Page images
PDF
EPUB

General HERSHEY. Yes; that is my information. Mr. SNYDER. How many are coming in now who are below the age of 17, how many are coming in each month, and how many are being let out who are over 54 years of age?

General HERSHEY. I do not know how many they are letting out who are over 54. Of course, the Navy is announcing that it is not demobilizing, but it probably is letting out some people. I do not know currently how large a number that is.

Their enlistments have varied quite widely; their inductions not so much. I think in the month of March they enlisted about 40,000 and inducted around 28,000. I believe, however, that they are restricting enlistments to about 20,000 in the month of April; their April induction call is for 30,000.

Mr. SNYDER. I happen to know that they are letting out very capable and efficient officers, petty officers, and what not.

General HERSHEY. I think they have a definite policy regarding officers. The information we have does not deal with that. We have never had anything to do with furnishing officers.

Mr. SNYDER. Of course, the Navy stole a march on the Army by taking these young fellows 17 years of age, and therefore the Army did not have the opportunity to get them.

How many are going into the Army at 18 years of age?

General HERSHEY. For the last 12 months, prior to January 1 of this year, about 43,000 a month have entered the Army and Navy during their eighteenth year. There are 100,000 who become 18 years old every month, but in a normal month last year the Navy enlisted about 27,000 or 28,000 of these before they registered. But the 28,000 included no rejects. The rejects were all in the remaining 72,000 which registered with Selective Service. By the time we deferred some for farming and a few others for one reason or another, we found ourselves with about 43,000 who passed the physical examination and were inducted, taking the 12 months of the calendar year 1944 as an average.

Mr. SNYDER. That also would follow in another year, would it not? General HERSHEY. I am not sure about that. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. CANNON. I notice when Admiral Jacobs testified before the subcommittee handling the naval appropriations bill he said:

Estimates for enlisted personnel contemplate 223,249 male recruits and 7,537 WAVES. It is expected that male enlisted personnel will be obtained through the induction of those between the ages of 18 and 27, inclusive, and that the other riale groups between ages 17 and 38 to 50 will be obtained by voluntary enlistments,

Then later on he was asked this question:

Mr. Thomas. I noticed a statement in this morning's paper to the effect that for the next 90 days it has been agreed between the Army and the Navy that the Army would get all of the 18- and 19-year-olds; is that correct?

He said that was correct.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. When were your budget estimates submitted to the Budget, General?

Colonel MITCHELL. About the middle of January.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. That is the first time they asked you to appear?

Colonel MITCHELL. Yes, sir.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Have you submitted to this committee a statement of your reallocations forward during the past year, both within grade and from grade to grade?

Colonel MITCHELL. În'the higher brackets; yes, sir.

PENALTY MAIL

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Have you given us any statement as to the penalty mail? There is some language here as to what you want.

Colonel MITCHELL. I do not know that such a statement has been furnished the committee, sir.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Could you give us a statement when you revise your remarks to show the amount expended during the last 3 fiscal years as compared with the $1,860,000 you are asking for for the fiscal

year 1946? Colonel MITCHELL. Yes, sir. (The statement requested is as follows:) The estimated obligation for fiscal year 1945 is the same as that estimated for 1946. During prior years matter bearing penalty indicia was mailed at no cost to the System, and no obligations were incurred or recorded.

PUBLIC-RELATIONS WORK

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. How much are you spending for publicity and public-relations work?

General HERSHEY. We spend nothing much for that.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. You have very little of that?
General HERSHEY. We do take some newspapers.

But we never have much in the way of a public-relations organization.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Will you put some statement on that in the record when you revise your remarks?

General HERSHEY. Yes, sir. (The statement requested is as follows:) We have two commissioned officers and two civilian clerks assigned to Information Services. We subscribe to approximately 60 newspapers and maintain a clipping service for the information of the Director and members of his staff. The entire obligation incurred by the System for these purposes during the current fiscal year is approximately $5,000.

REDUCTION IN ESTIMATES, 1946 Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. I understand the net reduction is about $1,700,000 as compared with the fiscal year 1945?

General HERSHEY. That is right.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. You said there is something over $400,000 that reverted to the Treasury last year, did you not?

General HERSHEY. Yes; that was for camp operations.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. So it is really about $1,300,000 under the actual expenditures for the current fiscal year?

General HERSHEY. Yes.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. I still am not quite clear in my own mind as to why, with the Army and Navy as near their peak today as they apparently are, you cannot picture a further reduction in the over-al expenditures for the fiscal year 1946.

General HERSHEY. This is budgeted, I think, against a call of 93,00€ inductions per month.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. What has been the average for the past year?

General HERSHEY. The average monthly call for this fiscal year runs a little more than that, I think. To be specific, the call was 111,000 in July, 104,000 in August, 81,000 in September, 87,000 in October, 84,000 in November, 82,000 in December, 92,000 in January, 115,000 in February, 135,000 in March, 130,000 in April, 118,000 in May, and 117,000 in June. This is a monthly average of around 105,000.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. What is the reason for the increase in the second half of the year?

General HERSHEY. I think "the bulge," the German counterattack into Belgium, was responsible for that.

ROLE OF SELECTIVE SERV CE SYSTEM IN REEMPLOYMENT OF VETERANS

(See p. 62) Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Does your organization play any part in the demobilization picture?

General HERSHEY. Yes. Section 8 of the act makes the Selective Service System directly responsible for the reemployment of veterans. It even gives us the responsibility of seeing that the veteran gets a new job if that is his wish, as well as seeing that he gets his old job back if that is his preference. But we have not yet had a difficult problem in this operation.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. You say the law makes you responsible for the veteran getting back his job?

General HERSHEY. Yes. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Where does your jurisdiction dovetail in? You have the Veterans' Administration, you have the Manpower Commission, you have the Civil Service Commission, and I do not know what other agencies.

General HERSHEY. There is also the Railroad Retirement Board and the Agricultural Extension Service.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. They are all responsible for the same over-all problem?

General HERSHEY. I think there are some varying degrees of legal responsibility here. Both the G. I. bill and the Wagner-Peyser Act place the responsibility on that part of the War Manpow Commission shich is known as the United States Employment Service and also part of the United States Employment Service known as the Veterans' Employment Service. I think the Railroad Retirement Board and the Extension Service derive their powers from delegation. The Director of the Selective Service for 2 or 3 years has, in a cooperative effort, attempted-under that part of the act which says that he can rall on another bureau of the Government to perform acts-an agreezaent with the Chairman of the War Manpower Commission, acting as the head of the United States Employment Service. The proposal is made that the main responsibility for finding new jobs would be taken by Selective Service in the fields where these agencies were not operating, or for the veteran who comes to us after having been directed repeatedly to the United States Employment Service. I have never been able to believe that under the law I could evade my responsibility of at least attempting to see what I could do, if the agreement we have made does not work out in any particular case.

I think it is not our purpose to operate in any sense where there is any agency, either permanent or traveling, such as the United States Employment Service. But up to date, the job has been so small and the demand has been so great that, by and large, it has been a trial run, and I do not believe we have gained very much experience as to what it might be if we should realize a reasonable report.

To some extent more and to some extent less, States have been engaged in passing laws about everything they can do for the veterans.

I have said, and I am glad to repeat it, that if, out of the 12,000,000 people in the armed forces, 4,000,000 or 8,000,000 can solve their own difficulties, we should not put any obstructions in their way.

If the communities can solve 50 percent or 75 percent of the remaining problems, then the Federal Government should in no way interfere with them. But I do think we have to be prepared at least to carry out our legislative mandate until we are relieved of that responsibility, by allowing people to solve their own problems or permitting their solution at some other Federal Government agency level.

If the United States Employment Service places in employment a man who wants a new job, the Selective Service, wisely, will do nothing about it. If there comes a time when that cannot be done, then it seems to me we have a definite responsibility in the way of insurance.

(Discussion off the record.)

REDUCTION OF EXPENDITURES THROUGH CONSOLIDATION OF DRAFT

BOARDS

Mr. CANNON. Your item for expenses of local boards is the largest expense item?

General HERSHEY. Always; yes, sir.

Mr. CANNON. I note on page 37 of the justifications, with hearty approval, that you are keeping expenses down by maintaining minimum wage scales.

General HERSHEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. CANNON. As the activities of the various branches of the armed forces decline, as it seems they will, and as we expect them to do in the near future, would it not be possible for you to consolidate some adjoining boards so that you may be able to further reduce the expenses of the Service?

General HERSHEY. To the first question the answer is "yes," and during the lull last summer we had moved quite a way in the direction of consolidation. We cannot consolidate when there is only one board in a county, but in the large counties we have begun to do quite a little planning on consolidation.

I think that there are possibilities of reduction, but I doubt whether we will be able to make reductions to any measurable extent unless the local board structure is materially changed.

Mr. CANNON. Do you consider that such a change in your structure as you have suggested is possible, workable, and practical?

General HERSHEY. In the consolidation, yes. As soon as we get to the place where we are not beyond our depth in trying to produce men, then we will go ahead with consolidation. I cannot promise when that will be.

DISCUSSION OF PREINDUCTION EXAMINATIONS

Mr. Case. On that point we have just raised, I note that one item in the project for local boards shows an increase for travel expenses of $80,000 over last year, and the request for 1946 is $12,810,000, which constitutes about one-third of the total requests for local boards of $39,860,000.

In that connection, a rancher recently called my attention to the practice he thought was responsible for a lot of traveling expenses. He cited a case of a boy on a farm who was called in and sent from western South Dakota out to Fort Snelling for a physical examination. After the physical examination he came back and was deferred. That physical examination will be no good if he is called again, and be will then be sent for another physical examination.

General HERSHEY. That is right. Mr. CASE. The farmer said: I do not know who runs things at Washington, but I cannot see any sense in sending a boy several hundred miles for a physical examination when you could determine in advance that he would be deferred.

General HERSHEY. It works both ways. Congress, in the amendment to the act of December 5, 1943, provided that we must have a preinduction examination. It does not work out in all individual

But there was a good, sound argument back of that, because there had been some difficulty in forwarding people for induction after they had sold their farms.

I do know that if we send this fellow up for preinduction examination and denial of an appeal arises once he has taken the examination, then you tend to close the door on the man.

Wisely or not, we generally allow a man to present whatever evidence he can. I have even taken men out of the line at the induction station.

On the other hand, we are in a difficult situation out in North Dakota and South Dakota and some of the other States out there, because the Army, in order to save personnel, has only a limited number of induction stations, and I must send people from western North Dakota a long distance for a preinduction examination. Of course, if we could have an uction station in Bismarck or in Pierre or some other place like that, then the travel would be a great deal less.

Mr. Case. But you have two tests that are going to be applied to this man. One is a physical examination, and the other is the question of his essentiality for farm work. Why should you not apply first the test that costs the least, and if that keeps him from going in, immediately stops the machinery at that point. When you apply the most expensive test first, and he qualifies, there is still another one to *ake. If you give the least expensive first and he is deferred you would save travel expense and also the man's time on the farm.

General HERSHEY. A year ago this spring when we moved in on industrial deferments under 26 years of age, we examined all of them with the idea of taking everybody that could possibly be spared. We were issuing orders for the preinduction examination of people under 25 and I think there was a feeling, at least on the part of some of us that a greater percentage of farmers were going to be taken than Eetually were. On the other hand, even after they have been given

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »