320 



CONGRESS, U. S. 



which it has been expected would be obtained. 

 I do not think so. It is true the draft did 

 not result in bringing into the field so many 

 effective men as had been hoped for, but it is 

 not attributable to this cause. Let me state 

 some of the causes to which it is attributable. 



"In the first place, somebody made out a 

 schedule of infirmities for which a man was to 

 be excluded as being an infirm man, not of suf- 

 ficient physical ability. On reading it over it 

 looked to me as if some one had undertaken to 

 show what he knew of the most recent medi- 

 cal learning, by finding out all the probable in- 

 firmities to which the human frame could be 

 subject, and especially all the most modernly 

 invented diseases, or at any rate those for 

 which new names had been invented. In 

 short, very few men were to be found who 

 could escape falling within some one or other 

 of the various calls for infirmities, unless in- 

 deed it might be the man who could not find 

 any thing else, and said at last that he was 

 very much subject to measles and wanted to be 

 excused. 



"An unexpectedly large number were ex- 

 cused under that. In the next place, it was 

 found that a very large proportion of our able- 

 bodied young men were dependent on their 

 parents for support ; and, what was worse than 

 that, it was ascertained that the parents were 

 dependent upon them. Nobody had ever 

 found it out before particularly ; but there 

 was a large part of these poor dependent young 

 men dependent on their parents for support, 

 and they showed somehow or other that their 

 parents were dependent on them for support. 

 That was worse yet. This was a very unex- 

 pected condition of things, and very large num- 

 bers got off on that plea. Between the infirm- 

 ities of body and the infirmities of parents and 

 children and their relative dependent condition, 

 which came within the act, the number who 

 were obtained under the act was comparatively 

 few. 



" I think the mode of administering the law 

 tended very much to produce the effect that 

 you did not get men readily with the $300 

 which persons were permitted to pay in. If 

 the people had been told plainly and directly in 

 the beginning that paying the money or fur- 

 nishing substitutes would be the same in effect, 

 they would not have given any more, and the 

 Government would not have given any more 

 than $300 for a substitute. 



"Such, Mr. President, was the manner of 

 the execution of this law, and I cannot but 

 further say that I do not see why the law, even 

 as it resulted in the draft, was any failure at 

 all. What was the amount of the draft ? They 

 proposed to draft about one-fifth of those en- 

 rolled. The Senator from Indiana the other 

 day gave us the numbers as they were re- 

 turned. I do not remember the exact num- 

 bers; but that is not material. The general 

 result is, that leaving out of view the exemp- 

 tions, of which I have already spoken, the 



Government got some twelve million dollars 

 commutation money, and between forty and 

 fifty thousand men. "Why did they not go on, 

 then, and draft another one-fifth, get forty 

 thousand men more, and $12,000,000 more; 

 and, in the mean time, why did they not use 

 the $12,000,000 which they had got from per- 

 sons who paid the $300 each, for the purpose 

 of procuring substitutes ? Why did they not 

 go on in this way ? If it had been done, would 

 it not have been effective ? If it had been as 

 effective as the first draft, the result would 

 have been to bring all the men we wanted, 

 and we should not have to go through the 

 whole five drafts to obtain the number of men 

 desired." 



Mr. Lane, of Indiana, presented the follow- 

 ing view:. "What is our present legislation 

 upon the subject? It is just this: that the 

 able-bodied persons who are deemed subject to 

 draft by the board of enrolment, shall either 

 give personal service, hire themselves a substi- 

 tute, or pay $300 commutation in lieu of a sub- 

 stitute. By the provision of the bill reported 

 by the Military Committee, that $300 commu- 

 tation exemption is proposed to be stricken 

 out. Now, what is the effect of that $300 ex- 

 emption in view of the present legislation upon 

 the subject ? Under the provisions of that bill, 

 thirty-five thousand men paid their commuta- 

 tion money, and received a certificate of entire 

 exemption for three years ; and the conscrip- 

 tion law was enforced in but a small portion 

 of the States. If it had been enforced in all 

 the States, instead of thirty-five thousand men 

 who have to-day in their pockets certificates 

 of exemption for three years, we should have 

 had seventy -five or one hundred thousand men 

 who would have been exempted under the op- 

 erations of that law from any draft for three 

 years. That is the effect of it. If thirty-five 

 thousand are now exempted and exempt for 

 three years on the payment of $300, if you en- 

 force the conscription in all the loyal States, at 

 each return of the draft one hundred thousand 

 men may procure their exemption for three 

 years. The report of the Provost Marshal 

 General will show that we have less than half 

 a million of men to draw from. Then, if we 

 have continual drafts, and exempt at the end 

 of every draft one hundred thousand men for 

 three years, how long will you have any basis 

 to draw from? You exempt these men for 

 three years upon the payment of $300. That 

 is one of the effects of this system." 



Mr. Wilson, of Massachusetts, followed, say- 

 ing: "Mr. President, although my committee 

 instructed me to report the amendment, I am 

 opposed to the repeal of the $300 commutation 

 clause. I know that it was put into the act by 

 Congress for the benefit of the people of the 

 country, to make that law bear as lightly as 

 possible upon the poor, toiling people. It has 

 been demonstrated by experience so to operate. 

 Nobody questions that now. Nobody rises in 

 Congress now and denounces that provision as a 



