Evening star., 1946-07-09
Letters to The Star
Wants Men Paid for Leave
They Could Not Take

ney AOulQ lNOt axe
To the Editor Of The Star:
May take exception to your editorial
Of July 5 regarding the bill for ter
minal leave for enlisted men2 I feel
that there are few points Of which you
are not aware, and that there possibly
is misunderstanding as to the aims OF
the bill
First. it is claimed that the records
of the enlisted men were so loosely kept
that it is practically impossible to de-
termine the amount of furlough due an
individual. If such a statement has
been made by q representative of the
War Department, said representative
must either be trying to avoid the pay
ments or is entirely unfamiliar with
Army regulations. One of the most
seriously kept of all Army records is the
service record record of each individ-
uals accomplishments, service, etc,
while he is in the Army This record
includes all furlough time taken, so
simple deduction, based on the time
due, less the time taken, will indicate
the amount now due the soldier. II
these records have been loosely kept, I
should like to know where, and the
only answer seems to be right In the
War Department. 1 was a unit COM
mander in the Army in Europe, and
can testify that these records were
always complete and up-to-date, thanks
to section OF the Army known as the
Inspector Generals Department. You
need but ask any officer who had a
command to determine the truth of
this. Secondly. every record of return
ing enlisted men is checked, first at his
original outfit. next at port OF en-
barkation, and finally at the separation
center. These checks, of course, would
not reveal furloughs given which were
not recorded, but I can assure you that
IG inspections in the field had taken
care OF that. Further, the IGs were not
idle during combat, either, at least,
not in the campaigns OF my unit.
A second check is through the ma
chine records unit of the Adjutant Gen.
erals Department. Every unit submits
a morning report daily, and this report
shows the departure and return of every
man taking a furlough. These reports
are sent to the War Department, where
such entries as are pertinent are en-
tered in the WD copy OF the mans
service record. 1t Is a double-c check, so
to speak
Next. it is stated that the bill is
merely a disguised bonus This state
ment Is entirely unfair to those en-
listed men who were unable to take
their furlough time. Many of those who
We're lucky enough to have served their
time in the States were able to take all
OF their allowed furlough time. Most of
those who served overseas received
little or none of 1t. How is it giving
these men bonus to pay them for
leave honorably earned, but not taken
through no fault of their own? Govern
ment employees may earn their leave
and be paid for it when they resign or
are discharged. A soldier who worked,
fought and sweated 365 days a year
with no time off is being given a bonus
when he is merely paid for his accumu-
lated leave. Is that fair?
AS an officer. received my terminal
leave when was separated, on nv
sworn statement that had received a
certain amount OF leave while I was on
active duty. This statement Is subject
to check, and I am aware of the penal
ties which may apply to me If this
statement is not correct. see no reason
why the same system may not apply to
the enlisted man. The Government ac-
cepts sworn statements as to income
tax, etc. Why not as to furlough time?
All are subject to check.
II you do not wish the sworn state
ments to apply, then let the War De-
partment hire the necessary employees
and compute the leave due from the
service records on file II they could set
up an organization as efficient as the
Oftice for Dependency Benefits, they
could set up similar one for payment
OF accrued leave time due enlisted men,
1hls Is no bonus, it is a just payment
OF moneys due and owing to those who
served in the armed forces.
A CAPTAIN WHO HAS PAID FOR
HIS LEAVE.