: control and training of the Home Guard itself. Issues that the acting-

Prime Minister had declared as late as July 9, 1941, “the Government is not yet in a

position to make a comprehensive statement covering the control and training of the

Home Guard.”

The government’s dismal response to the Home Guard training question,

answered by Minister Semple, had been documented by the Lake Wakatip Mail on March

11, 1941, “receive only spasmodic training, whereas men to be drawn in the fifth ballot

for territorial service would receive a thorough and in-tensive training to equip them fully

for any emergency.”

This effectively allocated the Home Guard to a position paling in

importance to the Territorial Service, in spite of Minister Semple’s words meant to soothe

their concerns: “These men are doing a real job of work, and it would be impossible to

defend the country without them.”

Additionally, control of the Home Guard had been

established under formal regulations; however, citizens such as A.C.A Sexton and

Minster Semple’s acknowledgement of the suggestion that in vulnerable areas the Home

Guard should be army drilled and equipped, offered a strong counter to the government’s

inability to provide and train the Home Guard, generating an explosion of controversy

between Minister Semple and Col. Aldred in July 1941.

Before this tipping point of frustrations was reached, the appointment of General

Sir Guy Williams as a special advisor to the New Zealand government in late May 1941

had come as a hopeful sign that things would finally begin changing for the better with

the Home Guard. The New Zealand Herald reported the announcement with unbridled

excitement on May 21, 1941, while denoting the clear similarities between England’s

situation and New Zealand’s. “Training methods” it observed, “were revised and training

Patea Mail, 9 July 1941, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PATM19410709.2.8

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 4509, 11 March 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/LWM19410311.2.22

Ibid, 4.

itself expedited; equipment was im-proved until new production was available; the whole

problem of de-fence was tacked with resource, in-genuity and courage. Who can say that

similar methods are not re-quired to-day in the organization of defense in New

Zealand?”

Of particular notice, the New Zealand Herald signaled out Williams role with

the Home Guard, declaring he “will be called upon to study the establish-ment and

efficiency of the Territorial Force; the value of the Home Guard and its possible

reorganis-ation for the selection of that num-ber of men which can best be trained and

equipped for active work in the field; and the coordination of all defence plans,

embracing both military and civilian organizations.”

Citizens such as Osterley Park

agreed with the appointment of General Williams and offered their own advice for Home

Guard reorganization, such as standardized training manual, improving experience with

improvised equipment and weapons, establishing headquarters that allowed for greater

cooperation with the army.

What would drive this monumental confrontation was the

late July 1941 release of General Williams official report concerning the possible change

in the Home Guard’s relationship to the Army.

The first notice of this seismic shift came from the Auckland Star and its

parliamentary reporter stationed in Wellington. The Auckland Star offered a sharp

contrast to the reporting of the New Zealand Herald by focusing on reporting news from

across New Zealand as quickly as possible through the assistance of telegraph lines.

Through this quick method of reporting came a flash bulletin from Wellington by the

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23970, 21 May 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410521.2.31

Ibid, 8.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23975, 27 May 1941, Page 12. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410527.2.116.4

aforementioned parliamentary reporter on July 21, 1941 pertaining to the release of

General Williams report on New Zealand’s defensive capabilities.

According to the Auckland Star, the crux of this report rested on the relationship

of the Home Guard to New Zealand’s regular standing army. The Auckland Star’s

parliamentary reporter clarified the statement of the Minister Semple, that the current

relationship of the Home Guard to the army was “under consideration at the present” and

that the public would see the report in a few days.

Auckland’s Home Guard District

commander Col. M. Aldred received notice of the government’s intent for the future of

the Home Guard, and discussed the matter with local newspapers, drawing a strong

statement from Semple. What had drawn the ire of the minister was Aldred’s statement,

covered by multiple papers throughout North Island. Aldred had mentioned that “all

reasonably fit men would come more directly under army control…and that arms,

ammunition, and equipment of all kinds would be more readily available” and his

statement was later thoroughly documented in the Gisborne Herald on July 22, 1941.

The potential of Aldred’s comment is difficult to estimate, as the incorporation of the

Home Guard into the army was certainly a sensitive topic, one that the minister did not

want to muddle.

In response to Aldred, the minister's tone was cutting: “I will ask individuals to

take no notice of an individual who has published what he had no right to publish. What

he said is not official and the public should take absolutely no notice of it… They will get

Auckland Star, Volume LXXII, Issue 170, 21 July 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19410721.2.87

Ibid, 8.

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20613, 22 July 1941, Page 9. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19410722.2.127

a correct statement in a few days’ time when the whole matter has been properly dealt

with. I am at a loss to know where this individual got his information from.”

The

minister’s reply to Aldred displays itself, to the reader of the same July 21, 1941, edition

of Auckland Star, as both a criticism of Aldred and a frustration seemingly towards a

disregard of proper government channels. While the minister may have been content with

the tone of his response to Aldred as the superior government representative, the New

Zealand media and Home Guardsmen found a common ground over the following three

days with regards to the army incorporation issue.

Within forty-eight hours of the publishing of the minister’s statement, newspapers

across North Island on July 23, 1941 leapt unanimously to the defense of Aldred. The

New Zealand Herald, Auckland Star, and Evening Post rushed to Home Guard

committees and parades held immediately to discuss the minister’s statement with their

respective communities. The New Zealand Herald took a particularly critical stance of

the Minister of National Service and dedicated a large section to the vicious reaction of

local Home Guard committees to the minister’s statement. The New Zealand Herald had

displayed these critical sentiments toward the Minister of National Service before,

notably during the “Motor Fiasco” on March 14, 1941, regarding the government’s

impressment of vehicles for use by the army. Bearing striking similarities to the issue of

rifle impressment, The New Zealand Herald had directly criticized the manner in which

the transportation department, of which Minister Semple oversaw, allowed appeals to be

exempted from the vehicle impressment order, alongside the decision of the

Auckland Star, Volume LXXII, Issue 170, 21 July 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19410721.2.87

transportation department to step in as, “char-acteristic of those central authori-ties which

are always perpetually jealous of their authority, and always on the watch to see that

nobody shall exer-cise one iota of it so far as it can be prevented.”

Drawing an

immediate furious response from Semple the following day, the New Zealand Herald

offered a headline declaring “MR. SEMPLE IRATE, as the Minister noted “the attitude

of the paper was a very unhelpful one.”

The very response of the Minister of National

Service to such criticism by the New Zealand Herald despite the difference in category of

the incident, would directly be reflected by the reactions of Home Guardsmen and the

various contributions of New Zealand’s print media. Comments by Semple regarding

Col. Aldred having essentially overstepped his bounds alongside the rigid formality

Semple insisted on regarding such announcements, would present the ideal opportunity

for the New Zealand Herald to lead the criticism towards the Minister.

Opening its article with the bold title “Colonel Defended”, the New Zealand

Herald went on the offensive against the minister through publishing guardsmen’s

official and unofficial protests made towards the minister’s comments. Mr. A. Tronson,

the commander of the Remuera Home Guard furiously informed the New Zealand

Herald, “Mr. Semple’s recent outbursts have disgusted those giving their time to the

movement, and his statements were responsible for keeping many men away from

parades.”

The paper, with a short statement from Mr. S. Campbell, briefly covered the

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23914, 14 March 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410314.2.36

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23915, 15 March 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410315.2.61

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 24024, 23 July 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410723.2.93

reaction from the Pukekohe Home Guard committee secretary encompassing both

"bitterly resenting the tone of the remarks of the minister” and “astonishment” from the

guardsmen themselves upon reading the statement from the minister. Wellington’s

Evening Post additionally dedicated a section of their article “Tone Resented” to Mr.

Campbell’s statement on Aldred’s character, noting the praise heaped upon the colonel in

light of his “arduous and devoted service to the Home Guard movement” in Auckland.

The Auckland Star focused its fact-oriented reporting on the Remuera Home

Guardsmen. The paper published the statement from the Remuera Home Guard in full for

its readers, but focused on the actions of the Minister of National Service himself and the

reaction of the guardsmen. The Auckland Star noted that all but one of the 115 Remuera

Home Guardsmen present adopted a statement supporting Aldred. Describing the attack

as “entirely unwarranted” in the circumstances and even “detrimental to the well-being of

the guard and are discouraging the men who are doing their duty without any assistance

from the Minister of National Service” in light of the minister's statement. However, the

Auckland Star saved the most enticing information from the Remuera meeting for its last

sentence, the guardsmen had considered the attacks “further reason to remove the Home

Guard from the Department of National Service and place it under Army control.”

The

sentiment to shift to army control, one of the major issues concerning the Home Guard,

would now gain incredible momentum in light of the minister’s public outburst.

Evening Post, Volume CXXXII, Issue 20, 23 July 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19410723.2.86.2

Auckland Star, Volume LXXII, Issue 172, 23 July 1941, Page 5. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19410723.2.16

As the dust settled on July 24, 1941 the New Zealand Herald brought multiple

important bulletins to its readers’ attention regarding the incident of the previous week.

The government had made an official announcement through acting-Prime Minister Nash

that Home Guard reorganization plans were well under way and an early statement was

expected soon. Though this acceleration of incorporation plans should have been

emphasized, the New Zealand Herald focused a large portion of the article on the

ongoing rift between Aldred and Semple. The minister gave his first public statement

since the incident “To suggest I would do anything to injure the Home Guard is

ridiculous.”

Despite what was reported in the press, the minister insisted that “It is

unlikely I would do anything to destroy the organization I assisted to create and which, in

my opinion, is essential to the safety and welfare of the country,” especially given his

position as Minister of National Service.

The New Zealand Herald noted that the

minister had dismissed comments that the incident was a result of a personal grievance

with Aldred and that as a result the comments had not been made in the best interests of

the Home Guard.

Following his comments, the New Zealand Herald detailed that

Semple’s sentiment focused more on the publishing of information outside official

channels, and that by doing so Aldred had let down the government and Semple had

taken exception. Aldred stepped into the fray with his own explanation, that he had

disclosed the information to “allay the growing dissatisfaction among guardsmen

regarding their future” and appealed to his guardsmen to resume their duties

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 24025, 24 July 1941, Page 13. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410724.2.133

Ibid, 13.

Despite Semple’s and Aldred’s statements, the anger felt by guardsmen at seeing

Aldred attacked by the minister had exposed a wide and deep discontent within the Home

Guard. The New Zealand Herald documented a meeting of the local battalion

commanders in Auckland who assured Aldred of their steadfast support and loyalty,

despite the “unsatisfactory conditions pertaining in the Home Guard under the Ministry

of National Service” in addition to ordering Auckland guardsmen to resume their duties

as usual. Major J.H. Herrold formally requested escalating the issue further, through a

meeting of Home Guard area commanders on that coming Friday. He had considered

Semple’s words “an insult personally and to officers and guardsmen” who served under

Aldred.

The anger led a member of parliament from Waikato, W.S. Goosman, to

propose the government act quickly after having been approached by two Home Guard

area commanders. This quick action was warranted according to Mr. Goosman due to

“considerable dissatisfaction and unrest within the Home Guard” that if not acted on

quickly, would cause interest in the Home Guard to evaporate and the organization to

collapse. The New Zealand Herald implored the urgency of this situation brewing within

the Home Guard, such as complaints that guardsmen had to divert funds to petrol

expenses to reach parades.

The following days of July 25 and 26, the New Zealand Herald continued to

allow ample space for extremely vocal criticism of Minister Semple within its opinion

columns. Anonymous author Unitas directly attacked what they believed to be the

Semple’s socialist inspired views: “When Mr. Semple and the Gov-ernment formed the

Ibid, 13.

Home Guard they evidently had in mind a semi-demo-cratic ‘people's army’ on the lines

proposed by Mr. Tom Wintringham in his widely-circulated little book, ‘New Ways of

War.’...His book shows a considerable dislike for orthodox British military organization

and discipline, and envis-ages a reserve army very similar to the Spanish Republican

irregulars beside whom he fought.”

Unitas accused Semple of maintaining the Home Guard as his own “‘private

army,’ carefully insulated from control by, and contact with, the defense forces” and was

now suffering the consequences of his actions.

Unitas ended his piece with an appeal on

behalf of the Home Guard for army incorporation, while also throwing Semple’s actions

back into the minister’s face: “Perhaps he now has some regrets. The Home Guard, not

being restrained by King’s Regulations, is holding meet-ings, passing resolutions, and

giving a good deal of critical back-chat. The burden of its complaint is that it is tired of

civilian control and wants to be part of the Defense Forces. The sooner that is done, the

better for the Dominion.”

The following day on July 26 a second anonymous author, Battalion

Commander, directed their entire opinion article to vehemently criticise Semple’s

personal conduct alongside his work for the Home Guard. Battalion Commander directly

addressed what they deemed Semple’s unjustified actions in responding to Col. Aldred:

The Hon. R. Semple’s state-ment setting out the reason for his completely

unwarranted attack of Col-onel M. Aldred, District Commander of the Home

Guard, entirely misses the main point at issue. Even assuming the Colonel had

been indiscreet in publish-ing confidential matter-and this is extremely doubtful

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 24026, 25 July 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410725.2.22.5

Ibid, 4.

as the allegedly ‘confidential’ information had been Home Guard gossip for

weeks past-this would in no way excuse or justify the insulting manner of the

Minister’s reference to Colonel Aldred.

Battalion Commander intoned Semple's references to Col. Aldred as “this

individual” went much deeper and insulted the Home Guard itself, “a deliberate insult to

the District Commander obviously reflects on the whole movement and as such as

strongly resented.”

Battalion Commander ended with a hard hitting attack on the

Minister’s comments published on July 24 that noted his effort “day and night” in

organizing the Home Guard:

In referring to the four months’ work he undertook in recruiting for the Guard Mr.

Semple should remember that many of us in the movement have worked for eight

months without pay, publicity, reward, or recognition. And in spite of

departmental indifference, in the interests of the Home Guard; and this quite apart

from the fact that the majority of us also served our country for several years, not

months, in the Great War.

This barrage of words on Semple’s personal conduct and “effort” put in regarding

the Home Guard’s organization ended with Battalion Commander’s loud declaration to

the public, “The public should be informed that we in the Home Guard feel very strongly

in this matter. Is it too much to expect the Minister to be big enough to apologise to the

Colonel, or will he be content himself with the palpable shuffling of the mere

politician.”

The published reactions of the New Zealand public to the July 1941

confrontation between Aldred and Semple, through multiple independent newspapers,

demonstrated the charged emotion and common opinions with which New Zealanders

viewed the government’s stance towards the Home Guard. Outbursts such as Minister

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 24027, 26 July 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410726.2.21.2

Ibid, 8.

Semple’s over matters such as Home Guard information confidentiality and his insistence

on the necessity of proper governmental channels to disseminate information, found

virtually no public sympathy. Instead, the collective criticisms of Minister Semple as a

representative of the New Zealand government through his work pertaining to the Home

Guard, and the subsequent change to army control, demonstrates New Zealanders

collective power to influence the Home Guard’s direction. This influence on the

government can be seen directly through parliamentarians such as Mr. Gooseman,

himself approached by Home Guard area commanders seeking his assistance, alongside

an indirect influence through New Zealanders published words in newspapers, words that

were unquestionably read by government officials, as Minister Semple had demonstrated.

With discontent running high among Home Guardsmen and officers alike,

alongside a supposed apathetic government, and the Minister of National Service

attacking his subordinates for breach of policy, the Home Guard’s future looked

increasingly bleak. Mr. Goosman’s suggestion for remedying the situation had echoed

many of the prior recommendations already made by citizens and Home Guard members

alike in the past year. In his opinion, three major things necessitated immediate action:

efficiency must be secured immediately to ensure proper training, arms and ammunition

needed to be provided at once, and the Home Guard should be placed under army control

immediately to take on a bigger role in home defense.

Slowly over the course of late 1941, the Home Guard was incorporated into the

New Zealand Army in the aftermath of the “Auckland Incident”. However, some

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 24025, 24 July 1941, Page 13. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410724.2.133

questions remained unanswered about the finer details of the incorporation scheme,

leading the Minister of Defense, the Hon. F. Jones, to update the public on September 26,

1941 about the government’s progress. The New Zealand Herald brought the information

to its readers through a report from Wellington covering a statement by the Minister of

Defense, narrowing its focus on the minister’s statement to three major principles that

had been adapted for New Zealand from the British Home Guard. Minister Jones

emphasized to the New Zealand Herald that the Home Guard’s primary objective would

continue its duties in defending areas near or around their homes. He also stated that the

Home Guard would remain a volunteer force but encouraged guardsmen to attend

specialist training for which they would be compensated at Territorial Army rates of pay.

Finally, Jones promised that the Home Guard would be equipped, trained, and supplied

with commissioned and non-commissioned officers.

In addition, personnel of

government departments involving “railway, Post and Telegraph” would upon

mobilization be activated as “signals and auxiliary transport companies” in their own

right as Home Guard members, a statement no doubt thrilling the Otahuhu railway men

and the opinion writer Home Guardsman.

The New Zealand Herald noted that clothing

in particular remained a considerable problem, alongside the distribution of arms and

ammunition, but nonetheless these logistical matters proceeded smoothly with the

aforementioned changes.

In the months following the announcement of incorporation, New Zealand

citizens and Home Guardsmen again wrote in to offer advice in the midst of this shift.

New Zealand Herald, Volume 78, Issue 24080, 26 September 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410926.2.83

Ibid, 8.

Waitakere’s Company Commander J. T. Beck wrote to the New Zealand Herald on

October 29, 1941 on the matter of army incorporation. Beck noted, “I can assure your

readers we were highly pleased, especially as we have existed for so many months on

unfulfilled promises,” reflecting the improvement on Home Guard’s previous status

under the Ministry of National Service. Through J.T. Beck noted he disagreed with some

aspects of army instruction, he proclaimed, “we of the Home Guard regard it as a

privilege to give our time and in many cases money to assist in the fight for freedom”

despite the shortcomings.

These shortcomings were mentioned by other New Zealand

citizens, such as W. Perry. M.L.C, President of the Dominion Council of the New

Zealand Returned and Services Association, who implored in the October 29, 1941 issue

of the Evening Post, “Members of the Home Guard must assume that the Govern-ment

was doing its best to assure that the Home Guard would have equipment as soon as

possible...Men in the Home Guard now must realise that they must stay in it, and train,

until the equipment arrived, as much valuable time would be saved.”

Mr. Perry’s

optimistic comments almost perfectly reflected those of Minister Semple earlier on

March 6, 1941 that, “To provide the men with uniforms and equipment will be a problem,

but everything possible is being done in that direction.”

In the following days on October 30 and 31, the Evening Post continued its

coverage with the announcement of a special army order pertaining to the Home Guard.

New Zealand Herald, Volume 78, Issue 24108, 29 October 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19411029.2.24.3

Evening Post, Volume CXXXII, Issue 104, 29 October 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19411029.2.59

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24549, 6 March 1941, Page 9. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19410306.2.102

This order clearly adding needed clarity regarding the Home Guard’s defensive role, “In

defining the object of the Home Guard the Order states that its duty will be to augment

the defenses of the Dominion by providing static defense of localities, protection of

vulnerable and key points, and giving timely notice of enemy movements to superior

military organizations...Its value lies not in in-dividual action by its members, but in

proper co-ordination with other parts of the Defense forces.”

Of particular note was the order’s mention of equipment and uniforms, echoing

Minister Jones statement on September 26, 1941, as the Evening Post happily allocated

the issue space, “The following scale of uniform and personal equipment will be provided

as soon as possible for members of Division I:- Battledress, cap, steel helmet, great coat,

boots, and web equipment. Two armbands will be provided for members of Division II.”

The government prioritizing Division I, “50,000 of all ranks fit for combat duties, who

will be trained and equipped as soon as possible,” contrasted sharply with the meager two

armbands for the remaining guardsmen. Despite calling for a Home Guard numbering

over one-hundred thousand strong, it seemed the government was only able to equip, if at

all successfully, only half of the total guardsmen. Considering the noted difficulties in

equipping Home Guardsmen, leaving a strong sense of doubt that the government would

be able to fulfil the goal outlined in the special army order.

On October 31, the Evening Post detailed the remit carried by the Dominion

Council of Returned Services Association that held a “hope that full use would be made

Evening Post, Volume CXXXII, Issue 105, 30 October 1941, Page 11. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19411030.2.105

Ibid, 11.

of returned soldiers of the past and present wars in the appointing of Home Guard staff

and executive officers.”

Taking a forward approach in line with the president of the

organization, W. Perry, the Dominion Council of Returned Services Association

advocated its own headquarters to, “institute a Domin-ion-wide campaign asking the

Govern-ment to introduce compulsory univer-sal national service.”

The Evening Post

broke down the stated reasoning for such a bold measure as, “the failure of a very large

number of eligible men to enrol in the Home Guard, National Military Reserve… and

other national service organisations.”

This stated desire of the New Zealand Returned

and Services Association, in light of the clear difficulties faced by the Home Guard, to

expand to universal national service seems unfathomable considering with its current

enrollment the Home Guard was under equipped, undergoing a major organizational

overhaul, and ripe with dissatisfied guardsmen. However, the lofty goal of the

organization was not meritless, as during 1942 the Home Guard recruitment issue would

emerge like a specter to haunt the defense organization once again.

The confluence of issues plaguing the Home Guard could not have come at a

worse time, as the advent of December 1941 saw the start of the war in the Pacific

Theater for New Zealand. The Attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 drew the

slumbering giant of the United States of America to war with the Japanese Empire in the

aftermath of a devastating surprise attack. As pre-war defensive plans, long held in

reserve, went into motion for New Zealand one of the key tenants of its survival in the

Evening Post, Volume CXXXII, Issue 106, 31 October 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19411031.2.21

Ibid, 4.

Pacific, the Royal Navy, suffered its own incredible naval setback. Sortieing out from the

Singapore Naval Base, Force Z, including the battleship Prince of Wales and the

battlecruiser Repulse, found itself under heavy attack from Imperial Japanese Navy land

based bombers. The two capital ships were unable to repel the attack and were

subsequently sunk, provoking an outcry of panic and regret in New Zealand as news of

the battle arrived on Dec 11. The New Zealand Herald reported the loss of the ships in a

state resembling mourning and anger, “With profound regret we record the loss by enemy

action of two brave ships, the battleship Prince of Wales and the battlecruiser Repulse.

These are ‘sore and heavy tidings’ and the blow to the Royal Navy a heavy one. Official

details are few at the time of writing, but it may be hoped that some of the ships’

companies have been spared the fate that befell their ships…Both the British and

American Navies have suffered loss in the same way-by aerial attack by a treacherous

enemy.”

Additional information concerning Japanese landing in Malaya featured

prominently in the New Zealand Herald as its editors worked to assure their readers that

the situation was not lost on land, as imperial forces from India were arriving in Rangoon

equipped, “with the most modern weapons and special transport vehicles” alongside

bomber and fighter aircraft from the Netherlands East Indies reinforcing Singapore,

including more naval units.

The impact of these devastating attacks reverberated across

New Zealand, especially at the governmental level, as reflected upon later in a report by

the National Service Department in 1945, “The outbreak of war with Japan brought an

New Zealand Herald, Volume 78, Issue 24145, 11 December 1941, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19411211.2.53

New Zealand Herald, Volume 78, Issue 24145, 11 December 1941, Page 9. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19411211.2.80.1

immediate change in the situation. The need for home defense became of paramount

importance, and mobilization proceeded accordingly.”

In light of this pessimistic news across the Pacific Theater, a much needed

Christmas present emerged for the Home Guard on Christmas Eve 1941, as the Gisborne

Herald optimistically reported Minister of Defense Jones update on uniforms for the

Home Guard, “arrangements had been completed to make available a fairly large number

of battledress uniforms to Territorials. This would release a large number of service

uniforms which, after being cleaned, would be issued to Home Guard units in various

parts of New Zealand. It is anticipated that it will be possible to make the first issues of

these uniforms within the next few weeks. It is hoped eventually to provide battledress

for all Territorials and uniforms for the Home Guard com-pletley, but it must be

remembered that we have overseas commitments.”

Despite such positive sentiment, some New Zealand citizens still considered the

work inadequate, multiple inquiries drawing a published response from Brigadier P.H

Bell in the December 29, 1941 issue of Press. The commanding officer of the Northern

Military District, Bell vented his visible frustration, “I sometimes wonder whether these

criticisms emanate from Home Guards-men whose desire it is to help the or-ganization or

from people whose ob-jects are entirely the opposite...This is no time for petty of petulant

statements which are so often made by those who are not in possession of the complete

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT ON ACTIVITIES UNDER THE NATIONAL SERVICE

EMERGENCY REGULATIONS 1940, AND THE INDUSTRIAL MAN-POWER EMERGENCY REGULATIONS 1944,

Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1945 Session I, H-11a, Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/parliamentary/AJHR1945-I.2.2.5.12

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20647, 24 December 1941, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19411224.2.99

facts.” With regard to the equipment issue Brigadier Bell pointed to problems beyond his

control, “Many calculations in regard to the arming, clothing, and equipping not only of

Home Guard units but also of territorials and National Military Re-serve units, which

have been upset by cir-cumstances over which neither Government nor the Army-or

Home Guard authorities- have any control, but the situation has improved and it is hoped

that it will continue to improve.”

Col. Aldred echoed this sentiment in his own statement to Press, “Home Guard

battalions have, in spite of equipment difficulties, reached a high standard of efficiency”

with equipment difficulties impacting Aldred himself considering evidence from Press

demonstrated, “Lack of uniforms and equipment is seriously troubling Home Guardsmen

throughout the Auckland district. Substantial issues, have, however, been made re-cently,

and there is no doubt that the Army is making every effort to arm and equip the guard

fully.”

Despite this damper, both Bell and Aldred expressed their admiration for their

guardsmen's “keen and enthusiastic” demeanor and willingness to serve New Zealand

through home defense.

As a tumultuous chapter for the Home Guard closed in 1941, there were

nonetheless three notable achievements for the organization to be proud of: the number of

Home Guardsmen enrolled was steadily approaching one-hundred thousand, the

impressment of rifles had made it possible to arm more of its members, but most

importantly, the Home Guard was formally incorporated into the army and could now

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23523, 29 December 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19411229.2.45

Ibid, 6.

play a large role within New Zealand’s defense force. However, these praiseworthy

achievements came with four significant drawbacks to the organization and by direct

extension the New Zealand government: A long brewing discontent within the Home

Guard regarding its position under the National Service Department erupted onto the

national stage in July 1941, triggered in part due to Minister Semple’s very poorly

selected comments regarding Col. Aldred’s behavior, alongside continual promises by the

government regarding uniforms and equipment that seemed to only allow the problem to

fester, and most critically of all, a remarkable sense of apathy on behalf of the

government regarding its stance on the Home Guard and with the rifle impressment

fiasco and an apathetic response from New Zealanders on the same issue, all threatened

the continued existence of the Home Guard.

Nevertheless, the enthusiasm and incredible motivation of many Home

Guardsmen would continue to drive the organization forward through sheer will if

necessary, working and succeeding in developing the necessary administrative changes

within the Home Guard itself. No longer content with passively accepting judgement

from the Ministry of National Service, influential figures within the Home Guard

advocated for these proposed changes themselves. These proposed changes allowed for

an enormous outpouring of opinions from New Zealanders both within and outside the

Home Guard, catapulting issues onto a collaborative national stage, allowing New

Zealanders to actively influence the Home Guard in this critical year of the war.

CHAPTER 5 – EARLY-MID 1942: MAJOR MELROSE, EQUIPMENT, AND

COMPULSORY ENROLLMENT: HOME GUARD EXPANSION

This chapter will analyze the expansion of the Home Guard throughout the critical

year 1942, during which New Zealanders voices grew to a crescendo amidst the firebrand

advocacy of Major T.H Melrose in demanding a radical, grassroots reorganization of the

Home Guard. Additionally, Melrose’s attack on the lack of direction from the New

Zealand government unleashed a rogue wave of criticism, primarily through Home Guard

and civilian editorial pieces, towards the government itself, questioning its lackluster

support of the Home Guard despite strong support among New Zealanders for the Home

Guard as a defensive organization. Finally, unfulfilled promises by the New Zealand

government towards the Home Guard regarding the issuance of uniforms and equipment

for the organization, alongside a reversal of the volunteer status of the Home Guard

through compulsory enrollment, saw the Home Guard pushed towards a breaking point

that threatened to render the organization utterly and completely ineffective.

With the advent of February 1942, the war was now knocking on New Zealand’s

door. Further north, the Japanese Empire accomplished what had been considered the

impossible: the mighty naval base and strategic linchpin of Singapore had fallen to the

Japanese military juggernaut. M.G.C McCaul, past president of the Wellington Chamber

of Commerce and Associated Chamber of Commerce, voiced visible concern for the

Dominion in writing to the Auckland Star in the days before the Fall of Singapore: “to-

day, we can no longer rely upon Singapore as a barrier to Jap-anese invasion, all these

things that appeared vital then, and were of the utmost importance then, simply fade into

insignificance now we are face to face with the likelihood of inva-sion….The people of

this country must speak with one voice on the subject of our adequate defense in this

imminent danger.”

In the following days, the New Zealand Herald reported on the Fall of Singapore

with a clear apprehension of what was to come, after Australian Prime Minister John

Curtin’s declaration that the Japanese would inevitably attack Australia, adding pressure

onto the defense of New Guinea near New Zealand’s outer defensive perimeter.

Historian Ashley Jackson’s later commentary on strategic implications for New Zealand

given the aforementioned events such as the Sinking of the Prince of Wales and Repulse,

resonates strongly with New Zealand’s situation, “With American and British power

temporarily crippled in the Pacific, a handful of raw New Zealand soldiers manned slit-

trenches along the coastline of their homeland, shouldering old-fashioned rifles, secure in

the certain knowledge that, if they chose to come, the Japanese would brush aside their

opposition.”

Mr. McCaul’s appeal for unity throughout the country, especially given the

traumatic events of the past two months, would find another major advocate, one within

the ranks of the Home Guard with as large of an impact to rival those of Ministers

Semple or Jones during 1941. Into this apprehensive period of New Zealand’s defensive

position stepped Major T.H. Melrose, commander of the Hamilton Home Guard, leading

Auckland Star, Volume LXXIII, Issue 35, 11 February 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19420211.2.39.2

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24201, 17 February 1942, Page 5. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420217.2.68.1

Ashley Jackson, The British Empire and the Second World War, 485

a crusade against apathy towards defense. What began as a simple speech on February

23, 1942 to his guardsmen in Hamilton, quickly catapulted Major Melrose to national

prominence, and the New Zealand Herald provided extensive coverage of both the

speech itself and subsequent cascade of comments regarding it. Echoing the speech of

Colonel W.I.K Jennings on March 18, 1941, where both disappointment and

encouragement had been visible,

Major Melrose expressed similar sentiments towards

his guardsmen in the face of the troubling statistic that for every Home Guard member

there were ten members of the Emergency Precautions Service. The New Zealand Herald

noted Melrose’s response to the troubling statistics with great interest:

What was needed in New Zealand, Major Melrose added, was a spirit of

belligerency, whereas the building up of the [Emergency Precautions Service]

only created a spirit of pacificism and defeatism...The Home Guard was

untrammelled by regulations and was an unorthodox defense unit of great fighting

potentiality. However. The battalion members were now thor-oughly disillusioned

as a result of their disheartening experiences and because inspiring leadership was

entirely lack-ing on the part of the Government.

Melrose’s speech went beyond criticizing the lack of leadership but stopped short

of shutting the government out, quoted at length by the New Zealand Herald, Melrose

instead advocated for a total collective effort of New Zealand’s resources for the war:

“Major Melrose said the machinery of the town should be immediately be mobilised for

the manufacture of weapons. The material, plant and skill were all available, and all that

was needed was encouragement from the Government. As things were at present, apart

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 4510, 18 March 1941, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/LWM19410318.2.13

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24206, 23 February 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420223.2.41

from members of the armed forces, the people of New Zealand were not putting 1 per

cent of their energy into the war effort.”

Melrose’s attack on New Zealanders' apathetic attitude appears as a toned down

version of Mayor H.D Caro’s identical statement on the “appalling apathy of people with

regard to defense measures” in East Hamilton on March 21, 1941.

Although Melrose did

not extend his attack naming to particular government officials, the major made it

extremely clear that he simply did not care what the formal repercussions for his actions

were, something the New Zealand Herald sharply noted “No matter what the

consequences were, he intended to launch a campaign with the object of impressing on

the civilian population the need for a more determined and spirited effort in preparing for

the de-fense of their country.”

By the end of the week, a tremendous outpour of support for Major Melrose

flooded the pages of the New Zealand Herald in a deluge of both opinion articles and

major editorial pieces. The New Zealand Herald excitedly reported on Major Melrose’s

progress in light of his “energetic steps” towards organizing his campaign, “He said

during a visit to Auckland yes-terday that already his battalion had received 50 new

enrollments since he drew attention to the need of them, at a parade in Hamilton last

Sunday. He had also received offers of help from a number of people in official and

private positions.”

One of the offers came from a very familiar figure to Melrose, “Major

Ibid, 4.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23920, 21 March 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410321.2.62

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24206, 23 February 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420223.2.41

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24209, 26 February 1942, Page 8. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420226.2.92

Melrose stated he had received a letter from the Mayor of Hamilton, Mr. H.D. Caro, in

which he promised 100 per cent support in everything he might be able to do to arouse

the public to the need for helping to defend the Dominion. Red tape and regulations, said

Mr. Caro, were hold-ing the people in bondage. Inspired leadership was the urgent

necessity.”

Major Melrose’s firebrand activism for the Home Guard went beyond

simply attacking the passive spirit of defense across New Zealand, instead taking a more

radical approach compared to anything seen so far throughout the country. Of interest to

the New Zealand Herald was Melrose’s call for Home Guard diversity, “Included among

Major Melrose’s plans is the formation of a women's section of the Home Guard. Women

would be suitable for such duties as first-aid treatment of wounded, and for signalling,

transport driving, and cooking. He had often in the past received offers of assistance from

women and was convinced the country’s need was such that every available man should

be released for fighting.”

Advocating for total defensive effort, Melrose implored for the physical and

mental expansion of the Home Guard, “In-stead of a Home Guard with a nominal role of

100,000, there should be one with an active roll of 500,000. A national outlook should

take the place of a local one. What did it matter if some buildings were destroyed, or even

if a whole town were bombed, if the country was saved?” In addition, Melrose opined

that New Zealanders such as those making over 100,000 pounds should be prepared to

give 10,000 pounds to the defense of the country. These extremely radical measures

reinforcing his unbridled determination to, “without regard for any official disapproval of

Ibid, 8.

his actions, to awake the people to the need for a realistic attitude toward their country’s

defense and spur them into helping in every possible way.

While Major Melrose’s

utterly absurd suggestion of an active roll of 500,000 Guardsmen did not captivate the

New Zealand public, many of his ideas quickly spread across New Zealand, drawing

commentary from a plethora of individuals who almost unanimously agreed with him.

Melrose’s activist demeanor was precisely what the Home Guard needed, immediately

fanning the smoldering embers of its public support into a roaring patriotic fire, while

also offering an extremely blunt critique of the government’s handling of the Home

Guard. Melrose’s words directly critiqued the government’s lackluster handling of the

Home Guard and almost overnight found a deep resonance through a torrential flood of

support in published newspaper editorials throughout New Zealand, universally

supporting an effort at reform within the Home Guard. These opinions and editorials

struck at the government’s handling of the organization to varying degrees, yet

unanimously found the current efforts by the government to be less than desirable.

The first commentary on behalf of the New Zealand public came from A.G

Quartley, who wrote to the New Zealand Herald on February 25, 1942 taking Major

Melrose’s words to heart in an enthusiastic editorial:

Major Melrose is right. What attitude will preserve this land-that the father should

be proud to regard himself as a shield for his children, or should a father be

thankful that his children are a shield for him?...This hour demands that civic

leader-ship should take an unwavering stand that offensive defense is urgent and

will be successful. Arms and work are necessary, but they are useless unless the

will and determination permeated the whole community.

Ibid, 8.

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24208, 25 February 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420225.2.24.6

The next day, anonymous author E.H. wrote with a similar attitude focused on

defending the family, declaring his credentials to his fellow guardsmen:

Home Guardsman since its inception, I would like to pay tribute to Major Melrose

for his outspoken comment, as reported in Monday’s HERALD. He deserves the

thanks of all New Zealanders. I fully agree that we need inspiring leadership from

the top. The Home Guardsmen have been very patient for a long time...we want

orders and inspiration from the top. It is our duty to our forces overseas, to our

women and children, that we be able to handle arms and are ready to defend our

country come what may.

Another anonymous author, C.C, advocated for expanding the Home Guard

though not nearly as radical an expansion as Major Melrose suggested:

The question of Home Guard strength is being discussed many months too late,

but recent transfers to the Territorials, the transferring of Post and Telegraph and

railway workers to the [Emergency Precautions Service], coupled with a

continuous lack of Government support, is chiefly responsible. I think it is

logical to assume if we had 200,000 armed Home Guards-men in this Dominion

the enemy would think twice about landing on our shores.

On February 28, 1942, New Zealander P.O Bonham wrote to correct the error

made by the New Zealand Herald regarding his 1,000 pound donation to the Home

Guard, that was actually 200 pounds with a guarantee to raise it to 1,000 pounds.

Offering his thoughts regarding New Zealanders economic contributions to the war

effort, P.O Bonham beseeched citizens with a similar tone as A.G Quartley and E.H.:

Home Guard committees cannot function without definite financial backing, but

I make bold to say that given this backing, these committees will soon coordinate

their efforts throughout New Zealand and very substantially improve their

weapon equipment from plant and materials at present unused in this country.

What is more essential at the pre-sent dangerous time than a well-armed Home

Guard, 250,000 strong, to ably support the regular army and ring New Zealand

with a wall of steel? …Democracy only acts fully when dan-ger is acute. It is

acute now, so will groups of 10 or 20 earnest men forget the taxation they are

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24209, 26 February 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420226.2.26.2

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24210, 27 February 1942, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420227.2.24.2

paying and stand behind their respective Home Guard battalions and support a

movement that can and will fend off this very real and terrible threat to our

wives, daughters, and sweethearts. Let the voice of an angry nation be heard.

Additional voices joined P.O Bonham in the opinion section on February 28,

anonymous author Parent wrote in to both praise the paper for its coverage and offer his

own thoughts towards the government’s handling of the Home Guard:

I wish to endorse the remarks of your correspondent ‘E.H.’ re Home Guard.

Things have come to a pretty pass when the individual has to show a lead to the

Government in connection with the protection of our country against an invader.

Hats off to Major Melrose for the stand he has taken and to your paper for the

sup-port you have accorded him. Major Melrose’s lean is an inspira-tion to all

who have their country’s welfare at heart. To have held the interests of members

of the Hamilton Home Guard for over 12 months under such adverse conditions is

a tribute to his fighting qualities and his love for country.

Another anonymous author, Tin Hat, echoed this sentiment in their letter

regarding both the Home Guard and the Emergency Precautions Service, pointing another

finger towards the government’s lackluster leadership and to express his disappointment

regarding its support for the Home Guard, “The problems of the Home Guard have often

been ventilated. We look to the Government of the day for leader-ship in such times. In

their well-voiced socalisitic programme it seems a pity that they have not yet devised

some means of socialising the brains of the country.”

In the midst of this barrage of opinion articles editors of the New Zealand Herald

offered their own approval on February 26, 1942, in a long editorial concerning the Home

Guard’s manpower:

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24211, 28 February 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420228.2.30.7

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24211, 28 February 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand,https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420228.2.30.2

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24211, 28 February 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420228.2.30.5

Having laboured long under a sense of being ignored and neglected, the Home

Guard, through some of its responsible officers, is de-manding that its position

be defined and its needs considered...There is, moreover, much force in the

conten-tions of Major Melrose, of Hamilton, that the emphasis should be on

facing and resisting the enemy rather than on preventing or patch-ing up damage

attack might do. As the organization that represents active defense, the Home

Guard deserves a higher place in the re-gard of the community and more

consideration from the Government than it has had up to the present.

Taking into consideration the tidal wave of commentary, it seemed Major

Melrose’s influential speech had aroused as much debate within New Zealand’s print

media as Col. Aldred and Minister Semple’s confrontation in July 1941. The fallout of

Major Melrose’s provocative speech had unearthed a similar feeling of near unanimity

among New Zealanders, however instead of the Minister of National Service taking the

blame, the government as a whole was now beginning to feel this strong frustration from

Guardsmen and New Zealand civilians alike. This sense of dissatisfaction from New

Zealanders that the government was failing to provide leadership and inspiration for the

Home Guard cannot be understated, only P.O Bonham, who took issue with the lack of

financial support for the Home Guard, was the only opinion writer who did not directly

mention their disappointment with the government’s lackluster leadership.

New Zealanders had found a firebrand Home Guard advocate in Major Melrose,

who loudly and willingly brought to light, just as Col. Aldred had unintentionally done so

in July 1941, an overwhelming opinion of apathy on behalf of some New Zealand

government ministers towards the Home Guard. Although Major Melrose’s words found

more civilian advocates, compared to Col. Aldred’s draw of predominantly enlisted and

active Home Guardsmen, they nonetheless drew needed attention in New Zealand’s print

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24209, 26 February 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420226.2.37

media to unsatisfactory conditions in the Home Guard. The coming months would

demonstrate if the New Zealand government was listening to these complaints, as the

critical issue of uniforms and equipment took over the national spotlight. The urgency of

the uniform and equipment issue found the New Zealand Herald publishing a second

major editorial piece on March 2, 1942, only days after showing its approval regarding

Major Melrose’s advocacy for the Home Guard. Taking up the editorial reins, the New

Zealand Herald offered optimistic remarks regarding the Home Guard’s uniform issue,

“The arrival and distribution of uniforms to at least some of the Home Guard are a

hopeful sign that the long period of neglect this organ-isation has suffered is coming to an

end.”

Directing its scathing criticism towards a familiar target, the Minister of National

Service, the New Zealand Herald directed its editorial efforts to the recent announcement

of the transfer of personnel between the Emergency Precautions Service and Home

Guard, “Mr. Semple repeated, in effect, much of the criticism which has been heard from

other sources about the present anomalous position. Until the new powers were obtained

and put into operation, he said, efficient organization of neither body could be

obtained.”

The New Zealand Herald loudly lambasted both Minster Semple for his

paradoxical position and the government for its apathy:

This is a remarkable admission-indeed confession-from the Minster charged with

organising manpower to the best advantage. It is surprising also to find him

speaking on a lack of authority to do what he admits to be necessary if the country

is to be fully prepared. On the face of it emergency regulations issued early in the

war enable the Government to call on men to perform any duty that has to be

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24212, 2 March 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420302.2.32

Ibid, 4.

done. If they are not adequate for so apparently simple a process as filling the

ranks of the Home Guard, this is a lamentable late hour to be meeting the

deficiency. The fact is, the Home Guard has never had the consideration due to it,

and the responsibility rests wholly with the Government.

Lamenting the lateness of the hour for both the organization of the Emergency

Precautions Service and Home Guard alongside a strong lack of government

consideration was not limited to the New Zealand Herald. Writing to the Otago Daily

Times on March 2, 1942, anonymous author R.F.R. attacked the government’s apathy,

writing a long editorial on the government’s failure regarding uniforms:

Long before the war began to come dangerously close to our shores, the Home

Guard was promised uniforms...Not only have the Home Guardsmen worn out

their own clothes in the service of their country, but in spite of the unfair

treatment that has been meted out to them, they have displayed in their training a

willingness and en-thusiasm that are unsurpassed in any other unit. Why have we

waited until the danger has become imminent? There has been ample time to fulfil

these promises regarding proper uniforms. The Minister of Defense stated

recently that all that is possible is being done. And yet I understand that some of

our woollen mills are still manufacturing civilian attire. Is that not a shameful

state of affairs?

Indeed, as R.F.R. had passionately stated, the government had ample time to issue

uniforms for the Home Guard and yet still stumbled. Minister Semple had stated as early

as March 6, 1941 that providing uniforms would be a problem,

Minister of Defense

Jones himself had noted on March 25, 1941 that uniforms would be delayed due to

overseas commitments

, while acting-Prime Minister Nash on July 9, 1941 had intoned

Ibid, 4.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24854, 2 March 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19420302.2.75.4

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24549, 6 March 1941, Page 9. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19410306.2.102

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23923, 25 March 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410325.2.42

“no stone was being unturned to enable the promise of uniforms for the Home Guard.”

Despite Minister Jones' promise on Christmas Eve 1941, that Territorial uniforms would

be cleaned and ready for Home Guard use “within the next few weeks”

Col. Aldred had

revealed on December 29, 1941 that the “Lack of uniforms and equipment is seriously

troubling Home Guardsmen throughout the Auckland district.”

Some Home

Guardsmen even took the matter into their own hands rather than wait for the

government, the New Zealand Herald publishing a picture of One Tree Hill Home

Guardsmen as early as April 7, 1941, showing off “special working dress which they

have purchased themselves.”

Compared to a much later picture by the New Zealand

Herald, published the same day as R.F.R.’s comments, showing “Members of an

Auckland Home Guard unit wearing their new uniforms which were issued yesterday.”

This gap between private purchase and governmental assistance seemed even more

ridiculous with the announcement on March 4, 1942 that “special shoulder badges”

would be issued immediately made of “black cloth with the words ‘Home Guard’ sewn in

white” for Home Guardsmen, despite there still being considerable problems regarding

the issuance of uniforms for the Home Guard.

Patea Mail, 9 July 1941, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PATM19410709.2.8

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20647, 24 December 1941, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GISH19411224.2.99

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23523, 29 December 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19411229.2.45

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23934, 7 April 1941, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410407.2.15.1

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24212, 2 March 1942, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420302.2.101

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24856, 4 March 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19420304.2.28

Despite visible allotment of some Home Guard uniforms and “special shoulder

badges”, R.F.R.’s editorial again spoke directly to the heart of the uniform and equipment

issue, advocating for total conversion of civilian factories to fill the considerable gap:

When the mills are producing military cloths to their maximum weaving capacity

then, and only then, can we claim to be making an all-out effort as far as materials

are concerned...such is not the case at the present, and it shall be to our everlasting

disgrace if the making of uniforms is not stepped up immediately to the very limit

of our production capacity. These comments are made not for the sake of

criticism, but in an endeavour to see that the right thing is done by our country

and the men who are so will-ingly helping to defend it.

Demands for greater leadership and a drive towards Major Melrose’s “spirit of

belligerency” found yet another voice with the meeting of the Hamilton Chamber of

Commerce on March 3, 1942, where Major A.A. McLean spoke to what was described

by the reporter for the New Zealand Herald as, “a large and representative attendance” of

Hamiltonians. Recalling Major Melrose’s words in the weeks before calling for a more

active defense of the nation, citizens such as Mr. J. Marnane “asked why all the factories

in New Zealand were not en-gaged in munitions work” while Mr. W.R. Shattock

advocated for “the Government to declare a state of emergency and to mobilise the whole

manpower and wealth of the country for the war effort.”

The assembled chamber of commerce agreed, passing a resolution unanimously to

draw attention to, “every foundry and factory in New Zealand be directed to utilize all

available materials which can be improvised for the manufactur-ing of effective war

weapons...every available factory or workroom making clothing for our forces...that red

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24854, 2 March 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19420302.2.75.4

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24213, 3 March 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420303.2.89

tape and ineffi-ciency in all out national life be pushed aside for unrestricted action.”

The actions of the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce would join the ranks of other local

bodies, such as those in Auckland, in succeeding in receiving a reply from the New

Zealand government. However, before the reply would reach the Hamilton Chamber of

Commerce additional events involving the Japanese Empire would underscore the

realistic threat it posed to New Zealand. March 8, 1942 saw a reconnaissance flight

launched from submarine I-25 fly over Auckland and Wellington, and while this flight

did not directly damage any property or spark alarm among New Zealanders, it

reemphasized the fragility of New Zealand’s defensive position in the same manner as

the Sinking of the Niagara had done in June 1940, while showing the reach of the

Japanese Navy.

Mayor H.D. Caro comments on March 21, 1941 of “Unless or until we

get a bomb or two dropped on the town, the people will not wake up to their obligations,”

now seemed a very frighteningly realistic possibility given the reconnaissance ability of

the Japanese Navy.

Concerns about the ability of the Japanese Empire to conduct

bombing raids on New Zealand, given their advancement south and projection of force,

were additionally acknowledged by the New Zealand government in the National Service

Department’s 1943 report, “Whereas large-scale bombing from the air had been

previously thought unlikely, it was now considered a possibility, and provision had to be

made rapidly to meet this and other new hazards.”

Ibid, 6.

Ashley Jackson, The British Empire and the Second World War, 487

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23920, 21 March 1941, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410321.2.62

NATIONAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT REPORTS OF THE NATIONAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT AND OF THE

INDUSTRIAL MAN-POWER DIVISION ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE NATIONAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT UNDER

THE NATIONAL SERVICE EMERGENCY REGULATIONS 1940, THE EMERGENCY RESERVE CORPS

REGULATIONS 1941, AND THE INDUSTRIAL MAN-POWER EMERGENCY REGULATIONS 1942, Appendix to

In the weeks following the reconnaissance flight over Auckland and Wellington,

the Prime Minister’s letter responding to the complaints found extended coverage from

both the New Zealand Herald on April 6, 1942 and The Ashburton Guardian on April 9,

1942, each detailing the expected War Cabinet proposals regarding the Home Guard

alongside information on uniforms and equipment. The New Zealand Herald detailed the

Prime Minister’s response to a specific letter from Auckland Mayor Mr. J.A.C Allum,

conveying the Prime Minister’s “acknowledging resolu-tions of a recent Auckland

meeting on the subject.”

The transfer discussion within its editorial piece on March 2,

1942 resurfaced, as the Prime Minister announced the approval of the War Cabinet to,

“(1) Provision of compulsory powers to ensure members of the Home Guard discharge

their obligations; (2) power to transfer men from the Home Guard to the Emergency

Reserve Corps; (3) power to transfer men from the Emergency Reserve Corps to the

Home Guard.”

The Ashburton Guardian clarified this specific reply was made due

calls from the north on, “measures to be taken to fill the ranks of the Home Guard and

pro-vide uniforms and clothing for members of the Guard.”

Of concern was the Prime

Minister's note, “It is a matter of regret to the Government that it has not been possible to

date to fully clothe and equip the Home Guard.” With only “11,260 service uniforms”

issued, the Prime Minister implored Home Guardsmen to, “accept the in-evitable

situation with the conscious-ness that clothing and equipment will be issued to them as

the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1943 Session I, H-11a, Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/parliamentary/AJHR1943-I.2.1.9.13

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24216, 6 March 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420306.2.87

Ibid, 6.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 62, Issue 125, 9 March 1942, Page 2. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG19420309.2.11

soon as possible.”

Again, R.F.R.’s words echoed loudly towards the situation “How

can it be said then that the Home Guard is being put into uniforms ‘as fast as we possibly

can’?”

Despite the Prime Minister’s efforts to placate Home Guardsmen and reassure

them the problems of the Home Guard were being taken care of, widespread discontent

within the Home Guard simmered beneath the surface and threatened to spill over. Home

Guardsman, An Old Rifle Club Member, found a major problem with the training of the

Home Guard. Declaring himself to be “a returned soldier,” to the Otago Daily Times on

March 4, 1942, An Old Rifle Club Member revealed, “During my years’s membership

our company has fired five rounds of .303 at a range of 25 yards. This was a waste of

ammunition as far as training was concerned, but that is a year’s total...Further, rifles

issued are for drill purposes only and are not to be fired except in an emergency.”

Home Guardsman, Would-be Rifleman, wrote in on March 9, 1942 to the Otago Daily

Times, expressing his befuddlement and approval of An Old Rifle Club Member’s

comments, “Having been a member of the Home Guard for close on 12 months. I would

ask the use of all the drilling and uniforms in the world to a soldier if he has not learned

the first thing about how to shoot, and how is it possible for him to do this without

practice? ”

Others pointed fingers elsewhere, Guardsman on March 10, 1942 accused

the Emergency Precautions Service of sheltering “shirkers who should be drilling with

Ibid, 2.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24854, 2 March 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19420302.2.75.4

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24856, 4 March 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19420304.2.72.1

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24860, 9 March 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19420309.2.79.3

the Home Guard” while Open to Correction accused Minister Semple’s recent

announcement of favoring conscription, being the result of Home Guardsmen being

mocked by “youths of 20 or so sneer-ing.” and now sought to call them into service as

revenge.

Despite the assertion of this outlandish remark by Open to Correction, the

claim that Minister Semple favored conscription found some tentative validity on March

16, 1942.

The Otago Daily Times announced with a sense of apprehension the notification

from Prime Minister Frasier, placing the urgent information in bold, “An announcement

that the War Cabinet had approved regulations providing for compulsory service for the

Home Guard was made by the Prime Minister, Mr P. Fraser, yesterday. Amendments to

the National Service Emergency Regulations embodying this decision have been

passed.”

These regulations effectively gave Minister Semple the power to, “direct any

class or classes of persons to undertake such service as may be considered necessary in

the prosecution of the war effort. Pre-viously a direction could only be made to

individuals.” Despite the Prime Minister’s assurance that this would, “enable adequate

labour to be quickly diverted for the purpose” Regardless, the Otago Daily Times noted,

“No direction has yet been made under these provisions, and publicity will be given

through the press as soon as any direction is made.”

As Open to Correction likely relished having indirectly predicted Semple’s new

powers, the Home Guard found a willing champion for its brewing discontent in the

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24861, 10 March 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19420310.2.84.3

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24866, 16 March 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19420316.2.23

Ibid, 4.

Leader of the Opposition, Mr. S.G. Holland. The New Zealand Herald reported on March

27, 1942, that after having toured the country Mr. Holland sent a telegram urging the

Prime Minister to not ignore the extremely pressing issue, “the matter be made the

subject of an extensive inquiry with a view to rectifying the position.”

With

conscription on the way and discontent deeply sowed in the Home Guard, the winter

months would see Minister Semple and the Home Guard clash again on the national

stage.

April 30, 1942 found the New Zealand Herald happily reporting to its readers that

the Home Guard inquiry previously request made by Mr. Holland had been approved:

The organization, training and em-ployment of the Home Guard are at present

being inquired into in Auck-land by the members of the defense and military

affairs committee of the War Council. The members of the com-mittee, Major-

General Sir Andrew Russell, K.C.B., K.C.M.G., the Hon. W. Perry, M.L.C., and

Messrs. L.G. Lowry and E.T. Tirikitene, M.P.’s arrived from Wellington

yesterday and subsequently began their inquiry in a room at the Chief Post

Office.

The New Zealand Herald detailed that the committee would essentially function

via direct reports, “Senior officers of the Home Guard throughout the Northern Military

District attended the inquiry. They in-cluded the district director, Colonel M. Aldred, and

all the group directors in the district. Proceedings of the com-mittee included receiving

information from these officers on the position of the Guard in their respective areas.” In

closing with the government’s perspective, the New Zealand Herald mentioned that, “In

granting Mr. Holland’s request the Prime Minister said the task of the committee would

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24234, 27 March 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420327.2.61

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24261, 30 April 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420430.2.77

be to ascertain what further practical steps could be taken in the desired direction, using

Mr. Holland’s telegraph as the committee's general order of reference.”

As the Defense and Military Affairs Committee began working on its large task,

the regulations approved for compulsory service in the Home Guard took over the

spotlight. As the news raced across New Zealand that the Home Guard would now

formally be subject to compulsory enrollment, New Zealand's newspapers again recorded

the impact of the compulsory enrollment alongside the actions of Minister Semple during

compulsory enrollment itself. The drive for compulsory enrollment reached the pages of

Press on May 1, 1942, Press succinctly describing the important upcoming effort for its

readers, “Compulsory enrolment for the Home Guard service of all male British sub-jects

resident in the Dominion who have attained the age of 35 years but not the age of 51

years is required by an order gazetted to-day. With the exception of certain exempted

classes, these men are to apply for enrolment no later than May 7.”

Press detailed that

despite Minster Semple’s comment that this order would deplete the numbers of those

serving in the Emergency Precautions Service, effectively a manpower drain, that “It did

not necessarily follow that because a man applied for enrolment with the Home Guard, he

would be selected for Home Guard service. Selection committees would be formed in

various centres, consisting of representatives of the Emergency Precautions Service,

Home Guard, and manpower committees.”

Minister Semple insisted that this policy

was well founded, “The whole purpose in calling up men for the Home Guard service is

Ibid, 6.

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23626, 1 May 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19420501.2.41

Ibid, 6.

100

part of the national policy to ensure the best possible use of available man-power in

regard to the needs of the Armed Forces, the Home Guard and Emergency Precautions

Services.”

The Auckland Star approved of the decision in its own response the same day,

“The Government’s latest decision concerning the Home Guard offers the welcome

prospect of a systematic approach to the problem of using the remaining manpower in the

Dominion.”

Despite Home Guard equipment problems that caused, “enthusiasm for

service in it dwindled and many men thought they could be more immediately useful in

the [Emergency Precautions Service.]” the Auckland Star optimistically remarked that

now, “every man will have the nature of his service decided for him. Many men have

long desired this, and ask for nothing better.”

This infectious optimism carried over to

the New Zealand Herald on May 4, 1942, detailing the rapid pace of enrollment in

Auckland, “No time is being lost in Auckland following the announcement by the

Minister of National Service, the Hon. R. Semple, concerning the procedure to be

adopted in providing additional personnel. It is the intention of the Auckland Manpower

Committee to make available immediately for Home Guard service men in the gazetted

age group who appear to be eligible and whose civilian obligations do not con-flict with

their ability to undertake service.”

This extended to the expected enrollment numbers as

the New Zealand Herald excitedly noted, “It is expected that the city units of the Home

Ibid, 6.

Auckland Star, Volume LXXIII, Issue 101, 1 May 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand. https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19420501.2.46

Ibid, 4.

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24264, 4 May 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420504.2.40

101

Guard will be substantially reinforced within the next few days. Since the Minister’s

announcement was made on Friday a considerable flow of applications for enrolment

have been received at the Manpower Committee office. It is hoped that within the seven-

day period allowed by the gazette several thousand applications will pass through the

office.”

Another progress update from Press arrived on May 6, 1942, a sense of quiet

optimism emerging from its deconstruction of Minister Semple’s statement, “The

Minister said that many units of the Home Guard were in urgent need of additional

personnel, and in such districts the selection and posting of men would commence within

a few days. Calling up notices would be issued to all men selected for Home Guard

duty.”

As the enrollment deadline loomed on May 7, the lackluster response to the rifle

impressment issue perhaps loomed in some New Zealanders minds, would compulsory

enrollment be any different?

A hopeful answer to the enrollment question emerged in Auckland as the New

Zealand Herald and Auckland Star closely monitored the situation. The Auckland Star

described Auckland residents progress the day before the enrollment deadline with

nervous optimism, “From the steady flow of applica-tions for enrolment in the Home

Guard received at the Auckland Manpower Committee’s offices since the compulsory

regulation began on Monday some 250 men have received their calling-up notices, and

selection committees will shortly commence consideration of the cases of 1800 additional

names on hand.”

Ibid, 4.

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23630, 6 May 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library of New

Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19420506.2.43

Auckland Star, Volume LXXIII, Issue 105, 6 May 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19420506.2.52

102

The selection process appeared to be more holistic than anticipated as the

Auckland Star reported the core considerations as concerning, “A man’s occu-pation,

hours of work, availability for mobilisation and any position occu-pied in the Emergency

Reserve.”

The New Zealand Herald took over coverage of Auckland enrollment on

May 8, 1942, documenting the previous day's progress, “Approximately 750 men

residing in Auckland and the vicinity have been posted direct to the Home Guard under

compulsory enrolment up to last night.” The New Zealand Herald commented that

despite these numbers representing men who were “clearly available” for Home Guard

service and the “substantial number of men” who appealed their notices, “It is expected

when all are in hand the Auckland roll will contain a good many thousand names.”

The Auckland Star confirmed this expectation on May 8, 1942, as staff of the Auckland

Manpower committee were “kept busy” dealing with a flood of enrolment applications,

“By this afternoon about 1000 men residing in the Auckland area had been posted under

compulsory enrol-ment direct to the Home Guard.

With compulsory enrollment bearing optimistic fruit and Mr. Holland’s inquiry

underway, it seemed the Home Guard was heading into calmer waters after a stormy

opening half of 1942. With this notable progress being made, the government released its

annual report concerning the military situation in New Zealand, offering a notable

checkpoint analysis of the Home Guard. Compiled by Lieutenant-General E. Puttick, the

Military Forces of New Zealand Annual Report was presented to parliament on July 21,

Ibid, 6.

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24268, 8 May 1942, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19420508.2.109

Auckland Star, Volume LXXIII, Issue 107, 8 May 1942, Page 6. Papers Past Project, National Library of

New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19420508.2.95

103

1942. Lieutenant-General Puttick opened his report concerning the incorporation of the

Home Guard into the army “The Home Guard was instituted as a civil organization, but it

is now an integral and important part of the army” as of mid-1942. On the Home Guard

equipment issue, Lieutenant-General Puttick commented, “the equipment situation has

improved beyond expectations with a consequent improvement so far as the Home Guard

is concerned” but still needed work.

The Home Guard’s training outlook was also

optimistic: “training in the Home Guard has made great strides during the period since 1

August last.” This confidence was enough for Lieutenant-General Puttick to declare, “I

feel justified in saying the Home Guard is an organization that will render an excellent

account of itself should war extend to these shores.”

Despite Lieutenant-General

Puttick’s encouraging words in his report to the government, the perspective of the

government in this July 21, 1942 did not necessarily cover the plethora of problems the

Home Guard faced.

Major Melrose’s impassioned activism and subsequent coverage of his actions

unveiled a deep dissatisfaction with the government’s handling of the Home Guard as an

organization, furthering claims made by outspoken New Zealanders, such as Major

Melrose, that decisive action was not only needed, but could be found through passionate

grassroots activism on behalf of the Home Guard. A dismally low number of uniforms

allotted to Home Guardsmen, an equally frightening shortage of equipment such as rifle

and ammunition, and reversals of government policy concerning compulsory enrollment,

MILITARY FORCES OF NEW ZEALAND. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE GENERAL OFFICER COMMANDING.,

Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1942 Session I, H-19. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/parliamentary/AJHR1942-I.2.1.9.18

Ibid, H-19.

104

all threatened to derail the Home Guard during a critical stage of the war considering the

real threat of invasion by the Japanese Empire.

105

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION

When delving into newspaper accounts of the previous twenty-three months, a

more complex view of the Home Guard emerges, a multifaceted one laced with the

intricacies and complexities of rifle impressment, army incorporation, equipment,

uniforms, voluntary recruitment, and compulsory enrollment. Months after the issue of

compulsory enrollment dominated the pages, the results of the committee convened to

placate the problems within the Home Guard were practically finished. Leader of the

Opposition and Minister of War Expenditure, Mr. Sidney Holland, found himself

questioned by the Auckland Star on September 1, 1942 regarding sensitive Home Guard

issues. Holland’s words almost reflected the editorial stance of the New Zealand Herald

on February 26, 1942 in stating to the Auckland Star, “‘The Home Guard has been a very

patient organization-I might almost say long-suffering,’ said Mr. Hol-land. ‘It is

extraordinary how well the keenness has been maintained in many, if not most,

districts.’” Despite this praise for the Home Guard, even Mr. Holland himself as an

advocate for the Home Guard was pressured for a firm answer to the question of

uniforms. Holland insisted, “The supply of uniforms for those lacking them is one of the

first things requiring attention. Both with regard to clothing and equip-ment, I do not

think I should say anything that will be construed as a definite undertaking that

deficiencies will be rectified immediately. I may say the Home Guard is en-titled to and

can expect preference over the [Emergency Precautions Service] in the matter of uni-

106

forms.”

Mr. Holland’s hesitancy to offer anything that could be seen as definite, while

tentatively offering the Home Guard preference in uniforms, speaks loudly to the

inability of the government, and even the Leader of the Opposition, to make any promises

that simply were unable to uphold. Despite assurances that everything was being done

from multiple government officials, time and time again the Home Guard found itself

facing great uncertainty, soothed somewhat by the release of the committees report on

October 15, 1942.

The New Zealand Herald provided coverage of the report to its readers in a

detailed article, taking care to note Lieutenant-General Puttick’s specific wording on the

Home Guard. The report effectively functioned as a checkpoint for the Home Guard,

viewing its combined strength through both Division I and II, which totaled 109,226 men

as of October 8, 1942.

The New Zealand Herald demonstrated through Puttick’s

statements many of the recommendations pertained to “Division I,” which had been

described earlier in the October 30, 1941 issue of the Evening Post as consisting of

“50,000 of all ranks fit for combat duties,” while Division II made up the remaining

Home Guardsmen. Despite the hopeful sign that, “over 60 per cent of Division I of the

guard were now armed,” the committee recommended a drastic step beyond rifle

impressment: “personnel not equipped with .303 or similar rifles should be provided with

.22 rifles, shotguns, revolvers, all such weapons in private hands to be requisitioned for

the purpose.” In addition, comprehensive training would allow “every member of

Auckland Star, Volume LXXIII, Issue 206, 1 September 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National Library

of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19420901.2.65

New Zealand Herald, Volume 79, Issue 24405, 15 October 1942, Page 4. Papers Past Project, National

Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19421015.2.43

107

Division I to fire the full rifle course laid down for Territorial Force, although shortage of

.30 ammunition made it necessary for men armed with this caliber of rifle to fire the

greater part of the course with .303 rifles.”

Uniforms had seen improvement in their own

regard, with the issuance of “83,127 pairs of boots, 39,000 service dress uni-forms and

36,000 battle dress uniforms'' alongside recommendation that “further reduction be made

in the percentage of cloth allotted for civilian use” a step towards what author R.F.R. had

advocated for months earlier. With these recommendations made alongside other

administrative orders, the New Zealand Herald closed with noting Minister Jones’s “deep

appreciation of the importance of the guard and of the excellence of its work.”

Despite these reassurances from government officials of varying ranks and

degrees, the Home Guard’s trajectory over the course of the war shows a different

picture, muddied by problems that continued to impact the Home Guard until its

disbandment in December 1943. Recruitment efforts in 1940 until mid-1943 had shown

varying degrees of success. The initially dismal start that had characterized much of 1940

is perhaps best summarized in Sir Ernest Davis’s comments on December 12, 1940,

“apathy was inexplicable in view of the potential dangers in which the country was

faced.”

This sense of apathy for recruitment came despite Minister Semple’s earlier

declaration that the Home Guard would remain “entirely voluntary” on August 27, 1940.

Semple reiterated this position on March 11, 1941 when he noted, “Compulsory

Ibid, 4.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23837, 12 December 1940, Page 12. Papers Past Project,

National Library of New Zealand, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19401212.2.103

Northern Advocate, 27 August 1940, Page 7. Papers Past Project, National Library of New Zealand,

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19400827.2.99

108

membership of the Home Guard is not contemplated by the government at present.”

This

sense of apathy was somewhat absolved by satisfactory recruitment in early 1941,

described by the 1943 report of the National Service Department, “personnel was

recruited through publicity campaigns with the result that more than one hundred

thousand volunteers had joined up by April, 1941.”

However, the enactment of

compulsory enrollment in 1942 due to manpower losses and Minister Semple part in its

enactment, calls attention to his previous assurances that such a method was not

necessary for the Home Guard. Offering recruitment and compulsory enrolment as an

example of shifting wartime viewpoints and self-assurances of its success despite early

apathy.

The issue of rifle impressment functions as very strong evidence of both apathy

and a shortage of resources for the Home Guard, on behalf of the government, especially

considering its critical importance to the functioning of the Home Guard as a fighting

organization. Despite Col. Aldred’s early impressment call to the “powers-that-be that

these rifles should be made available to the Home Guard” the issue festered well into

early and mid-1941.

Prime Minister Fraser’s February 24, 1941 comments that “it was

impractical to make an adequate supply available to the Home Guard” offer a humbling

admission by the government of their failure to adequately provide rifles for the Home