The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1908-02-13
INCREASE IN PAY
FOR ARMY URGENT
viii Attempt to Put 1t
Through With Army APP
preparation Bill.
Representative Hull Makes
Startling Statements on
Cost of Enlisting Soldiers.

An honest effort IS going to be made.
when the army appropriation bill gets
before the House, to do something TO
rehabilitate the army of the United
States. Congressman Hull. chairman OF
she Military Committee, believes there
IL good chance to do something The
committee. before the bill is reported.
viii add TO it the bill for reorganization
Of army pay. increasing Il all along the
line.
IF on a point Of order this measure
IS stricken of as new legislation, the
Military Committee will ask for rule
under which a vote may be had on the
proposition TO attach IL 10 the appro-
priatiOn bill The report is. although AIr.
Hull insists that he knows nothing
about II. that a rule TOT this purpose Is
assured If II proves necessary.
Expensive Necessity.
Uncle Sans army IS a mighty ex-
pensive establishment.
1T costs about $1,000 10 enlist q man. 90
was the startling statement made by
Mr. Hull. in discussing the situation.
That may surprise you, bat it is true
that the recruiting business OF the army
aggregates a figure that represents
A,OOO per capita Of soldiers enlisted.
Even at that figure it wouldL be so
bad but for the fact that a constantly
decreased proportion OF men re-enliSt
after the expiration OF their hrst term
OF service.
Why? Because foreign service.
colonial service, Cuban service, IS not
popular, and because in good times the
pay OF army men Is too small 10 be any
'inducemenJ.
THE committee has not decided on
the percentage Of increase Of pay FOR
different grades. That we have still
10 fight cat this week. As to the pri-
Yates, there seems TO be no opposition
10 giving them a good Increased to
IS per cent, 1 should say. The non
commissioned officers viii get still
more than this, and there Will he pro-
vision also for a substantial increase
OF pay with each re-enlistment- You
see, re-enlistments are necessary TO
keep the army in the best condition.
and as I have said, the proportion OF
them has been growing less.
Not only does il cost $1,000 TO enlist
a soldier, but IL costs about $1,000 to
keep him per annum. He is more ex-
pensiye the first year than afterward.
Why shouldn't this expense be saved
by giving HIM more to re-enlist?
The Worst-Paid Man.
THE poorest paid man in the service
is the first lieutenant He gets more
than the second lieutenant in actual
cash, but the second lieutenant IS a
young man Just out Of school with no
family and no large social expenses.
When he becomes a first lieutenant he
is older and is probably married. He
IL liable 70 stay in that grade fifteen
years. and to have children to support.
That's why the lower grades OF com
missioned officers are entitled 10 real
consideration
It's necessary TO give about the same
percentage Of increase. however, TO first
and second LeuJenants and captains
because IL we didn't do that we would
run 'em al in together. There are 2
lot Of difficulties in thu way. bUt some
thing must be done. This isn't q good
tine for il, because of financial cOndi-
tions. All that IS realized But the
situation Of the army. without men,
and with the difficulty increasing con-
staEtly Of keeping men IN the ranks.
IS so serious that IL seems impossible
that we Will much longer be denied
some consideration. We think we can
pretty nearly show that II will not cost
more TO maintain an aTLly on a better
pay scale than II costs now, by reason
OF the difficulty Of securing Te-enlist-
ments."