need, nor does he expect to receive a bonus. He may possibly not need it and hence can easily appear in the rôle of "good fellow" in the eye of the public. Personally I am acquainted with a number of officers (and, by the way, also enlisted men) who do not need this financial aid in the form of a bonus, but nevertheless they are as much entitled to it as anyone, whether enlisted man or officer. I am very much opposed to any class distinction. I do not believe a jealous breach should be allowed to creep into our ranks. I believe we should accept as brothers in the service, as soldiers, sailors, and marines of these United States, whatever bonus is agreed upon by Congress. We should be "all for one, and one for all." If the bonus is a good thing we should stand "united " for it, as we stood united in Flanders field, Chateau-Thierry, the Argonne, or the Meuse, etc., and not permit the serpent of jealousy to creep in and destroy this friendly feeling nor jeopardize a just recompense. When the average man, whether enlisted man or officer, entered the service at the time of the great emergency, he did not stop to consider whether or not he would receive a pension, bonus, nor whether their lives would be insured. They entered the service for no other than patriotic reasons. These same men do not now consider that the contemplated bonus when paid to them will be a recompense for their patriotism, for it is not. Nothing could be further from it. American patriotism can not be purchased by dollars and cents. It could not be bought at the time of the American Revolution, and none the less can a money value be placed upon service rendered (patriotism) during the World War. The bonus is merely accepted as a partial refund for the great financial loss (not counting danger to life) sustained by all men and officers for time served in the Army during their absence from their civil occupations and professions, while those who remained at home, from whatever cause, were earning three and four times as much in the same occupations and professions just vacated by these men and officers. There are thousands of enlisted men and an equal percentage of officers who actually do not require any financial aid in the form of a bonus, but exceptions can not and should not be made. There are ten times as many men and officers, too, who do need financial help and need it badly, and who should receive it. Officers, in comparison to the enlisted men, have made greater financial sacrifices. Most of them are older, were beyond the draft age (consequently volunteered), and had been well established in their business or professions, and when they were ready to sell or otherwise close their business or profession it meant a great sacrifice, indeed, while the enlisted men-probably 90 per cent of them were young men-working at a fixed salary, a small percentage of whom received their salary regularly for the entire duration of their service. This, however, was the exception. Other young men who had started a business or profession had not yet become firmly established, and hence had not so much to lose. However, I say treat all men in the service, officers and men, as one class. Give them all the same bonus. The millions of dollars raised by the different war activities were used for the comfort and pleasure of the enlisted men; wearing apparel made by the various chapters of the American Red Cross, confections, smokes, etc., were always showered upon the enlisted men-never to the officers. Officers were often even solicited to make contributions to the different war service organizations. Officers were always compelled to pay excessive prices for all their wearing apparel, had to pay for their own rations, and to purchase expensive overseas outfits, while all these were furnished to the enlisted men gratis, or free. The enlisted men were granted allotments ranging from $15 up to $50 per month, depending on the size of the family; the officer received no allotment. Officers were denied that privilege; their families received nothing. I am trying to impress upon this committee the great necessity for including the officers in the distribution of the contemplated bonus, for many are in dire need of it. If the United States Government can pay a bonus to nearly 4,500,000 enlisted men, it would never miss the small amount it would have to pay 192,000 officers. Now, as to the plan of payment. Many men were only in the service a very short time; some as short a time as five weeks up to three months. I do not believe a man who was in the service only a month should receive the same amount of bonus as the man who was in the service 15 months. So, if a bonus is being given, I think the only just way would be to have a fixed amount per month for each month's service rendered, with full pay for a fractional month, with a minimum of three months. I am sure the man who served only six weeks or three months did not make the same financial sacrifice as the man who served 18 months or more, and hence should share only a proportionate amount of the bonus. Now to summarize: 1. There should be no class legislation. Bonus should be paid to all-enlisted men as well as officers. 2. A money value can not be placed upon American patriotism, and bonus should not be considered as paying the men for service rendered. 3. Bonus to take the place of a partial refund for financial loss occasioned by absence from business or profession in civil life. 4. The greater per cent (90 per cent) of enlisted men and officers need financial aid badly, while only a very small per cent (10 per cent) do not. 5. Officers, in comparison with enlisted men, have made greater financial sacrifices, but do not register any objection to having all receive the bonus and under the same conditions. 6. Bonus to be figured on the monthly service plan, with a minimum pay for three months' service. A. A. ANKENBRANDT. SAN ANTONIO, TEX., March 16, 1920. Hon. JOSEPH WARREN FORDNEY, Chairman Ways and Means Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. FORDNEY: As a former service man, who was disabled in the service during the late war, I take this opportunity of congratulating you on your stand in favor of granting a bonus in some form to the hordes who offered their services and risked their lives to defeat Prussianism. Dispatches that I handled to-day from Washington show that your heart is right, and as one of the millions who served the colors I thank you. I know that you are getting millions of suggestions as to ways of giving the men a bonus. I beg to submit the following plan for your consideration. There are probably 100,000,000 inhabitants in the United States. I believe it is safe to say that of this number 10,000,000 are men above the age of 21 years, who are unmarried, divorced, or widowers. My plan is: Effect legislation putting a tariff on all unmarried men above the age of 23 years of 50 cents a month. This would bring an annual income to the Government of approximately $60,000,000 a year. I am going on 26 years of age and remain in class that would be affected by law, placing a tariff on bachelors. The small amount of 50 cents a month would not be missed by the millions who paid the tariff and would make up the great deficit to the Treasury that the various bills that Congress have been thoughtful enough to pass to aid our boys. In a few years' time this tariff would eliminate all deficits caused by the Sweet law and a bonus to service men, if passed. I am, Truly, yours, P. M. Ross, Night Editor, News, San Antonio, Ter. ROANOKE POST, THE AMERICAN LEGION, CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SIR: I am inclosing copy of resolutions in regard to proposed legislation for the relief of ex-service men, which were adopted by the Roanoke Post of the American Legion at its regular meeting held March 1, 1920. Yours, very truly, R. B. ADAMS, Adjutant RESOLUTIONS IN REGARD TO NATIONAL LEGISLATION FOR THE RELIEF OF EX-SERVICE MEN. Whereas there are pending before the Congress of the United States numerous bills designed and proposed for the relief of the ex-service men who fought in the World War; and Whereas the national executive committee of the American Legion has appeared before the Congress and indorsed the bill which provides for land grants or farm loans, or in lieu thereof a cash bonus to the ex-service men; and Whereas the Roanoke Post of the American Legion believes that the said bill would be the most beneficial one for the ex-service men: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Roanoke Post of the American Legion indorses and approves the action of their national executive committee in appearing before a committee of Congress and supporting the said bill; That this post approves and favors the passage of the said bill for the relief of the ex-service men; that our Representatives in Congress be requested to support the said legislation indorsed by our national executive committee; and That copies of these resolutions be forwarded to Senator Carter Glass, Senator Claude A. Swanson, Representative James P. Woods, the chairman of the national executive committee, and to the Virginia department of the American Legion. Hon. FORDNEY, RICHMOND, VA., March 10, 1920. Chairman Soldier Relief Legislation, Washington. SIR: I have been keenly interested in this subject. I have just read the Associated Press dispatch in reference to the remark that "Every officer who had good pay doesn't want a bonus." This may be true of those who had good pay, but this could not possibly include but a very small percentage of those who served as officers in the late war. 66 I was on active duty 11 months on the salary of a first lieutenant with a wife and five children to support. If that can be considered a good salary," then I am not entitled to a bonus. I was ordered to active duty May 25, 1917, and stayed in the service until forced to resign on account of financial distress. All service men to whom I have talked believe as I do, that this country owes something to thousands of others, who, like myself, made these sacrifices trying to serve our country in time of need. I appreciate the efforts your are making in our behalf. American Legion, Post No. 99, by unanimous vote, passed resolution favoring $50 per month bonus to all service men. We expect you, as our Representative, to do all in your power to bring a bill this effect before the House and secure its passage. FRED ROCKY, Commander. Hon. LINDLEY H. HADLEY, SMITH-REYNOLDS POST, AMERICAN LEGION, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Attached you will find a copy of the resolution unanimously passed at the meeting of the Smith-Reynolds Post of the American Legion at our meeting on Monday, March 1. While these resolutions are to a large extent self-explanatory, yet perhaps it would be in order to say that the sentiment seems to be universal for some form of adjusted compensation bill, and I trust you will be able to support such legislation. If legislation can be passed which will give a service man a choice of either the adjusted compensation bill, a land settlement bill, or a vocational training bill, I think it will fully meet the needs of the situation. The main objection, as I understand, to the passage of any adjusted compensation bill is on account of the great need for economy at this time in our Government expenditures. However, it seems to be a pertinent fact that this economy should not be secured at the expense of the service men who have made such sacrifices from a financial standpoint, in order that they might serve their country. If such legislation is not passed it would result in a discrimination against these men, in view of the fact that Government employees and other citizens of the country were given an increase in pay in order to meet the increased costs of living, and yet who were able to remain at home in safety. May we not hear from you in regards to your views on this needed legislation? I am, Yours, very truly, RICHARD R. YEATMAN, Adjutant. RESOLUTION. Whereas now pending before Congress four bills of vital interest to all service men and women, namely: The Morgan Home Founding bill, the Mondell bill, the Vocational Training bill, and the bill for adjusted compensation, and Whereas these four bills were recommended to be passed by Congress at the national convention of the American Legion at Minneapolis in November, 1919, and Congress advised to that effect, and Whereas resolutions were passed by the national executive committee at their meeting held at Indianapolis on February 10, 1920, instructing the American Legion committee on beneficial legislation again urging Congress to take action on these bills, and Whereas similar action has been taken by our own State executive committee, and Whereas no definite action has as yet been taken by Congress; therefore be it Resolved by the Smith-Reynolds Post of the American Legion, That Congress be respectfully requested to take immediate action on these four bills, as may best serve the interest of this country and to the men and women who have been in its military and naval service during the late war. Passed March 1, 1920. Representative LINDLEY H. HADLEY, RICHARD R. YEATMAN. WALTER C. LEE POST, No. 32, THE AMERICAN LEGION, Walla Walla, Wash., March 6, 1920. Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. HADLEY: Inclosed please find a resolution recently passed by the Walter C. Lee Post, No. 32, indorsing the resolution by the national executive committee pertaining to "adjusted compensation." We trust that you will consider this matter carefully and that you may feel ready to support the resolution. Very truly, yours, PAUL H. WEYRAUCH, Chairman Executive Committee, Walter C. Lee Post, No. 32, RESOLUTION. Whereas at a meeting of the national executive committee of the American Legion, held at Indianapolis, on February 10, 1920, special consideration was given to the question of adjusted compensation; and Whereas a resolution was passed at this meeting bearing on this subject: Be it Resolved, That it is the sense of Walter C. Lee Post, No. 32, the American Legion, Department of Washington, that the resolution referred to be approved; and be it further Resolved, That a copy of both this resolution and the resolution of the national committee be sent to every one of the Congressmen and Senators of the State of Washington. PAUL H. WEYRAUCH, Chairman Executive Committee, Walter C. Lee Post, No. 32. Representative FORDNEY, THE ABERDEEN DAILY WORLD, Chairman House Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: If, after nine months, during which time he has made two affidavits and several requests for action, an ex-soldier is unable to get a reply from Washington regarding a $50 second Liberty loan bond that he paid for out of his meager salary, as an aid to his country in addition to a year's service in this country and 16 months in France, how long will it take him to secure any benefits from the measure your committee is discussing for the relief of ex-soldiers, should it become a law? Their records certainly show that I paid for the bond, which was to be left with the War Department until called for. All was turmoil in our outfit in France when the bond was paid for and I received no receipt. I have not received the bond and apparently can't get it. If I can't get it, who does? If you and your committee honestly want to help a soldier, a little aid in getting what is justly due him will be greatly appreciated. Let the rest be charged to experience. Very respectfully, yours, P. D. MORGAN. WHEELING W. Va., March 13, 1920. Hon. JOSEPH W. FORDNEY, M. C., Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Bully for you! The writer surely appreciates and commends your stand on the matter of soldier relief. The writer was one of the few thousand in the Air Service as a flying cadet. All through ground school and flying school, it was recommended that we buy this thing or that thing" because some day you fellows are going to be officers." Those of us who were not blessed with an oversupply of worldly goods, of course, had to go in debt for these things, and I know several, myself included, who borrowed amounts ranging from $500 to $1,000 before the long-looked-for commission was forthcoming. Understand, please, that there was no graft, only an overzealousness on the part of our superiors. I, for one, need the money, and I know a dozen others who will not " squander" any bonus that is forthcoming, but who will apply it to debts and obligations incurred while in the service of Uncle Sam. If there is anything more than you have done, that you can do to have this matter favorably reported, I am sure that you will receive the earnest commendations of the millions who served and the especial thanks of thousands who were proud to call themselves flying cadets and flying officers of the Army Air Service. Very truly, yours, HOWARD HOLLOBAUGH. CHEYENNE, WYo., March 1, 1920. 701-8 Munsey Building, STARS AND STRIPES, Washington, D. C. Transmit the following to Wyoming Congressmen, Senators Francis E. Warren, John B. Kendrick, Representative Frank W. Mondell: We, the following ex-service men, request your support in the bill providing for a $50 bonus per month for discharged soldiers for the period of time they were in service. Albert Cornell, H. Brannon, L. Morris, William Petrey, R. Woolston, William Keating, Fred Grant, Gus Sohrens, Kenneth Bell, B. McCloud, Clyde Peterson, Harry Doyle, Milton Dorough, M. Jones Dwyer, Smith L. Evenrude, F. Ballinger, Ward Hudson, Victor Harr, John McHugh, William Vavra, Charles Woods, N. McDonald, Frank Stabler, F. Wilson, E. Peters, Eli Jacobs, James Vavra, Willis Rees, J. Dougherty, H. Mitchell, Jess Husey, Walter Davis, William McGinley, Orin Kerrigan, T. |