Evening star., 1919-08-17

clouS and regarded as oanSeiou' "
american institutions and principles.
F, Under the latter system the executive
f., cannot call upon the trained men ioi
| military duty without the authority
of Congress; the men are not asslE heo
20 stations. and in event OF inop,1%'A
I ton some delay will be inevitable.
| The estimated additional cost LOT
| the training of the probable 650,0oo
is $4,000 900. but this does not IN
clude the cost of maintaining the
training force in the Regular Army. my
which, however would be available
| for all military purposes. The entire
| cost for the proposed military estap-
| lishment under this bill is estimated
at $500, 600, 900 annually.
| Two objections have been raised 70
| he provisions thus far mentioned.
The first is that the substantial rea-
son for opposing compulsory military
! service applies with equal force 10
| the maintenance of so large an army
! temporary measure until the worlo
! settles itself from the upheaval OF
| war and until vexatious matters De-
| low the Rio Grande subside. there is
no apparent Justification for any such
| force in this country. Fears that
malfunctioning of the league Of ma
tions may cause international dis
| putes involving the use OF such an
army after the present year do not
appear. thus far: to be 1ustined; s .,o
i
three month period is too short to
| produce either the best results for
i the Army or for the young men IN
| training Gen. March stated to the
committee that the course would not
| seek to give educational or vocational
training to the candidates. The Or
ganization of a modern army requires
masters of all trades. occupations and
professions Without chauffeurs. cleo
] ericians. blacksmiths and hundred
I n har
| would very soon come to grief. Three
months would not develop many
| young men for any of these jobs and
would be altogether 'valueless so far
as their vocational improvement Is
concerned.
| No American troops went into ac-
ton with less training than three
! months. Col. L. P. Ayers. chief of
F., the statistics branch. general staff. in
his official statistical summary says:
The average American soldier who
| went to France received six months
| training in this country before he
| sailed. After he landed overseas he
| he had two months of training before
| he went into battle. The part Of the
J battle line that he entered was in a
| quiet sector. and here he remained
| one month before going into an active
| sector and taking part in hard fight
| ing"
| He says that. while the experience
OIL tNOuSdnQS OF SOlOieTS OlHeF WIDELY
| from these typical figures, careful
| study of the training data Of nearly
| 1,4O0.0 900 men who actually fought in
France gives these as the average
| results. That is. total of nine
| months training for troops was
! fit to enter the fighting line. Without
| doubt. the three months training for
| the students would nearly equal the
six months training given to the
American Army in camps before they
went abroad; for the students would
enter camps prepared for them and
equipment ready, with skilled instruc-
tors on hand to put them at once at
their work.
The arguments in favor Of the
short course are not without force
They are the saving of money; the
i affect the various localities least un-
favorably; the fact that three months
| in camp would not seriously interfere
with the established terms Of colleges
and Universities. and that 1t would
have the approval of those who do not
believe in long removal of the young
! from their homes during this forma-
tive period of their lives
| X +
! Gen. Peyton c. March, when before
the military committee. discussed the
| m a ter of
Discusses Method Army pro-
Of Army Promotion. mo.,ons' noeo ana
the adoption of plan for advance by
selection. There is probably not an
officer in the Army who does not ad-
| nit the soundness Of the principle
| that the Army is entitled when a Va
cancy exists to have the flttest off,
| Ger of the grade below advanced to
fill the vacancy. 1t is likely that they
will also agree that unfit officers
should be dropped from the service
by a rigid process of elimination
However. it is almost impossible to
find an offlcer-especially among
those who are almost certain to be
included among the selected-who will
indorse any specific plan for a selec-
& tive promotion; Thsy argue that even
| a practical impossibility to obtain in
dividual records that will reflect the
fitness Of the candidates for advanced
| rank.
Officers also argue against the clas-
sifcation OF themselves in the three
| groups: Those recommended for Sc
lection for promotion; those who
barely hold their own, and those who
are rated as united for advance.
They hold that the classification OF
officers In the last group at once de-
stroys their further usefulness in
the military service. One so rated
would, IL sent to serve with the troops
be quite unable to command effective
ly. They assert that 1t would be bet
ter to sever his relations with the
Army at once and let him go out by
elimination.
Apparently the Navy is having its
own troubles with its system OF
selective promotion. Officers are con-
tending that no board composed of
officers of high rank can fairly pass
upon the merits and qualifications OF
officers several grades below them, on
the ground that by reason of the
distance between them there has been
little opportunity for the members
of the board to become personally ac-
quainted with more than a few of
those to be promoted from the lower
grades.
Naval officers say that without this
personal knowledge 1t is not possible
to skelect officers for promotion to the
best interests Of the Navy; the Army
officers are saying that the difficulty
in the Army is far greater on account
OF the much larger number of officers
in it's organization.
+ 4 y
The chief of the militia bureau
Maj. Gen. Jesse Mel. Carter, reports
Progress in Forming states the
(; the National Guard. re-, e0rsan'.a. al
National Guard is progressing with
commendable responsiveness. but tha,