and Williams' statement that the National Guard men would be willing to serve more than 1 year.

Where did he get that idea, we all would like to know?

We gave up good jobs and are willing to serve a year, but to give up more of our civilian life when our Nation is not even in a war is very foolish. Most of us up here have plans we propose to carry out when we are released from service. If this country were at war we would be glad to remain in the Army until the battle is won or lost. We believe 1 year of training is sufficient for any soldier. Why keep us longer?

In New Jersey, troops from the 44th Division dropped notes from trucks as they passed through cities, appealing to civilians to defeat the proposal to extend the training period. They too asked where did Williams get his information? Whom did he ask?

Reports from the Navy are equally disturbing. We offer the following excerpts from a letter received by a mother from her son who is a university graduate. He writes:

There should be quite a bit to write about but we are not allowed to write. We can shout what we think from the housetops as long as we don't shout above a whisper and as long as no one hears us.

Tell Eddie [his brother] to stay out of the Army, Navy, or any other branch of the service at any cost."

We mothers, opposed the Compulsory Draft Act for several reasons, one of which was that we felt that there was no need for this drastic departure from our way of life. We feel there is no need now to further extend the act by authorizing the President to exercise the power conferred upon him by section 3 (b) of the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, which section gives the President the power to retain the men indefinitely if a national emergency is found to exist. When a general testifying before this committee was asked whether the emergency is greater now than it was on September 16, 1940, he stated it is. When asked why it is greater he answered in true warmonger style, "The whole world is aflame, practically." Mr. Chairman, and members of this committee, this is not sufficient evidence on which to base an important decision-one which affects the lives, mentally, morally, and physically of millions of young men, in and out of the Army; our young women and in a different manner, but in no less degree, mothers and fathers of this Nation.

I want to say here that intelligent people favor building our national defense to such strength that we can resist any invasion but we demand that our Government stop making plans for sending the armed forces to any and all parts of the globe.

It is claimed by the generals and some members of Congress that the public understood when the Selective Training and Service Act was passed that service was for 12 months or more.

Mr. Chairman, when the Burke-Wadsworth bill was being debated in Congress the short training period-only 12 months-was played up. The possibility of a national emergency and service for the duration was played down. In fact, a song was written and became very popular the title, "It's Only a Year, Dear."

The position of parents is a trying one. They hear from their sons who are in camp. Others, whose sons have not yet been called, live in constant suspense and mental anguish. We see the war machine moving forward, relentlessly crushing everything in its path. For national defense? Who believes that today?

We hear reports of troops sent to outposts! Requests are made for legislation to send them anywhere in the world! Speeches before luncheon clubs explaining that we must mobilize our men, young and old and prepare to fight anywhere on the globe! The President's ambition is to enthrone the four freedoms everywhere in the world. The War Department requests of Congress complete power to act. The plan to enter the war is obvious. We oppose extension of the training period because it is another step toward war. Unless we stop taking these steps we will one day find ourselves at war.

Clearly the purpose of this proposal and the request to declare the national interest is imperiled is to circumvent the limitations of the Selective Service and Training Act of 1940; to legalize holding the draftees indefinitely; to legalize sending our armed forces anywhere in the world.

They are already scattered from the Philippines to Bermuda and Trinidad, Newfoundland and Iceland. Yet, Canada, a British Dominion is only now discussing the possibility of conscription for overseas service. Canadian soldiers train for 4 months; are paid $40 per month; overseas service is voluntary. Prime Minister Mackenzie King is opposed to conscription for overseas service and is making speeches throughout the Dominion against it.

General Marshall gives as a reason why the training period should be extended the fact that the War Department now faces the problem of returning the draftees who have been sent to outposts, and getting them back in time to muster them out when their year is up.

Surely the War Department knew they were limited by law when these men were sent away. They knew when the men were due for discharge from the Army. Why then did they wait until late in July to ask for a change in the legal machinery and urge its passage by August 1? There was ample time to foresee and plan for this.

Since we are not a military dictatorship and since the people are of the opinion that they are the government; we make this observation: Since the War Department is not infallible, and since there are unmistakable signs of incompetence, would it be asking too much if we were to suggest that they consider well before rushing into another situation from which there is no turning back.

STATEMENT OF MRS. ETHEL GROEN, PRESIDENT, THE MOTHERS OF SONS FORUM, CINCINNATI, OHIO

The CHAIRMAN. The next on my list is Mrs. Ethel Groen, of Cincinnati.

Mrs. GROEN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I want you to know that I come before your committee not as a hysterical mother nor as a woman who is beside herself because I do not. And I also wish to apologize because I am not a public speaker and probably if I were I could put this over much more effectively than I will be able to do.

I represent and am president of the Mothers of Sons Forum of Cincinnati, Ohio, and wish to thank the committee for the opportunity to present their views on the proposals now before this committee, which views we make free to declare, reside in the consciousness of the vast majority of our people.

I want you to know that I have two sons, one boy 25 years of age, a Reserve officer in the Ohio State Militia; and another boy 18 years old. I have a daughter 16. I have every interest and right to appear here to represent those boys, and I also have the responsibility to speak for the Mothers of Sons Forum, mothers who belong to the organization I represent.

Like every true American organization that has the interest of its country at heart, we are definitely for national defense and hemisphere commitments, but we are as definitely opposed to measures which can be construed only as aggressive war measures and which violate the purpose of the Draft Act as stated in the act itself and in its title, namely, "An Act to Provide for Common Defense."

Last fall General Marshall estimated less than 500,000 men were needed for adequate hemisphere defense. Today he talks in terms of millions. Was General Marshall right last fall or is he right today? Or is he right in both instances as his reputation inclines us to believe him to be? If this be so, then certainly while General Marshall was talking about "defense" last fall, he is talking about something entirely different today. These contradictory figures made by the same authority seem conclusive proof that we were forever right in our contention that the draft bill was never intended as a defense measure, but was a war move, and we therefore oppose the proposal to extend the period of service for draftees and demand that the terms of the contract made by our Government with these boys, be honorably complied with and that you do not break faith with our men in order to "keep faith" with strangers.

The President's first obligation of good faith is toward the draftees, their fathers and mothers and their country generally. The 12-month service period obligation to the draftees is something that comes before any questionable "good faith" toward our neighbors.

The parents in this country as also the boys are familiar with the circumstances under which the Draft Act was framed, and by implication, the purposes of this act. They know who composed the group that met at the Harvard Club, New York City, May 22, 1940, to make plans for a conscript army for the United States of America.

They know of the quarter million dollars this same group raised to drive the conscription bill through Congress.

We have not forgotten the statement that green American troops "can be trained as well in Singapore, Palestine, Egypt, and Ireland as in Georgia" and other Southern States. In other words, it would seem our American soldiers will be policing and protecting British dope interests in Singapore; British oil interests in Palestine, British cotton interests in Egypt under the guise of training, and at our

expense.

President Roosevelt expressed the feeling that Japan's imitation of his Iceland move would induce Americans to support these fresh requests made upon Congress. Fortunately, however, we have not forgotten Sidney Rogerson's warning that "To persuade (America) to take our part (in the next war) will need a definite threat to America, a threat, moreover, which will have to be brought home by propaganda to every citizen before the Republic will again take arms in an external quarrel. The position will naturally be considerably eased if Japan were involved and this might and probably would

bring America in without further ado. At any rate, it would be a natural and obvious object of our propagandists to achieve this, just as during the Great War they succeeded in embroiling the United States with Germany."

We know that many of our most ardent warmongers are empireminded. We Americans have no desire for empire. The history of every empire from Roman to British, is a record of crimes against the common man. Though it is fabulous business for a few, it means unsuspected misery for many.

While the men in the army and their parents are definitely for defense of their own country, the men do not intend to fight for British Imperialism, for Russian Communism, nor even for American Imperialism, it would be advisable for you gentlemen to consider this fact when you vote on the resolution. If our men are going to die in war, it will be better for them to die here defending American liberties against American tyranny.

We who went to war to give the Negro freedom certainly cannot be expected to look on complacently at this attempt to rob us of ours. Mr. CLASON. Have you talked to any of the boys in camp? Mrs. GROEN. Yes, I have.

Mr. CLASON. Judging from those with whom you have talked can you say about what proportion of them are favorable or would desire to remain in the service beyond the one year period?

Mrs. GROEN. I have the first one to meet yet who has expressed any willingness or desire to remain in the service after the year is

over.

Mr. CLASON. Is it your opinion or view that these selectees would voluntarily enlist to serve in the Regular Army after the 12-months period is over?

Mrs. GROEN. It certainly is my opinion, from what I have learned in my contacts with the selectees, that they would not.

Mr. CLASON. In that respect you find yourself considerably opposed to the statement that has been made by the members of the military? Mrs. GROEN. There is no question about that; I certainly do feel that way.

The CHAIRMAN. We thank you.

Mrs. GROEN. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, madam.

We have two other witnesses now, Mrs. L. S. Benge of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Mr. Stuart Benge, of Cincinnati, Ohio. May I inquire if you happen to be husband and wife, or not?

Mr. BENGE. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you be contented to have one of you make the statement?

Mrs. BENGE. If it be necessary, due to the shortness of time, I would rather have my husband speak for the family; otherwise I should like to speak for myself. [Laughter.]

But I will say this: I only have one thing to say, and I still would like to have my husband speak, but I still would like to have the gentlemen hear what I have to say. I maintain that I should like to be heard.

The CHAIRMAN. There is not a man on this committee but what understands that. [Laughter.]

Come around, Mr. Benge.

STATEMENT OF STUART BENGE, CINCINNATI, OHIO

Mr. BENGE. Mr. Chairman, I hope the gentlemen of this committee will not think that I am prejudiced, but I am saying what I think, from what information I have gained by traveling in various parts of the country and talking to men in the Army camps.

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Military Affairs Committee: My name is Stuart Benge. I am appearing here on behalf of my son who is now in the draft Army. He has been deprived of his constitutional rights and cannot speak for himself. The enactment of this bill which is backed by a minority group in this country, and fostered by His Imperial Majesty's Government of Great Britain, will condemn my son to possible death or maiming.

The general public and the draftees accepted the Conscription Act in the belief that it was a defense measure, and that the Army was not to be used to defend the British Empire or invade the European continent. There is not a soldier in the American Army who would not fight to the last ditch to defend his country, but that does not mean that he is willing to die on some foreign battlefield to save the declining British Empire.

The draftees and the general public have not been duped by British propaganda as they were in the last war. Now that bloody communistic Russia has been welcomed into the fold by England and the United States, the mask is at last torn aside, and only a moron would fail to realize that the present war is a struggle for the domination of Europe.

The draftees had not been in camp a month before they started to mark the days off the calendar, checking daily the number of days they had to serve to complete their year of training-training which is almost valueless because of the lack of equipment and ammunition. I have not talked to a single draftee or even heard of one who has expressed a desire to stay beyond his year of service.

The loss of life due to accidents during maneuvers held by our new Army has been all out of proportion to the number of men engaged. I would suggest that this committee secure from the Army sworn statements as to the number of men killed in accidents during maneuvers held the last few months, also the number of suicides. If the members of this committee are really interested in knowing what the boys actually think, I would suggest that they visit some camps and, after excluding all commissioned and noncommissioned officers from the hearing to prevent coercion, ask the private soldiers what they think about the lengthening of their term of service.

In February 1940 General Marshall told a congressional committee that a regular army of 242,000, together with the National Guard, then numbering 235,000-or a total of 477,000 men-could defend the United States and its hemisphere commitments. A short time later he appeared before a congressional committee and supported an increase in the Regular Army as adequate to defense and opposed conscription. Then the administration, abetted by the warmongers, cooked up the conscription bill, and July 12, 1940, found General Marshall testifying in favor of that bill. But he told the Senate Military Affairs Committee on that occasion that he opposed a suggested increase in the Regular Army to 750,000.