User:ITz Spitfire

Conscription, compulsory military service, in Australia was one of the most significant issues that evoked controversy and debate in politics and everyday discussion during the First World War. The Prime Minister at the time, William ‘Billy’ Hughes, believed that conscription was essential for Australia to maintain its fighting capacity and its contribution to the war efforts in Europe. The issue of affair influenced many people, especially figures in the Church and Parliament, where it became opinionated and strongly debated as if the law was passed, it would affect the whole nation.

A Dividing Nation
During the beginning of World War I to the establishment of the Gallipoli campaign in March of 1915, the Australian Imperial Force (AIF) saw floods of volunteers enlisting to join the Allied forces in the European fronts. However, shortly after the Australians arrived at the fronts did news come through to Australia of the disastrous Somme offensives in France, the huge loss of lives and the terrible conditions in the trenches, the AIF saw a gradual decrease in applicants and volunteers near the end of 1916. Australia fell short by more than half of its promise to supply 16500 troops per month in order to maintain their fighting capacity in Europe. Following a visit to the battlefields of France, William Hughes, the Australian Prime Minister, proposed the solution of conscription to sustain the Australian military strength and fighting numbers. Hughes’ solution prompted controversy and nationwide debate that led to civil conflict and disagreement on the issue of conscription.

How and Why Conscription Divided the Nation
The conscription debate divided Australian society into two groups: one supporting conscription and the other opposing. Both groups began alienating their opponents and echoed the same loyalty as exhibited in the Federation debate in the late 1800s where conflict, anger and a ‘civil war-of-words’ were exchanged. Support for the idea of conscription was lead by Hughes and followed by military groups, newspapers and political figures supported the idea of conscription as the ideal answer; however, they were opposed by numerous Churches, women activists and many of the working class. Supporters of conscription stated that young men should be conscripted as their participation in war embodies patriotism and bravery expected of Australians whilst being a part of shaping Australia’s future. Conscripting more men, in addition, as they believed would allow Australia to prove itself as an opulent force having been largely overshadowed by its mother country, Britain. In a speech made by Hughes at Sydney Town Hall during his conscription campaign he states: “Are their sacrifices and those of our glorious dead to be made in vain? Who will support the abandonment of our fellow citizens who are fighting with deathless heroism?” It can be exhibited that many propaganda posters portrayed men in action or women at home along with a message that was targeted to sway and evoke the responder’s emotions of patriotism. Opposition to the matter of conscription based their arguments upon the principles of loss of workforce, invasion of foreigners and the lack of pay when conscripted. More importantly though, moral judgement on why young men should be forced to give up their opportunities for war as they were literally ‘replacing the dead or wounded’. Furthermore, the Easter Uprising and Britain’s brutal and unjust retribution to the affair was also another reason that contributed to the changing attitude of the Irish and Roman Catholics and the dividing society.

Role of Women in the Conscription Debate
The role of women in the conscription debate paramount as their work, propaganda campaigns and overall contribution primarily against conscription reinforced their legacy as an influential strength in wartimes. Women played a key role in committed to organising groups such as the ‘Women’s Peace Army’ and ‘United Women’s No-Conscription Committee’ (UWNCC) which essentially promoted anti-conscription and ‘vote no’ propaganda. The women’s votes were seen as important and large meetings and campaign events were held aimed at women. Moreover, targeting propaganda at women was advantageous as they could influence and persuade their husbands to vote against conscription. Emergence of women activists during Federation and in the fight for women suffrage became foundations for more women standing up to voice their opinions. In October, 1916, the UWNCC organized a women parade that advertised the opposition of conscription where 60 000 women walked down the streets of Melbourne. Poster pictures depicting women and sometimes children were also utilised to promote the campaign of the opposition to the issue.

Referendum Process and Result
Prime Minister Hughes was a firm supporter in Australia’s involvement in World War I and believed that it was vital for Australia to prove its military power as well as support Britain in battle. However, after visiting the battlefields of Somme and receiving pressure to increase troop numbers being sent to Europe, Hughes eventually agreed with the AIF that the most effective way to do this was through the introduction of conscription. However, as Hughes did not have a majority support in Parliament, Hughes could only pass this change in law through means of referendum (a vote in which the nation is asked on whether they support or oppose against the issue). On the 28th October, 1916, Australian voters were asked: The results were very close with marginal differences with 1 087 557 ‘yes’ votes and 1 160 033 ‘no’ votes with 3 states with a majority of ‘yes’’ and 3 states with a majority of ‘no’s. Hughes was promptly voted out of the Labor Party; however, after combining with the Liberal Party and 24 of his followers from the Labor Party, the wartime Nationalist Party was created. In 1917, after a resounding win in election, Hughes was re-elected to his second term as Prime Minister and within months, he declared for a second referendum. The Australian population was asked on 20th December, 1917, to once again vote on whether they supported or opposed conscription. It was later declared that Hughes’ campaign had lost with a larger margin that previously: 1 181 747 ‘yes’ votes and 1 015 159 ‘no’ votes, however, this time with 4 states voting ‘no’. The greater numbers of opposition towards the introduction of conscription was largely due to the great losses of the battles of Ypres, Messines and Gallipoli. After a second rejected referendum, the campaign for conscription gradually lost interest and support as Hughes himself lost commitment to persevere.

Archbishop Mannix
Daniel Patrick Mannix (1864-1963), the Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne at the time, was ambiguously one of the most influential and outspoken supporters and pioneers who spearheaded the anti-conscription campaign in WWI. Archbishop Mannix was the main opponent of William Hughes and used his power of persuasion and influences over the Roman Catholic Church to publicly voice his opinions. Due to his positions in the Church and his support, his opinions were not censored thus reinforcing his influence on the public. Archbishop Mannix’s views were largely influenced by his Irish backgrounds, where he disapproved of supporting and argued against any cause that involved the British. His perspective and prejudice against the British reflected what many angered Irish-Australians believed following the Easter Uprising in Ireland and execution of Irish leaders by the British. Archbishop Mannix’s strongly supported the campaign against conscription in Australia, voicing his thoughts in the Age newspaper on October 1916: “Australia has done her full share in the war…conscription is a hateful thing and will bring evil in its train…present war would not have assumed such disastrous proportions if conscription had not prevailed in Europe”. In a speech he made to an open audience, Mannix also added that the war was only prolonged for economic advantages/development and conscription would be futile and unnecessary.

William Hughes
William ‘Billy’ Hughes (1862-1952) was the seventh Prime Minister of Australia and was one of the most colourful and ambitious politicians during the era of WWI. Hughes is remembered as Australia’s longest serving parliamentary member having changed parties five times and serving Hughes made significant contribution to the campaign of supporting conscription and was involved greatly propaganda advertisement of the issue, legislation in Parliament and in the lead up to the referenda. Hughes was a strong supporter of the War and Australia’s participation in the war efforts; however, after a loss of 28 000 men in July, 1916, Hughes was persuaded by the AIF to acknowledge that conscription was the only option in order to maintain Australia’s fighting force. Hughes was instrumental in establishing a campaign supporting conscription as he journeyed nationwide to deliver speeches promoting support for the issue which was endorsed by newspapers and preceded by posters. The first referendum was voted against with a narrow marginal victory for the opposition. The Labor Party passed a vote of no confidence in Hughes and subsequently left the Party with 24 of his followers. Upon his departure from the Labor Party, Hughes delivers one of the finest political cries “Let those who think like me, follow me”. After forming a new Nationalist Party, combining with the Liberal Party, Hughes was re-elected as Prime Minister for a second term in 1917 where he again decided to pass a second referendum. Unsurprisingly, his second referendum was voted against again with a slightly larger margin between the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ votes. Following his loss, he gave up attempt in the conscription issue, admitting defeat and did not persevere in a third attempt of referendum.