« ПретходнаНастави »
the Regular Army were pursuing their life work. The casual- We understand perfectly well what it will eventuate in. At ties among the junior officers particularly were very, very next Congress the officers who are less than 30 per cent disabled large.
will demand that this discrimination be removed and that their A friend of mine, Mr. Sterling J. Joyner, now in this city, compensation be also based upon rank. If I were a supporter had a conversation last summer in a club in Paris with three of this bill I can think of no legitimate reason why, should I of the French generals, outstanding generals in the French be a Member of that Congress, I could refuse to support such Army-General Petain, General Neville, and General Foch. In a demand. discussing the American soldiers this gentleman asked General I learn from the minority report that this bill will favor Neville, “ Just what do you think of the American soldiers and 3,297 emergency officers whose disability is 30 per cent and the part they took in the World War? How were they as above and will leave 6,972 emergency officers whose disability soldiers?” He paused a moment, and then said, “I tell you, is less than 30 per cent upon the same basis of compensation never in the history of the world have finer soldiers stood in the as the enlisted man. It is further stated therein that there are ranks of war. The only criticism I would make of them is 69,386 enlisted men who are disabled to the same degree as the that they were too careless of danger." [Applause.]
3,297 emergency officers who are to benefit and 173,842 whose And that is the reason--that is one reason-why we are disabilities are rated at less than 30 per cent permanent. here to-day dealing with a measure which concerns so many Second, let us look to the situation as regards the dependents wounded officers of the World War. They were not men who of those officers who were killed or died in the service and said, “Go." They were men who said, “Follow me.” And for since the war. This bill makes no provision to change their that reason the casualties among them were very large.
situation. The dependents of those dead officers will continue Mr. Speaker, I shall not take up more time of the House.
to draw compensation upon equality with the dependents of I believe the House desires the opportunity to vote on this privates. measure. It has passed the Senate time and time again. Con- If we are to change the national policy and base compensasideration has been put off, lo, these many years. The Ameri- tion upon rank, should we not think of the dependents of the can Legion has indorsed it time and time again. I believe the dead as well as the votes of the living? [Applause. ] people of America are behind this bill, and I believe the House These two glaring discriminations as between the emergency will do itself credit by passing the Tyson-Fitzgerald bill. officers themselves seem to me to condemn the bill. [Applause.]
But it is urged that Congress is only being asked to place the Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 minutes to the emergency officers upon the same basis as officers of the Regugentleman from Tennessee. [Mr, GARRETT).
lar Army, and it must be said that this has doubtless been the The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Tennessee
most appealing argument or plea which has been advanced to is recognized for 20 minutes.
the enlisted men to secure their indorsement of this measure. Mr. GARRETT of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, it has been my
They have been asked at their Legion meetings, "Do you not pleasure to support every item of legislation which has been
feel that your officer who went out as you did from civil life brought before the House of Representatives in behalf of the should be treated as well as the Regular Army officer?” and it disabled service men of the World War, except the rider placed was the most natural thing in the world for the enlisted man on the appropriation bill by the Senate in 1920 which discrimi- to answer “Yes.” In nine cases out of ten, I dare say, the nated between officers and privates in the naval service and Ma
enlisted man never gave consideration to the great question rine Corps. Upon this, as I shall later show, there was no of national policy involved. He compared his emergency officer, opportunity for an independent vote.
whom he may have loved, with the Regular Army officer, whom I have friends, political and personal, who have most earnestly he may not have loved so much, and compared them as officers. and persistently urged me to support the pending bill. I do not He did not, for the moment, think to compare the emergency recall ever having had more pressure brought upon me in behalf officer with himself on the basis of citizenship. The enlisted of any measure than has been for this one. Letters and tele
man will come to think of this bye and bye, and just what, I grams have flooded my desk, not only from my State but from wonder, is he going to say to us when he does ? I believe i the entire country, and in numerous personal contacts I have know. He is going to say, “Those emergency officers and I been urged to vote for it.
went out from civil life together. We sacrified our businesses I should be less than frank did I fail to admit the embarrass- alike; we took the same hazard; we suffered the same tortures; ment which these requests and—I may say in some instances
we returned together to civil life and became equal again in demands have caused me. But I have been unable to reconcile the great mass of American democracy, equal in rights before myself to the support of the principle involved in the bill, and the law, though for a time that man was an officer and I a I wish briefly to state the reasons for my position.
private in the ranks.” And when the enlisted men have worked First, let us see just what the bill is. It is designated in this out in their minds they are going to cry out in bitterness, common parlance as the World War emergency Officers' retire- “Our Congress has done an undemocratic thing; they have ment bill. I think, however, that no frank advocate of the overturned the traditions of our national life lasting down measure who really understands it will claim that it is anything through a century and a half ; they have discriminated between other than a proposal to establish a system whereby disabled citizens, civilians now, if you please; they have engrafted a men of the World War who were officers will receive compensa
new principle upon the practice of the Republic; they have for tion--which up to the World War was called “pension"- the first time exalted rank!” [Applause.] according to rank. It is a pension bill based upon rank. Under the terms of the bill emergency officers with a 30 officers of the Regular Army.
But let us see, for a moment, about the retirement of the per cent disability will receive compensation for life as follows:
That system was instituted long before any Member of this Brigadier general.
250.00 | Congress sat upon this floor. But we sitting here now can at Lieutenant colonel
218. 75 least comprehend the reason which prompted our long ago Major
predecessors to adopt it as a governmental policy, although it Captain--
150.00 First lieutenant
125.00 may not be popular as a campaign shibboleth. Second lieutenant-
93. 75 We can imagine the early proponents of the system arguing The ordinary enlisted man with a 30 per cent disability will in about the following language: “Ours is not a military Nacontinue to receive just $30 per month.
tion. God forbid that it shall ever become so. We maintain It is needless to say to those familiar with the pension laws but a small standing Army, but we have to have officers for this of the past and present that this proposal is one which will Army and good ones. Those who become officers in the Regular completely change the traditional national policy of preserving Army, whether by way of West Point, as most of them do, or equality in the volunteer and emergency armies, so far as pen- from the ranks, as sometimes happens, are men who make sion or compensation is concerned.
this their life work, their profession. They have no other avoNo one can tell what the cost will be with any fair degree cation. Rare indeed does the opportunity present itself for of accuracy, but I am not now worrying about the matter of one of them to accumulate financial means. We have to have cost. The principle involved causes the question of cost to pale them and, in order to have them competent and efficient, their into insignificance.
life must be devoted to the profession. Naturally provision Let me first direct attention to the discrimination which the must be made for them when their period of usefulness has bill makes among the officers themselves.
passed. The private in the Regular Army enlists for a brief The changed compensation will apply only to those officers period and at its end is at liberty to return again to civil life, who have a permanent disability of at least 30 per cent. Those and become again of its democracy." officers who have less than 30 per cent will continue to draw on As to whether the logic of the argument was entirely sound an exact equality with the private. Why should this be if we there may yet be some difference of opinion, but be that as it are to change the national policy and grant pension based upon may, the system then adopted has come down to us through rank?
many, many years, without serious effort on the part of any Congress, so far as I am aware, to abolish or materially | defend ourselves with arms we have drawn our soldiers from change it.
civil life. It was their own country they were asked to deSo much for the Regular Army comparison. I submit the fend—theirs in possession and their children's in heritage. practice furnishes no precedent for this proposed bill.
They have never failed to respond and lift the sword of But the insistence is made that a precedent is to be found America to the heavens as it shimmered with glory in the in the treatment which has been accorded disabled officers of sunlight-the fine sharp sword of democracy. [Applause.] the Navy and Marine Corps. Let us see exactly what has been Some became officers, most remained privates. At the end of done in that regard, and how it was done.
each emergency those who survived returned to civil life and When the naval appropriation bill of 1920, as it had passed the every-day duties of the work-a-day world, and officer and the House, was under consideration in the Senate, an amend- man, released from the necessary rigors of military discipline ment was adopted by that body which carried legislation upon and relations, became again equal as citizens. this subject.
Two young men went forth from the same town, the same It will be recalled that at the time the Budget system had business house, the same law office, the same farm. One became not been adopted, nor had the present rule of the House been an officer, the other a private. They suffered alike; they were applicable to legislation upon appropriation bills. It therefore wounded upon the same battle field or contracted the same dread frequently happened in those days that the Senate would put malady in the service. They were discharged together. Tolegislative riders upon the supply bills, and it was within the gether they went back to the same business house or law office power of the House conferees to accept such riders and make or farm, and to the extent that their physical condition admitted them an integral part of the conference report without return- reengaged in the work of life. Do you tell me that I can by ing to the House for a separate vote upon them as is now any process of reasoning justify voting to give one of them required.
$150 per month and the other only $30 as compensation for That happened in this instance, and the conference report,
the disability each suffered? I have been unable to find the which was a very long one covering many matters, carried this justification. provision :
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from
Tennessee has expired. That all officers of the Naval Reserve Force and temporary officers of
Mr. MICHENER. I yield to the gentleman two minutes more. the Navy who have heretofore incurred or may hereafter incur physical
Mr. GARRETT of Tennessee. I know, Mr. Speaker, it is now disability in line of duty shall be eligible for retirement under the same
and then hinted privately that there must have been some conditions as now provided by law for officers of the regular Navy who sort of mental superiority in those who became officers. This have incurred physical disability in line of duty. (CONGRESSIONAL
is never publicly urged, but privately it will be said many of RECORD, 66th Cong., 2d sess., vol. 59, pt. 8, p. 8092.)
them made greater sacrifices of business, and so forth, than In the Sixty-seventh Congress-act of July 12, 1921--there did the privates. There may be instances in which this was was a repeal of this law in the following manner:
true, but after all, sir, each sacrificed his all, each offered his The Senate again attached a legislative rider to the appro- all, each dared his all. I submit that Congress can not search priation bill dealing with this subject, and as agreed to by the among the 4,000,000 men called to the colors and reach any just conferees the language was the same as above quoted, but at the conclusion as to relative sacrifices and sufferings. end there was added the following:
Remember this principle of retirement was not adopted for Prorided, however, That application for such retirement shall be filed
emergency officers of the Spanish War, the Civil War, the Mexiwith the Secretary of the Navy not later than October 1, 1921.
can War, the War of 1812, or the Revolutionary War. It has
remained to be demanded for the first time now. Are we ceasThere has been no further general legislation upon the ing to be a democratic Republic? subject.
I trust no one will for a moment entertain the thought that I It will be seen, therefore, that the law permitting this dis- speak with any feeling toward the emergency officers save one crimination between the naval and marine emergency officers of profoundest respect and gratitude. I should be most happy and the enlisted men of those organizations was in effect for to support the bill did I not feel the principle involved to be just 15 months.
inconsistent with the very fundamentals of our democratic It will further be seen that this legislation was never consid- Nation. [Applause.] ered by the House, or so far as the records show, by any com- Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, I yield five minutes to the mittee of the House, as an independent piece of legislation. gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. STEVENSON). [Applause.] Both times it was placed upon the naval appropriation bill by
Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. Speaker, I will start exactly where the Senate as a rider, and came in the conference report, which my distinguished friend left off. He referred to two young under the rules had to be voted upon as a whole and without men going out from the same town, suffering the same hardamendment.
ships, coming back, and one being discriminated against in The proviso inserted in the 1921 act acted as a repeal of favor of the other. That is exactly what inspired me to the law of 1920, as of date October 1, 1921, and is the last introduce the first bill looking to this relief, the first one expression of Congress upon the subject.
that was ever conceived or ever introduced into this Congress. I am indebted to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. SIM- Two young men in business in the same block in a neighborMONS], one of the distinguished ex-service men of the House ing town, but not in my district, went to a training camp towho is opposing this legislation, for the information that gether; they were trained together; they were graduated as during the 15 months the law was in operation there were second lieutenants together, and they went to France together; retired under its provisions 228 naval officers and 56 marine but one took his commission as a provisional lieutenant in the officers, and he further informs me of the significant fact Regular Army, and the other took his commission in the that each and every one of these 284 men was in the service National Army. In the course of that terrible conflict the man at the time he was retired.
who took his commission in the National Army, on the 8th of The emergency Army officers whom it is proposed to favor November, just before the armistice, in leading his men to the by this bill were discharged long ago and are now in civil front, as he had been doing ever since the push began, lost life. The naval and marine officers who benefited by the leg- his right arm and was disabled in such a way that he could islation quoted were retired from the service itself.
not follow his occupation in life. The young man who took I doubt if this fact has been known to any considerable his commission as a provisional lieutenant in the Regular number of the emergency Army officers and their friends Army was assigned, I believe, to the Quartermaster's Departwho have so earnestly appealed for this discriminatory legis- ment, and he had the misfortune to fall off a truck and injure lation. They have honestly thought that a precedent had been his knee, and he came home with a stiff knee. I was called on set, when, as a matter of fact, Congress actually repealed the by friends of the young man who had lost his arm and who was law by limiting its tenure to October 1, 1921. And so what. at Walter Reed Hospital to go out to see him, and, being a ever of precedent there was has been wiped out, and we are friend of his people and of himself, I went out to see him, at liberty to consider the legislation upon its merits alone. and then I found they were both there. But what was the
I may say in passing that it is proposed in this bill to situation? The young man with the right arm gone, the restore the naval and marine officers to the status they had young man who had been facing German bullets while the for the 15-month period, and that is quite logical from the other was in the Quartermaster's Department, was receiving standpoint of those who favor discrimination between officers compensation at the rate of $15 a month for the loss of his and enlisted men.
right arm, while the other was eligible for retirement, and did I return now to the principle underlying the proposed legis- retire, at $125 a month for a stiff knee. lation. Ours is a democratic government founded upon a Now, when you talk about equality you must look at both constitution designed to insure equality before the law. True ends of the proposition. [Applause.] Gentlemen, you can to the fundamental spirit of such a Nation we have never not require absolute and rigid equality when you come to maintained a large standing Army. When we have had to deal with human rights, human passions, and human suffering.
You have got to remember that there is humanity in us and in | $93.75 per month, as I am informed. The second lieutenant the people of this country. I came back here and introduced with a total disability receives no more, just $93.75. Is this the bill H, R. 6688, in the Sixty-sixth Congress, providing : fair? A colonel having incurred a 30 per cent disability will That any officer who has served in the military forces of the United
be placed on the compensation roll for life at $250 per month. States during the war with Germany and who does not belong to the
He may recover his health completely, but there is no way proRegular Army shall have the right, provided they have incurred dis
vided in this bill for ever getting his name off the pay roll. abilities while in the service during the said war, to be retired on the And what about another colonel? I have one now in mind. same terms and on the same compensation as like officers of the
One of the finest and most unselfish men that ever breathed,
whose health was completely destroyed in the Great War, a Regular Army.
case of total disability. Does he receive more? No; he reI asked for equality between that young man with his right ceives just the same as the other. Can anyone justify delibarm gone and the young fellow with a stiff knee.
erately creating such inequality? I can not. What did I meet? They said, “ It will never do to retire Mr. BLACK of Texas. Will the gentleman yield ? such men; the retired list is a sacred list, in which are written Mr. TILSON. Yes. only the immortals who belonged to the Regular Army, and we Mr. BLACK of Texas. I just want to say that the gentleman can not have that." I said, "All right, give us the same com- | is correct in his statement that this is a compensation bill pensation," and I introduced H. R. 10835, which provided : instead of a retirement bill. I received a letter from a doctor
That any officer who has served in the military forces of the United in Texas urging me to support the bill. I looked up the niStates during the war with Germany and who does not belong to the nority report which has been filed on this bill, and he is listed Regular Army and who incurred disabilities while in the service during as now drawing $16.50 per month, and will immediately draw the said war, shall be entitled to the same compensation as like officers $187.50, according to the report that has been filed. of the Regular Army receive on being retired for an equal disability. Mr. TILSON. Fellow Members, we can never justify this In other words, I did not put them on the retired list, but I dict now that any who vote for it out of a sincere desire to
bill at the bar of equity, justice, or square dealing, and I pregave them a square deal, and that is all I asked.
In the next Congress I introduced the bill again, got a favor- adequately compensate worthy men for disabilities incurred able report, and got a rule for its consideration, which Hon. will have difficulty in making answer in the years to come when Philip P. Campbell, then of Kansas, kept in his pocket until as freely to the service of their country as did their officers,
one of the millions of enlisted men who gave themselves just Congress adjourned. This is what was known as a pocket veto. The bill was numbered 15804 and the report was No. 1284, gree of disability, comes to one of us and says, “ For a dis
who endured the same hardships and suffered the same deSixty-sixth Congress, third session. Then the Veterans' Committee was appointed and I surrendered the field to it, but have ability equal in degree to my own you have given an officer $150 never lost interest in the subject and take great pleasure in its enough to wear the star of a general, $375 per month for life;
or $187.50 or $250 per month, or perchance, if he were lucky prospective passage. The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from South
what are we to expect in the way of compensation?” What
can we say? Carolina has expired. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the
Mr. CONNERY. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. TILSON. Yes. gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. TILSON). Mr. TILSON. Mr. Speaker, I might well say, as the gentle Tennessee [Mr. GARRETT) and the distinguished gentleman from
Mr. CONNERY. While the distinguished gentleman from man from South Carolina said when taking the floor, that he Connecticut are worrying about the enlisted man, why do they would begin where the gentleman from Tennessee left off, that not bring the enlisted man up to where all of these officers are? I also might well begin where the gentleman from South
Mr. TILSON. A general officer, I believe, is to receive, Carolina left off. The gentleman from South Carolina de under this bill, $375 per month. Does the gentleman from Masscribed very feelingly how he found on two cots in the Walter sachusetts undertake to say that we should place every man Reed Hospital a Regular Army officer and an emergency officer. who served in the military or naval forces of the United States I should like to pass on with him to the next cot where we during the war and incurred a 30 per cent disability, or who should probably find a private soldier who had left home at hereafter may be declared to have a 30 per cent disability, on the same time as the other two, who had endured the same the compensation rolls for the rest of his life at $375 per service, and who had incurred the same disability. Then I month? It would be necessary to do this if there is to be should like to make the same comparison between the emergency equality. officer and the enlisted man that the gentleman from Tennessee
Mr. CONNERY. No; but I say that $150 a month would be so eloquently and so convincingly made as he emphasized the
a little fairer than $30 a month. discriminatory features of this bill in its present form.
Mr. TILSON. There might be some difference of opinion as I am very glad to take the time that I shall use in speaking to what it would be practicable to do for so large a number of on this bill on the adoption of the rule, because one suggestion men, but I am willing to go with the gentleman as far as is I shall make bears directly upon the proper procedure in the practicable and reasonable if for equal disability we give equal consideration of the bill. Rather than vote the bill up or vote compensation regardless of rank. it down I think the best course to pursue now is to recommit
In the early days of this Republic, borrowed from older the bill to the Committee on World War Veterans' Legislation countries, it was the rule to make a difference between the for a very thorough and drastic revision, eliminating its most pensions allowed to officers and to enlisted men. As our glaringly discriminatory features.
It is a most unpleasant great Republic grew and we developed a policy of our own duty for any of us to be forced to vote against a bill providing we abandoned the principle of discriminating in pensions accompensation for disabled soldiers. We have not been in the cording to rank, and after the Civil War it was entirely abanhabit of doing that in this House, but on the contrary where doned-and who were instrumental in its abandonment? The the disabled soldier is affected we have all vied with each very Officers who, having served in the Army, came to this other in making a generous response to his needs. I say House and served here in very great numbers. Their sense of that it is a very disagreeable duty, if it should become such, for fairness to the enlisted men who served with them and under anybody to vote against reasonable compensation for disabled them caused them to be in large measure responsible for soldiers, and so we have voted with gladness and satisfaction giving up forever, I hope, the idea of pensions based on rank. for such compensation when the occasion has been presented Mr. CONNERY. I would like to ask the gentleman another to us.
question. I was an enlisted man. I was not an officer, but an In this instance, however, as this bill now reads, in order enlisted manto vote for compensation, justifiable in some instances, we must Mr. TILSON. The gentleman was a good and valiant solvote for compensation which is not justified for others if meas- dier whichever he happened to be. ured by the same standards.
Mr. CONNERY. I thank the gentleman As the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. GARRETT] so thor- Mr. TILSON. But in my judgment he ought not to be entitled, oughly demonstrated, this is not in any sense a retirement propo- in case of disability, to any greater compensation if he had sition. Retired from what? These former officers are not now been a major general than what he should be entitled to as in the service, and most of them have not been for about nine an enlisted man. This is my view of it. [Applause.) years. They are all in civil life again, most of them back at Mr. CONNERY. Does not the gentleman believe that these their old vocations. By no legitimate stretch of the imagina-emergency officers who, as everybody knows, fought the war tion can this bill be called a retirement bill. It is purely and in the trenches, should get equal justice with a man who persimply a disability service pension. But on what is it based? haps stood on the deck of a battleship or who fought a tough Purely on rank and nothing else. It is certainly not based on war out in Kansas City and is now getting retired pay? the degree of the disability suffered. Under this bill the second Mr. TILSON. The gentleman has reference, I suppose, to a lieutenant suffering from a disability of 30 per cent receives | few Navy and Marine officers who were retired under a rider carried on a Navy appropriation bill which was in effect for as part of the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps of the United States, to be only 15 months and was then repealed.
known as the emergency officers' retired list of the Army, Navy, or Mr. CONNERY. I am referring to the Regular Army and Marine Corps of the United States, respectively, with the rank held by not to the emergency officers.
them when discharged from their commissioned service, and shall be Mr. TILSON. The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. GARRETT] entitled to the same privileges as are now or may hereafter be provided so thoroughly explained the difference between the status of the for by law or regulations for officers of the Regular Army, Navy, or Regular Army and the emergency officers that it needs no Marine Corps who have been retired for physical disability incurred in further explanation.
line of duty, and shall be entitled to all hospitalization privileges and In an emergency every able-bodied man of proper age who is
medical treatment as are now or may hereafter be authorized by the needed should be a soldier, every one should do his bit. It is United States Veterans' Bureau, and shall receive from date of receipt his duty as a citizen. The Regular Army is entirely different.
of their application retired pay at the rate of 75 per cent of the pay There is no analogy whatever between the Regular Army and to which they were entitled at the time of their discharge from their the emergency officers. The conditions are entirely different commissioned service, except pay under the act of May 18, 1920: Proand we should not confuse matters by attempting to put the rided, That all pay and allowances to which such persons or officers Regular Army and the emergency officer on the same basis. may be entitled under the provisions of this law shall be paid solely out The condition of actual war changes the situation completely, of the military and naval compensation appropriation fund of the and no man, in my judgment, should have retirement privileges United States Veterans' Bureau, and shall be in lieu of all disability for having served in an emergency.
compensation benefits to such officers or persons provided in the World Mr. CONNERY. Will the gentleman yield?
War veterans' act, 1924, and amendments thereto, except as otherwise Mr. TILSON. Yes.
authorized herein, and except as provided by the act of December 18, Mr. CONNERY. I have heard it said it is going to be a
1922: Provided further, That all persons who have served as officers difficult thing to have to explain to the enlisted man why we
of the Army, Navy, or Marine Corps of the United States during the voted for an emergency officers' bill. I think we would have a
World War, other than as officers of the Regular Army, Navy, or harder time explaining to the enlisted man why we give retire
Marine Corps, who during such service have incurred physical disment to ą man in the Regular Army who stayed back at Chau. ability in line of duty, and who have heretofore or may hereafter be mont and fell off his horse and hurt his knee and deny this to
rated less than 30 per cent and more than 10 per cent permanent disa man who fought in the front-line trenches and was disabled
ability by the United States Veterans' Bureau for disability resulting in line of duty.
directly from such war service, shall, from date of receipt of application Mr. TILSON. Retirement in the Regular Army is a story
by the Director of the United States Veterans' Bureau, be placed upon,
and thereafter continued on, the appropriate emergency officers' retired that goes back into our history of maintaining an Army in time
list, created by this act, with the rank held by them when discharged of peace. It has been found necessary, or at least those who have gone before us as legislators have thought it necessary,
from their commissioned service, but without retired pay, and shall to have a system of retirement in order to get and keep good
be entitled only to such compensation and other benefits as are now or officers, but it should not serve as a precedent and ought not
may hereafter be provided by law or regulations of the United States be considered even as analogous to the service of an emergency
Veterans' Bureau, together with all privileges as are now or may hereofficer in time of war. [Applause.]
after be provided by law or regulations for officers of the Regular The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Connecti
Army, Navy, or Marine Corps who have been retired for physical discut has expired.
ability incurred in line of duty: And provided further, That the retired
list created by this act of officers of the Army shall be published anMr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous ques- mually in the Army Register, and said retired lists of officers of the tion on the resolution.
Navy and Marine Corps, respectively, shall be published annually in the The previous question was ordered.
Navy Register. The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the resolu
SEC. 2. No person shall be entitled to benefits under the provisions tion.
of this act except he make application as hereinbefore provided and his The question was taken, and the resolution was agreed to. application is received in the United States Veterans' Bureau within 12 RETIREMENT OF OFFICERS AND FORMER OFFICERS OF THE WORLD WAR
months after the passage of this act: Provided, That the said director Mr. ROY G. FITZGERALD. Mr. Speaker, I move that the
shall establish a register, and applications made hereunder shall be
entered therein as of the actual date of receipt, in the order of receipt House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole IIouse
in the Veterans' Bureau, and such register shall be conclusive as to on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill S.
date of receipt of any application filed under this act. The term 777, and pending that I ask unanimous consent that the time for general debate be equally divided between the gentleman April 6, 1917, to July 2, 1921.
“World War," as used herein, is defined as including the period from from Mississippi [Mr. RANKIN] and myself. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio moves that the
Mr. ROY G. FITZGERALD. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House of the House, nine years of energetic action have elapsed on on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill s. the part of the American Legion, composed of 90 per cent of 777, and pending that asks unanimous consent that the time enlisted men, to right a wrong. What is the wrong? Why, the for general debate be equally divided, one-half to be controlled United States Government and Congress, realizing in 1917 that by himself and one-half by the gentleman from Mississippi this country had an emergency to meet, passed an act and in[Mr. RANKIN). Is there objection?
vited into the Army men of mature years, men of responsiThere was no objection.
bility, men who had acquired positions in life and experience The motion was agreed to.
which would fit them to become officers of a great emergency Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of army. Preference was given by law in selecting officers to the Whole House on the state of the Union, with Mr. LAGUARDIA those who were 31 years of age and over, in the chair.
EQUALITY PROMISED The CHAIRMAN. The House is in Committee of the whole Equality for all officers and enlisted men was promised in the House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the selective service act of May, 1917. This equality has been bill which the Clerk will report.
granted to all classes of enlisted men and to eight of the nine The Clerk read as follows:
classes of officers. The disabled emergency Army officers alone s. 777, 70th Cong., 1st sess.
have been denied the fulfillment of this promise, made by the An act making eligible for retirement, under certain conditions, officers Congress 11 years ago, and former officers of the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps of the
Section 10 of the selective service act of May, 1917, provided United States, other than officers of the Regular Army, Navy, or
as follows: Marine Corps, who incurred physical disability in line of duty while
That all officers and enlisted men of the forces herein provided for, in the service of the United States during the World War
other than the Regular Army, shall be in all respects upon the same Be it enacted, etc., That all persons who have served as officers of the footing as to pay, ailowances, and pensions as officers and enlisted men Army, Navy, or Marine Corps of the United States during the World
of corresponding grades and length of service in the Regular Army. War, other than as officers of the Regular Army, Navy, or Marine How that has been evaded is a matter of public scandal, Corps, who during such service have incurred physical disability in which the American Legion with its overwhelming personnel of line of duty, and who have been, or may hereafter, within one year, be, enlisted men is seeking to set right. It is not a matter of disrated in accordance with law at not less than 30 per cent permanent crimination between officers and enlisted men, but a discriminadisability by the United States Veterans' Bureau for disability resulting tion between officers where enlisted men are not concerned. directly from such war service, shall, from date of receipt of applica- | All enlisted men have been treated the same. tion by the Director of the United States Veterans' Bureau, be placed Retirement for officers was provided originally by the act upon, and thereafter continued on, separate retired lists, hereby created 1 of Congress of August 3, 1861. Why? To eliminate superan
nuated and inefficient officers in the time of the Civil War. | loose, who had no reasonable ground for exemption. Of the 400,000 The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. GARRETT] has shown that who applied for training to be made officers in the two first he is unacquainted with and actually opposed to the settled training camps, only 44,588 were commissioned, less than onepolicy of our democratic but noncommunistic country, from the eighth, while of those summoned under the draft act an enorRevolutionary War times down. It gives an opportunity to mous majority were rejected because of family ties and responset this Congress right. The Republican floor leader evidently sibilities. knew that the gentleman from Tennessee was in error when
ENLISTED SITUATION DIFFERENT the latter stated on the floor of the House that it was against The World War enlisted men were chosen for their lack of the policy of this country to discriminate between officers and responsibility. Out of each 350 men who passed the required enlisted men. This is the first open communistic and social- physical examination for service, 250 men received exemption istic utterance that I have heard for many a long day on this because they had dependents, and 100 men were accepted for floor.
service through their lack of dependents. It was the desire of Mr. DAVIS. Will the gentleman yield?
the Congress that the enlisted personnel be men without family Mr. ROY G. FITZGERALD. I will.
obligations, and that the spirit of this desire was fulfilled is Mr. DAVIS. Did I understand the gentleman from Ohio shown by the foregoing exemptions granted to those who had made reference to the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. GARRETT]? passed the physical examination. Mr. ROY G, FITZGERALD. To the statement he made.
EXEMPTIONS Mr. DAVIS. I challenge that statement as being unjustified and unwarranted.
The final report of the provost marshal general of the Army
to the Secretary of War, dated July 15, 1919, shows in Table 4, Mr. ROY G. FITZGERALD. I am glad to meet that challenge, and I will show how it is easily justified and absolutely service during the World War, as compared to Table 2, page 20,
page 24, that 2,780,576 men were actually inducted into the warranted. The United States Army was composed of officers and enlisted men. It is necessary that the officers be chosen of the same book, which shows that 6,964,229 men received exbecause of riper years, greater experience, and training. The emption
from their local boards because of dependency. officers are paid more. There is always a necessary discrimi
This means that for every 100 men actually inducted into the nation. Officers have ever been chosen for responsibility be service 250 men were exempted because of dependency. cause they had responsibilities; the enlisted personnel was
This action was in line with that portion of the selective chosen under the draft act because of their lack of responsi- service, act which authorized the President to exempt among bilities. In the World War the officers average 12 to 15 others the following: years older than the enlisted men.
Those in a status with responsibilities to persons dependent upon Men were taken for officers who had wives and children, who them for support which renders their exclusion or discharge advisable. had made a success in life, and who had positions of responsi
It is apparent from this act that Congress desired its fighting bility, who had already demonstrated their fitness for command. forces to be made up of men without family responsibilities
. The figures quoted show that this wish was followed by the Number
Number local boards.
One of the chief reasons for the difference in pay of officers admission
and enlisted men of all armies and for all wars has been be
cause of the difference in their ages and responsibilities. These First camp, May 15, 1917.
same responsibilities continued after the emergency officers were Second camp, Aug. 29, 1917..
200,000 23,000 17, 247
disabled and crippled. If this difference in pay was proper Third camp, December, 1917.
11, 657 when the emergency officer was well and sound, how much more Total.
400,000 84, 437
necessary to continue it after he has been permanently disabled and thus prevented from earning a livelihood for the family
which was dependent upon him prior to his war disability. The personnel of the third camp was made up exclusively of enlisted men already in the service.
A FALLACY EXPOSED
Occasionally opponents state they can not see the justice in a Here are some extracts from a War Department memorandum disabled officer receiving a higher rate of compensation for his of June 4, 1917, which instructed officers of the regular service disability than a disabled enlisted man. They cite as an examon the methods they were to follow in selecting candidates for ple of this two brothers of approximately the same age, just the officers' training camps. These show the emphasis placed out of college, one attending an officers' training camp and upon age, experience, and character:
obtaining a commission, the other enlisting and serving in the ranks. Both become equally disabled in the service. Why
should one receive a higher rate of compensation for his disTo provide officers for
the National Army the War Depart- ability than the other? This is the stock argument advanced ment has adopted the policy of commissioning all new officers of the by opponents. line (Infantry, Cavalry, Field and Coast Artillery) purely on the basis of There would be justice in this argument provided it were demonstrated ability after three months observation and training in typical of the situation. It is not typical. The fundamental the officers' training camps. Thus the appointment of officers of the merits of the legislation are due to the fact that this illustranew armies will be made entirely on merit and free from all personal tion is very far from the true situation. or other influences.
The officers were older than the enlisted men by an average Also, in connection with these camps, it is to be noted that of 12 to 15 years. They were in midcareer in civil life. A mature and experienced men are needed to fill the higher grades (first large proportion of them were married and had families delieutenant, captain, major, and a few lieutenant colonels).
pendent upon them. Many of these officers could not have QUALIFICATIONS
accepted commissions but for the pay which they received as In order to obtain the experienced class of men desired
officers; otherwise they would not have been able to support preference will be given to men over 31 years of age, other things being
those dependent upon them while they were in the service. equal. Because of the anticipated large number of applications, it will
Mr. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? probably be difficult for men under that age to qualify except in in
Mr. ROY G. FITZGERALD. Yes. stances where the applicant has preeminent qualifications or unusual
Mr. GREEN. I know that one place in the bill we are about military experience.
to work a hardship on some officers. CHARACTER OF MEN DESIRED
Mr. ROY G. FITZGERALD. That is another mistake.
Mr. GREEN. In other words, some of them get $100 a month Since the special object of these camps is to train a body of men
now, and under this new retirement they will get only $93.75 a fitted to fill the more responsible positions of command in the new
month. I would like to see that corrected. armies, every effort will be made to select men of exceptional char
Mr. ROY G. FITZGERALD. acter and proved ability in their various occupations.
The gentleman from Con
While it is necticut [Mr. Tilson] made a mistake. In the first place, no desired to give full opportunity for all eligible citizens to apply, no man
one need come under this bill unless he chooses. need make application whose record is not in all respects above
Mr. GREEN. He can remain at the hundred dollars under reproach and who does not possess the fundamental characteristics the other, if he desires? necessary to inspire respect and confidence.
Mr. ROY G. FITZGERALD. Yes; but a second lieutenant While on the other hand those who were called for service under this retirement bill will not get merely $100. He will get under the draft act to serve in the enlisted personnel of the Army $106 and something, because he will be retired under the were those with least responsibilities. Those were exempt who pay act which was in force at the time that he was injured had responsibilities, and only those were taken who were foot- and disabled.