Evening journal., 1918-01-31
Stacker MARRIAGE
DRAFT RULE UPSET
Baker Reverses Decision Of
Hughes'S Board Treating
All Cases Alike
MUST FIND OUT
IMPELLING MOTIVES

NEW YORK, Jan. 3i.-The action Of
Newton d. Baker, Secretary Of War, in
overruling tbe district draft appeals
board on the Stacker marriage" dues-
tion, resulted yesterday in causing
much confusion among conscriplion
officials here.
Where the district board, which Is
presided over by Charles +. Hughes
and composed OF some of the most IL
lustrous veterans OF bench and bar, had
decided after weeks of consideration
that a uniform rule should be adopted
and had gone TO great pains in drafting
an opinion for the guidance of local
exemption boards, the Secretary OF
War has completely reserved IT,
The Secrelarys letter, received by Mr..
Hughes yeste day and read at the
board meeting, directs that each case
where a registarant married since the
enactment Of the conscrlption law must
be considered separately The local
board must exercise its own discretion
in granting a deferred classification.
This ms the very thing that the board
members feared would be harmful TO
the draft They pointed out that il
would open the gates 10 accusations Of
favoritism In certain cases and for this
reason decided upon the rule which
Secretary Baker has set aside; namely
that no marriage contracted since the
enactment Of the conscription law
should be regarded as basis for de-
ferred classification unless before mar
riage and since May iS the rcestrant
had haau fopnd nbxefaa11.r rpuf f,r
military service.
Among the men who supported this
opinion besides Mr. Hughes were
George w. Wickersham, formerly At
torney-General; George l.. lngraham
and Samuel G. Ordway former Justices
Of the Supreme Court Of this state
Louis Marshall and Meier Sieinbrink.
As the situation IN regard TO these
recently contracted marriages now
stands the boards must decide in each
case just what the underlying motives
of the marriage contract were. and IL
10 is found that the marriage was per-
formed TO evade tho draft they must I
refuse TO recognize IL. The exact man
ner In which conclusions are 10 be ar |
rived at is a matter greatly perplexlng |
to the draft officials
The district appeals board suspended
judgment on many marriage claims
yesterday because Of the Baker ruling.
Theodore +. Dumoulln, secretary Of the
board, was directed to request further
investigation by local draft officials.
Secretary Bakers letter containing
the new rules applicable to marriage
slackers" follows in part.
"The erect of the ruling, as under
stand 10, is that unless by reason Of
rejection for military, service or prior
exemption, q belief that he would notl
be called for military service, then any
marriage relation contracted by him
since May IS, Will be disregarded as
creating a condition Of dependency
meriting deferred classification.
"The argument Is cogent, but It pro-
ceeds upon an assumption that the ef
fect OF the selectiye service law was 10 |
yet up a deterrent TO marriage among |
registranis at least TO the extent OF /
warning them that such marriages |
would be disregarded as a ground for I
deferment, and in this I cannot concur. /
In my opinion each case must be |
considered in the light of It's own cir /
and whenever the board Is /
convinced that the marriage was not /
entered into with a primary purpose Of |
evading military service the claim for /
deferred classification should be al |
lowed.
In my opinion, the ruling of the /
District Board for the city Of New York /
Is more harsh than Is consistent with /
the purpose and intent Of the law. and (
/ fear that its application VIII involve /
us In great di0lcultV Tho rules rov
erning exemption arc left 10 be formu- /
lated in executive discretion and there
fore there Is a question OF national pol
Icy as well as a question Of law 20 be |
considered. / como with great defer
ence to a conclusion inconsistent with |
that Of the board, and If the question
were Of law solely ] should hesitate
even more than ! do IN promulgating
the following ruling, which is being
sent out to all Governors today.
While the effect Of Rule ", PAGE 36.
s. 5. r, is to require boards to scru-
tinize marriages since May iS, 1917. Il I
was never intended that rule should
raise the presumption that every mar /
rlage since that date was effected with 4
the primary purpose Of evading milf |
tary service. That rule was intended I
authorize the boards to disregard /
the relationship created by clearly es-
tablished Stacker marriages as a con- I
dltlon Of dependency. but each case
must be carefully examined on its own
merits No general rule can be laid /
down, but it may be stated that a mar /
riage that carries no equivocaI circum- /
stances other than It's date is not TO be /
.to diernQard rdad "