Evening star., 1945-02-24
Letters to The Star
Corporal in First World War
Argues for National Service Law

Argues for National Service Law
To the Editor of The Star:
The excellent letter of 1t. Ralph L.
Trisko, U. S. N. r., in regard to national
service legislation expresses I am sure,
the sentiments of very large number
of loyal American citizens.
My belief is based, among other and
more recent considerations, on views
expressed by servicemen during and
after World War l. These views may
be summarized something like this: II
we ever have another war tand many
felt sure even on November IL, 1913 that
we would, because Germany was not
licked the way we wanted to do the
job, but merely surrendered at an OPP
perfume time) we should have a uni
versal draft, of men for the armed serv-
ices, of labor for the production and
distribution job, and of capital for the
financing. Freezing of wages, prices and
profits was felt to be necessary to take
the profit out of war for both capital
and labor, to protect workers against
rising costs of living, to avoid an un-
necessarily inflated war cost, and to
minimize the differences in sacrifice df,
indeed, it can be compared at alb be-
tween civilians and servicemen'
The views expressed above are largely
academic now, since we already have
incurred most of the i'll effects of war
which might have been averted by such
a program. There still remains, how
ever, the opportunity to strengthen the
home front if we do not waste too much
time arguing about it.
In my opinion, national service legis-
lation need not involve the regimenta-
ton of all workers. Those already in
essential work would have the imme-
diate blessing of the law. They should
be permitted to move as freely as pos
sible from one essential job to another
to utilize their skills to best advantage
and to take advantage of individual
opportunities for advancement.
Trusts Fair Draft Methods.
Shifts from essential to nonessential
occupations during the war emergency
should be forbidden under penalty.
Workers in the less-essential and non
essential occupations, as we'll as able
bodied people who prefer to live by
their wits and the earnings of others
rather than by working. should be taken
Systematically by fair draft methods
and should be required to accept such
essential work as they are qualified to
perform.
Most of this latter group, while ap-
parently lacking the interest in the war
effort which motivates many others,
would comply willingly enough with fair
draft methods, just as every segment
OF our population complies without COM
plant with military draft calls.
What about compulsion applied to
those few who refuse to comply with
the requirements of such labor draft?
Is jail or the 'workhouse" for such
people to be considered slave labor or
un-American? I think there is ample
precedent for saying: No. More than
one leader, including Capt. John Smith
in Virginia, invoked mo work-no eat"
ruling for shirkers in the early days of
y.
basic reason for the requirement was
the dangers that threatened the exist
ence of the entire group, and the same
danger is involved in the present war
let no one mistake it.
Why any person or any organized
group should refer to this as slave labor
or a step toward slave labor, I cannot
see. That bogey is just so much
"baloney' to me, no matter how thickly
or thinly sliced.
We got rid of wartime controls after
the last war and We shall do so again
We have wen-balanced, independent
Congress. Let lis keep it that way and
We needn't fear for the rights of the
people. HUGH ROSS,
1918-19 Corporal