between trained men and seasoned men-outside the Regular Army there are no sources except the present National Guard and selectees from which to secure such men.

Now, if you want them to stay, there are two methods that you can use to get them. You can ask for volunteers. This involves a recruiting campaign in each unit, a name-calling process, a disorderly method of compelling each man to make a decision as to what his duty is, and to be called a slacker or something else if he does not. Selective Service, of course, feels that that is not fair to the organization, that it is not fair to the individual, and it is not fair to the Nation. However, that is one method of trying to keep in the organization the man who is trained and seasoned-if you feel you must keep him.

There is one other method. I might say, however, that to get this volunteering done, in addition to name-calling, you can go a little farther and add bounties of one kind or another, regardless of whether they are paid now or when he leaves the service, or to his family if he never does. If you do that, you must face the necessity of setting up within each of these companies that General Devers has told you about, some men who are going to get $60 a month and some that are going to get $30 a month, and some that are going to get some other figure.

I have been an enlisted man. I have lived most of my life as a battery commander. No one thinks more highly of soldiers than I do, real, genuine admiration-whatever I may be, they have made me, and I say it very freely, and I would like to see them get every nickel that the Federal Government can pay them-but in the outfit that I command I say pay the same amount for the same service. Make them alike, because I do not believe you can have morale, training, and efficiency in a unit that has one man drawing $60 a month and another one drawing $30 for being a private.

Now, I offer as a solution of this problem, the retention of these units intact by the use of the law which you gentlemen in your wisdom passed last year, I believe, to meet the situation with which you are now faced. I believe the operation of that law will give you efficiency, security, and will be in accord with what was planned, at least by not a few of you last year, to meet an emergency, should it come, if you believe that the national interest is imperiled.

I would like to say in conclusion that the Selective Service System has lasting interest in the selectee as an individual, and I am not claiming anything except the selfishness of an organization, if you want to express it that way. We select him for induction. We receive him on discharge and attempt to have him reemployed. His well-being during his service is reflected in at least one of our 6.500 local board areas. The public reaction to selective service creates a public opinion which permits or prohibits our operation. The long range best interest of the soldier. and of all soldiers, is of vital importance to the Selective Service System, but the long-range interest of the soldier is likewise the long range best interest of the Nation. I appreciate the desires of some, perhaps many, to terminate their service.

I lived as a small farmer, as a small farmer lives in that great Midwest. From my own experience I know something of the public

school-teacher's life, and how college students think, and of their aims and their homes. I know something of what an enlisted man of the National Guard thinks, and an officer of the National Guard, and the problems that come to them. I have lived through one situation quite similar to this one. I was on the border in 1916 in a National Guard unit, wondering from day to day when we were going to go home-and I wanted to go home, and all the rest of them in the unit wanted to go home, especially when Purdue-not Notre Dame but Purdue-had a college unit next door to mine, and they came home because they let the college people come home. My unit was two-thirds college, but we came from town and we were known as a town unit. The result was we did not come home until December. We got out in the snow on December 29, 1916, and I went back to Angola.

Now, what did getting out at that time do for me? Another fellow had my school, the school that I had been teaching. Mr. THOMASON. Where was this, North Carolina?

General HERSHEY. Indiana. Angola, Ind.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you never hear of Angola, Ind.? [Laughter.] Mr. THOMASON. No.

General HERSHEY. I did not get my school back. A great many of the other boys did not get their jobs back, because in less than a month we broke diplomatic relations with Germany, and then what was the use of putting me back in the school? I was going away in the summer anyway. What was the use putting these other men back in their jobs? The employer would say: "I want somebody that is going to at least be with me a little while." Not only that, but I had this question of uncertainty: first, we were going to be mobilized in April, then in May, then in June, and finally in the latter part of June we found that the date was August 5, and that date stuck, and we were mobilized on August 5. But I did not engage in anything gainful-perhaps it may take a stretch of the imagination for anyone to believe that I had before, but I had. I engaged in nothing gainful, and the great majority of my fellow soldiers did not either, because some of them could not get jobs. Some of them said, "It is only going to be a month or so, and I am going to sort of ease out of town. I am not going to work these last 2 or 3 weeks." And a great many people said, "Well, I am sorry, but I can't use you. If I teach you how to do the job I want to keep you."

Mr. SHORT. The very thing that is likely to occur now.

General HERSHEY. I was working up, emotionally or otherwise, to a situation where you would see where I am sitting with 800,000 people coming at me in the next few months wanting me to find them a job, telling their to-be employer that they are members of the Guard and will be likely to be called out any time, or that they are in the Reserves and are subject to recall at a moment's notice to join their forces.

I remember that when I left the border my company was not a very large company, but it was a very well seasoned company. We could march three or three and a quarter miles an hour, a good many hours a day, if we had to. When we next came together in August, it was in May or June 1918, before my unit approached

what they were in December 1916. I may not have had too good an experience, because in the first place a lot of our boys went to training camp and became officers and I am very glad they did. We did expand into an artillery unit and take on more men, but we were not seasoned when again we met in August 1917.

In conclusion I want to say one sentence and I will be finished. Congress has provided an efficient method, which they provided after long thought, to meet a condition where there is a peril to the Nation. The Selective Service System recommends that that policy be employed.

The CHAIRMAN. General, you have been before the committee so often and have been so helpful to us that it seems as though perhaps no one on the committee will want to ask you any further questions. Your statement has been so excellent that I am going to thank you on behalf of the committee, and if there are no questions we will proceed with the next witness.

Mr. CLASON. General, have you any documents, any printed documents, in which you carry the enlistments or the inductions of selectees by months?

General HERSHEY. Are you speaking of inductions into the 1 year, into the training period, or enlistments in the Army?

Mr. CLASON. I am referring to the Selective Service Act.

General HERSHEY. Oh, yes, I can furnish you that. I will be glad to do so.

Mr. CLASON. I wish you would furnish that.

General HERSHEY. Yes, I will.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, General.

Now, we have two more very brief witnesses, and then I want the committee to remain, because I have an announcement to make. Our next witness is Mr. Frank Murray, president, National Parents of Selectees, Inc. Let me ask you a few questions, and then you can present your statement. Where do you live?

STATEMENT OF FRANK MURRAY, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL PARENTS OF SELECTEES, INC.

Mr. MURRAY. I live in South Bend, Ind.

The CHAIRMAN. What is your connection? Whom do you represent?

Mr. MURRAY. I represent the National Parents of Selectees, Inc. That is an Indiana corporation.

The CHAIRMAN. When was it organized?

Mr. MURRAY. May 21, 1941.

The CHAIRMAN. What character of corporation is it? Is it a nonprofit organization?

Mr. MURRAY. It is a nonprofit corporation.

The CHAIRMAN. How is it supported in its activities?

Mr. MURRAY. By the contributions of its members, contributions of parents who are not members, and regular membership dues.

The CHAIRMAN. How do you obtain contributions from the parents? Mr. MURRAY. By sending letters to them asking them either to attend a meeting, take part in the volunteer work, or send in some money.

The CHAIRMAN. How do you obtain your finances other than that, if you have any?

Mr. MURRAY. We do not have any.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you on a salary?

Mr. MURRAY. Not with the National Parents of Selectees. That is a purely voluntary organization, and all work is volunteered by the parents themselves.

The CHAIRMAN. What are the duties of yourself and your assistants? What activities do you engage in?

Mr. MURRAY. You mean other than the National Parents of Selectees?

The CHAIRMAN. What is your work?

Mr. MURRAY. My work is head of a taxpayers organization.

The CHAIRMAN. A taxpayers organization set up as a branch of your parents of selectees?

Mr. MURRAY. No, sir; that is a local organization that has been in existence for some time.

Mr. HARNESS. This is an organization of the parents of these boys who have been drafted in Indiana.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I am simply trying to find out about it. How do you get your finances with which to operate this particular organization?

Mr. MURRAY. Just in the manner which I have stated, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. What is your position with respect to this resolution? Are you for it or against it?

Mr. MURRAY. I am opposed to it, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Proceed with your statement.

Mr. MURRAY. First, I am from South Bend, Ind., where the Notre Dame team is located. We know when the Notre Dame team is going good, and it is going good when its morale is high. It goes good when it has trust and confidence in its coach and the officers of the team. And we know that when it is going bad, is when its morale is low and confidence is lacking. This is the main point that I want to present to your gentlemen today, the attitude of mind of the parents and the boys in the ranks. It is a question of our morale and the morale of the boys that is the greatest question before you. It is not what may be the attitude of the Congress today or what you thought you were doing, that affects the morale, it is what has been communicated to the parents and our boys that are in camp, and what they and we understand.

I have been here only a few hours, but in that few hours I find an atmosphere that is entirely different than the atmosphere back home. The understanding is different than our understanding at home. I could not help but note, as the generals talked here today, that everything they had to say in support of this resolution should have been existent on paper or in their minds at the time the act was passed by Congress. There has been absolutely no change whatever in the needs of the Army.

It so happens that I served better than 4 years in the United States Marine Corps. About 2 years of that time was spent in recruiting service, and I have some idea of bringing men into the service. I know that part of it. I know what it is to enlist men and have them dropping out of the ranks over a period of time.

Records will show that each recruiting sergeant would take in three or four men a week. Those men had to be dropped out from day to day as their enlistments expired. That problem has always faced the Army, the Marine Corps, the Navy, and when the Selective Service Act was passed, the men in charge of the Army knew of that condition. Therefore, as far as we are concerned as parents, what you have in the act as to the period of 12 months of training was just exactly what we expected, and that is precisely what our boys expected, and not more than 12 months unless there was a war. In interpreting the act to the parents or to the boys who asked questions about time limit or what the words national emergency, or the Nation is in peril, it was understood that "in peril" meant war. And that was what was in our minds-not that the time would be extended by declaring an emergency while conditions were not changed. I want to get to that point now, this emergency it is said we have before us.

It is true that I come from a State where most everybody is in politics; where we take an interest in our Government. We perhaps have more means and methods of making democracy work in our State than any other State in the Union. That is more or less its record, and most all States, especially their citizen organizations, are continuously attempting to follow the Indiana plan to give the people the right to operate their government.

Based on this background, we took an interest in the emergency at the time of the passage of the 1940 Selective Service Act. What were we thinking was the emergency at the time this act was passed! I will tell you what we were thinking in Indiana, that the British Government would move to Canada. Our newspapers were carrying it. That was our understanding, that the English could not last on the island, and it was only a matter of just a short time until they would have to leave. It was our understanding at that time that Germany, Italy, Russia, and Japan were in a combination against the democracies. We considered that the emergency was of such character that our boys should go into training and get ready for it.

We also considered that Spain, Germany, and Italy were active in South America. It was our general understanding that they had entire colonies down there where the people were trained to fight; that there was a sufficient number of Spaniards, Italians, and Germans in South America, that they could control what the South American countries were doing; that they could actually vote and had sufficient numbers in the various legislative bodies so that they controlled the government itself. That was our understanding of the emergency at the time our boys went in. There is absolutely no difference in the emergency today, as presented by the leaders of our Government, and what we understood the emergency to be at

that time.

Mr. SHORT. Will you suffer an interruption, Mr. Murray? Do you not think the emergency should be less now because Russia was not fighting Germany then, but they are in a death struggle now. Mr. MURRAY. Well, thank you, I have covered that point right in

my notes.