The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1918-02-01
BAKER REVERSES
UNIVERSAL RULE
His Action Causing Much
Confusion Among New
York Officials
MUST JUDGE EACH
CASE SEPARATELY
Thinks That the Decision of the Dis
trict Board Is More Harsh Than Is
Consistent with Purpose and Intent
of the Law

NEW YORK. Feb. 1.-The action Of
Newton d. Baker, secretary Of war, in
overriding the district draft appeals
board on the "'slaeker marriage ques-
ton has resulted in causing much CON
fusion among CONSUMPTION officials here.
Where the district board, which is
presided over by Charles f. Hughes and
composed Of some of the most illustri-
Gus veterans of bench and bar, had de
cided after weeks of consideration that
! uniform rule should be adopted and
had gone to great pains in drafting an
| opinion for the guidance of local ex-
emption boards the secretary of war
has completely reversed it.
The secretary's letter, received by
Mr.. Hughes and read at the board
meeting, directs that each ease where a
rcgistrant married since the enactment
of the CONSUMPTION law must be con
sidered separately. The local board
must exercise its own discretion in
granting deferred classification.
This is the very thing that the board
members feared would be harmful to
the draft. They pointed out that it
would open the gates to accusations of
| tavorltism III certain eases, and for
this reason decided upon the rule which
Secretary Baker has set aside; namely,
that no marriage contracted since the
enactment Of the CONSUMPTION law
should be regarded az basis for deferred
classification unless before marriage
| and since May IS the registrant had
been found physically unfit for military
service.
Among the men who supported this
| opinion besides Mr.. Hughes were
| George W. Wickersham, formerly at
/ torney general; George l.. Ingraham
and Samuel G. Ordway, former justices
Of the supreme court of this state;
Louis Marshall and Meier. Steinhrink.
| As the situation in regard TO these
recently contracted marriages now
stands the boards must decide in each
ease just what the underlying motives
! OF the marriage contract were. and if
/ It Is found that the marriage was per
! formed to eyade the draft they must
/ refuse to recognize it. The exact man.
ner IN which conclusions are to be AZ.
rived at is a matter greatly perplex
ing to the draft officials.
The district appeals board suspended
| Judgment ON MANY marriage claims YES
terday because of the Baker ruling
| Theodore +. Dumoulin, secretary of the
board, was directed to request further
Investigation by local draft officials.
Secretary Baker 5 letter containing
| the new rules applicable to marriage
Slackers follows in part:
The effect of the ruling, as | un
derstand it, is that unless, by reason Of
rejection for military service or prior
exemption, registrant has had fai-
ground for belief that he would not b,
called for military service, then an,
marriage relation contracted bv hin
since May Is will be disregardcd a,
creating condition of dependenc,
meriting deferred classification.
The argument is cogent, but it pro
ceeds upon an assumption that the eff
feet of the selectiyc service law wa
TO set up a deterrent to marriap,
among reglstrants at least to the ex
tent OF warning them that such mar
rlages would be disregarded as
ground for defermeut, and in this
cannot concur.
N my opinion, each ease must b
considered IN the light of its own cir
cum$tances, and whenever the board j
convinced that the marriage was no
entered INTO with primary purpose o
evadlng military service the claim 70
deferred classification should be al
lowed.
>. " In my opinion, the ruling of tn
district board for the city of New Yorl
IS more harsh than is consistent Wit
the purpose and intent of the law. an
fear that its application will involv
us IN great difficulty. The rules GOV
ernlng exemption are left to be formu
lated IN executive discretion. and there
fore there is question of national 10,