Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1917-09-08
DISTRICT AND WATERLOO DRAFT
COMMISSIONS HOLD DIFF.
FERENT VIEWS.
WORK DELAYED BECAUSE
OF VARYING OPINIONS
Disagree a. to Interpretation Of War
Departments Instructions as to De-
pendents-Loeai Board Refuses to
Call More Men Until Ruling is OBJ
tanned From Washington.

lnSITuCLlOIlS on uepelueiIs pSNNSSH I-''
district and the local exemption board
is causing a temporary halt in the lat
ter's proceedings.
Members of the local board will wal
for new light.
They stand on their action in cert'-
fying hfty-Seven men for service on the
first draft to the district board. Ih'
district board certified back thirty-two
One hundred and three men were called
for examination by the local board II
making their certitication Of the fifty
seven registrants, In addition, the
local board certified men out OF the
next fifty called.
1t is inferred that this attitude oi
the local board on exemptions on the
ground OF dependents will mean me
board will call no more men for eN-
animation and Will certify no more -
the district board for service unless lis
Interpretation of war department m
structions is ruled TO be erroneous.
So far as known. this is the hrst
time a local board in Iowa has laised
the question of Interpretation OF the
latest orders from the war department
on the ground of dependents.
Dependency Instructions.
Rules and regulations issued after
the presidents letter on married men
and their dependents include the fol-
lowing:
"A feeling has been expressed that
in passing on claims for discharge on
the ground of dependents. local boards
to a married man or to the head Of a
family The law under which local
boards act requires that, before such
discharge can be granted, dependency
as well as relationship, must be estao-
lished. The matter having been pre-
sented to the president, the following
are his orders thereon
I'VE ought, as far as possible, 10
raise this new national army without
creating the hardships necessarily en-
tailed when the head OF a family IS
taken. and l hope that for the most
part those accepted in the first call
would be found to be men who had not
yet assumed such relations.
1.-The seiective service law makes the
fact Of dependents rather than the fact
of marriage the base for exemption.
and there are undoubtedly many cases
within che age limit fixed by law, Of
men who are married and yet whose
Accommodations or other economic sur
roundings are such that no dependency
of the wife exists in fact. Plainly, the
law does not contemplate exemption
for this class Of men,
The regulations promulgated June
80, 1917, should be regarded as con-
trolling in these cases, and the orders
issued under that regulation directing
exemption boards to establish the fact
of dependents in addition to the fact
Of marriage ought not to be ahrogated
THE attention Of this office has been
called TO the fact that in few in
stances local boards have certified 10
district boards, as held for military
duty, men whose families are actually
dependent on them for support, IN the
theory that the wife is able to work
and should be put to the necessity Of
going to work 10 support herself and
children. This situation is express Il
in the following by the district board
standing that the phrase, support
available from relatives is support
partial or total previously extended to
the applicant himself:
I'VE do not concur in the view sug-
gested in some quarters that in case
Of a wife and children actually depend
ent on the applicants labor Tor sup
port, and when there are no other
means OF support, the wife should be
put to the necessity of going to Work
ITO support herself and children. Bona
fide dependency Of wife and children
on the labor Of applicant, where in his
absence, they will be left without rea-
sonably adequate support, after duly
taking into consideration the soldier
wage and support available from rcla-
tives, as stated in the rulings Of the
provost marshal general, IS ground Of
discharge
This opinion clearly and adequately
expresses the intent Of me law in this
regard
Where Difference Lies.
= Acting on orders from the war de-
-partment. as it interpreted them, the
district board exempted seventeen mar
ried men who made appeal from the
action Of the Waterloo board on the
ground Of dependents.
The local board interprets all the
instructions, including quoted para
graphs above. as warranting them in
still holding that, out of possibly two
exceptions, the married men whose ex-
Z emption on appeal was granted by the
district board, should still be held for
service.
It Is simply a variance Of interpre-
tations OF rules and regulations which
the members of both boards gave their
oaths to follow.
The local board examined carefully
into all cases claiming exemption and
:.a members endeavored re- procure all
facts that would guide them in just
decision. Exemption was granted to
all heads Of families where there was
more than one child. Where the mar
= r..sa man had only q wife DIS dependent
on his labor it considered the SIS a
month that the husband might send
from his pay as a soldier and the wife's
ability to earn something.
Records in the local boards office
show that all claims Of exemption or
ground Of dependents where appea
was taken, were granted. In three in
stances married men were. certified
back to the local board for service, bu
there In no record in the local boards
office that an appeal was taken.
e