the leading non-commissioned officers of the Fifth United States Infantry. Non-commissioned officers and especially the non-commissioned staff and first sergeants are enlisted men (not officers) generally with long service to their credit. They know.

Whereas, That the articles appearing in Harper's Weekly [early in 1914] criticizing the system in the Army are inaccurate and do not show the conditions as they actually exist.

Whereas, That the undersigned non-commissioned officers know from long service and personal knowledge that enlisted men are not required to polish officers' shoes and that the picture drawn by James Montgomery Flagg as shown in the first number of the above mentioned magazine on 'The Honor of the Army" is not true. That we have never heard an officer order an enlisted man to do work of this kind.

Whereas, That officers exercise military authority with firmness, kindness and justice and do not injure those under their authority by tyrannical conduct, and that the authority exercised compares favorably with that accorded employees by employers of labor in civil life.

Whereas, That the interests of discipline would not be subserved if any greater leniency was shown those who fail to obey the orders of their superiors, and that all well conducted mercantile establishments and corporations maintain a system of discipline which is considered in some instances more severe than that of the Army.

Resolved, That no specific cause can be found for desertion in time of peace other than that young men enlist in a

spirit of adventure, become dissatisfied when this wish is not realized and desert for the same reason they would leave any position they may have in civil life in which they are required to perform certain duties where others were placed over them. It is also thought that the aspersion cast on the uniform of a soldier in certain communities and in public places of amusement are causes that make them dissatisfied and wish to return to civil life.

Resolved, That a copy of the above be sent to Harper's Weekly, The Army and Navy Journal and The Army and Navy Register with the request that the same be published.

The resolutions are signed by Frank C. Reilly, sergeant major; Fred W. Kenny, quartermaster sergeant; Frank Mayer, commissary sergeant; Fred S. Scoble, battalion sergeant major; Anderson W. Sharp, color sergeant; William G. Sams, color sergeant; Andrew Gibson, first sergeant, Co. G; Henry T. Hyde, first sergeant, Co. H; Harry Kleine, first sergeant, Co. F; Benjamin C. Fink, first sergeant, Co. L; John H. Lucas, first sergeant, Co. I; Harry H. Curtis, first sergeant, Co. K; Theodore Schoge, first sergeant, Co. A; George Moore, first sergeant, Co. M; John Trush, first sergeant, Co. E; Bernard F. Kahn, first sergeant, Co. D; Arthur Harris, first sergeant, Co. B; Clayton Sandoe, first sergeant, Co. C; Andrew Lindstrom, acting first sergeant, Reg. Det.

Desertions are not due to the army, but to the American public. The fault lies neither in undue

severity nor in unfairness in the service, but to the fact that the modern American youth is brought up without restraint, without discipline, without training. When he enlists he receives these beneficial things and he chafes under the restraint becomes "homesick and deserts. The same reasons may be given for desertion as any principal of a strict educational institution could tell you influence spoiled and pampered boys to run away from school.

CHAPTER IX

"" COMMON PEOPLE" AND MILITARY FORCE

NEXT, if not equal, in importance, to the slander

ous attacks made upon the character of the personnel of the army and navy, is the insidious attempt of anti-militarists of a certain class to convince the so-called common people" that military force is opposed to the interest of the plain citizen.

The most successful form which this campaign has taken has been in antagonizing union labor against military force. In this particular body of men there appears to be a natural tendency to regard military force as their enemy, and this tendency receives much assistance from some of the anti-militarists. It is a regrettable fact that at the present time organized labor has been unable to see the errors of its reasoning.

Labor unions are, as a whole, patriotic organizations. Many of them are composed of intelligent men, and it has been found in more than one instance that when conditions were properly explained, they favored rather than opposed military force. The opposition of labor lies, of course, in the fact that troops are frequently used to preserve order during

riots growing out of labor trouble. According to the agitators, the soldiers are the tools of the employer. Such, however, is far from the case. A soldier, in the first place, would rather perform any other duty than riot duty during a strike; and, in the second place, when compelled to do so he stands for order alone. Union labor men are not anarchists; they are not lawless; they are not dishonest; and they do not oppose a government that insures good order. In fact, such men give a strong, high-class vote in favor of what they believe will be for the protection and interest of their homes. They desire the protection of police for their own homes and privileges, and would under no circumstances vote to have the police protection done away with. Due to agitators, however, in many cases they fail to recognize, that troops when called out are merely performing the duty which the police have been unable to do.

As for the attitude of the soldier in labor disturbances, we quote from one of the military manuals for riot duty; a book which has been adopted by the War Department for study in all officers' schools in the National Guard, and which is in use in many of the states:

The attitude of the troops should be strictly impartial, especially in labor disturbances. They should absolutely prevent all disorder, no matter from what source, but should take extreme care to show no favors to any side of the con