TREASURY DEPARTMENT
BUREAU OF WAR RISK INSURANCE
DIVISION OF MILITARY AND NAVAL INS
Bulletin No. 3
FAMILY ALLOWANCES, ALLOTMENTS, COMPENSATION, AND
INSURANCE FCR THE MILITARY AND NAVAL FORCES OF
THE UNITED STATES PROVIDED UNDER ACT 0? CON-
GRESS APPROVED OCTOBER 6, 1917
Explanation submiited by Hon. Juiian W. Mack, of the pro-
visions of the Military and Naval Insurance Act, presented at
a conference of officers and enlisted men of the Army and Navy,
he'd in Washington on October 16, 17, and 13, 1917
Tliis explanation has the full approval of the Bureau of War
Risk Insurance
fdLc^rwx/ C. l^ cf^KA?
Approved:
Director of lite Bureau of War Risk Insurancz
S:crelcry cf Ik; Treasury
-. V^^
^-
WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1917
^^
SRLF
YRL
SCOPE AND MEANING OF ACT OF OCTOBER 6, 1917, PROVIDING FOR
FAMILY ALLOWANCES, ALLOTMENTS, COMPENSATION, AND INSUR-
ANCE FOR THE MIUTARY AND NAVAL FORCES OF THE UNITED
STATES.
HON. JULIAN W. MACK.
Hon. JuLiAX W. Mack. ^[r. Chiiirman and aentlemen. I think that
it Avould be Avell for all of you to read through the bill. I assujne
that very few of you are lawyers, and it may seem to you highly
teclinical. And yet you will have to read it through, and you will
have to read it through a great many times, so you might just as well
begin right novv\ While you can't grasp it at a first reading, and
probably won't grasp all of the details at a tenth reading — none of
us have been able to do that — 3'et you must thoroughly acquaint your-
selves with the words and the interpretation of the act, and with all
of the bulletins that are going to be sent out by the bureau explana-
tory of the act, if you are to perform the duty for which you were
called here. The essential pu.rposc of this meeting is to acquaint .some
men from each cant<jnnient as thoroughly as may be possible in a
three days' session, of coiu'se relying primarily upon their own efforts
to acquaint them with the purpose and scope of this bill, not, how-
ever, for their own good, but that they may be torchbearers to their
fellows in the various camps and cantonments.
The bureau purposes, of course, sending out literature, but there is
nothing like the human touch and the human word personally deliv-
ered to bring to men a message such as this, for it is a real human
message. It aims to do justice to the men. The underlying thought
of the framers of this act, the underlying thought of the Secretar}* of
the Treasury in advocating this act, and the underlying thought of
Congress in enacting the law in the shape in which it has emerged,
has been this: That a fair and reasonable measure of justice to the
men and to their families is the least that is due them from the entire
people represented by the Government. And it is that thought that
we are going to endeaAor to bring home to you, that thought which
we hope thi'ough you to bring home to every man in the military or
naval forces of the L'nited States; because unless the men thoroughly
understand the fundamental principle of this act, they won't take
advantaire, as we want them to take advantaire, of all of the benelits
and privileges that the act grants to them.
Now, gentlemen, 1 have the one distinct purpose of trying as best I
may to acquaint you with this law, acquaint you with it fully, and
then to answer the doubts and difliculties tliat will naturally jiresent
themselves to you. It is not at all eas3' to grasp a law that covers so
many dili'erent things as this does and that is so detailed in its pro-
visions as this necessarily had to be. And yet it is absolutely es.^ential
for y(.u to understand not only the broad outline but every single
detail of most of the sections of the act.
4 LIFE 1NSUEAXCE_, ETC.^ FOR SOLDIEKS AND SAILORS.
But, before starting on an explanation of the law, it behooves me
without tlie slightest degree of undue humility to say that tlie re-
marks that were made about me this morning as to my connection
with the law were greatly exaggerated. I do not underestimate tliem
at all. I d?em it the greatest opportunity, the greatest privilege of
my life, to have been given this opportunity to do my bit toward the
war service in this particular constructive v>"ay. But it is not my law
at all; I was only one of many. Happening to be selected as chair-
man of a committee, naturally I liad to guide the drafting of the
measure and the piloting of it through Congress. But a great many
had a larger or smaller sliare in the v-. ork ; it is no one man's law, and
no one man's name ought ever to be associated with a law of this kind.
It is the soldiers' and sailors' compensation and insurance act. It is
for them, and every one of us who has had anytliing to do with it
Avants to have his individuality sunk and his connection with it for-
gotten, so that the fact that it is for the soldiers and sailors may
alwaj's be remembered. And for that reason I am not going to
mention the names of those who had to do v,-ith the act; for the fur-
ther reason, too, that I might forget one or the other, and that would
be unfortunate, there were so many.
Now, then, to take up the act itself. And perhaps it would be
clearer to sketch first the underlying principles and then the general
scope, and then in a general way each article, and then to get down
to the details of each article.
As I said this morning, the underlying. pur})ose was to grant a
measure of justice to the fighting forces on behalf of the whole
people, and, secondly, in granting that measure of justice to do it in
a way that would hearten the men by freeing them of the one great
dread that every man has. Men who go out to battle, even though
they are not in the slightest degree physical cowards, may have a
fear of what may befall them. But that isn't the real fear that con-
fronts most of them. The real terror for men is that their families
may suffer or become objects of charit3^ That fear the Government
aims to dispel by letting the men know in advance that their families
arc not going to become objects of charity; that while, of course, the
Government can not keep each one of them in the comfortable situa-
tion in which many of you men maintain your families, it can and
it will at least do this: It will save them from abject poverty — save
them from having to go out and to ask others for the necessities of
life.
Now, some emphasis Avas placed in some of the talks Ihis morning
on compensation to the men. The contrast was mode between pen-
sions and compensation, and the analogy of the workmen's compensa-
tion act was referred to. All of that is true. I do not want, how-
ever, to overemphasize this thought of compensation. Ilatlier I
should like to have you feel that all of those who had anything to do
with this act have always appreciated that, what<?ver the Government
may do, it can not give real compensation for the services that sol-
diers and sailors render, and that their only compensation, their only
real compensation, is the legacy that they are going to transmit to
their children, the knowledge that they have st(;od up and done the
fighting for the rest of us. But in some reasonable measure the rest
of the country must give them a compensation, and we have used the
U.FE IK.SURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 5
Avord compensation in this act because pensions, rightly or wrongly —
I am not now passingon the justice of it — luit rightly or wrongly, pen-
sions ha^•o come to have a secondary and none too pleasing connota-
tion. When we come to the compensation section J will explain in
more detail why tliat is so and what we have done to obviate that
sort of thing, despite groat likeness between the pension laws and the
compenr-alion sect ion.
In framing the law we started out with the consideration of what
it was in a financial way that men were losing and risking, and that
thoy could reasonably' ask the Government to replace or compen-
sate for.
FAMILY ALLOWANCES.
'\Aniatevor roplacom^^nt or compensation was to be given, we felt
would have to be alike throughout the country, and u'ould have to be
alike at least as to all of the men in the same rank, irrespective of
their actual personal financial condition. It is not necessary, of
course, that the provisions should be alike, but it was the only prac-
ticable scheme. Take, for instance, the family allowance. The law
might have been drafted in such a way that the amount of the family
allowance Avould vai-v according to the cost of livinir in the particular
community in which the family resided. And in England that is
done to some extent. More is given to people who live in the large
cities, but it was not deemed feasible for a Federal act. It was felt
that even if it had been thought wise it would not have be^n prac-
ticable, because it would liave been impossible to get such an act
through Congress. Congressmen from the small towns would have
felt there was an unjust discrimination as against their people, so no
attem]:)t of that kind Avas made. Hovrcver, those of us v%-ho had to do
with the drafting of the act did not lose sight of the fact that there
is a real difference in the cost of living, and that the provisions that
are made by the Federal Government may be extravagant in a hamlet
of 500 people, and may be very inadequate in a city like "Washington,
Chicago, or Xew York. But we h.ad to strike somft fair average.
Then, again, wl^en it came to the amounts, we did not feel that the
amounts given w^ere large enough. Most of us coming from large
cities thought that thoy were very small. ^Most of us having more
tlum the average income of men throughout the country thought that
they were pretty small. But again we had to be reasonable. We had
to consider that whatever money is given is paid by the taxpayers of
the country, and that the man liaving an average income would feel
tliat tlicj'e was an injnslice to him if pro\isions vcoro made for your
families that Avould give them more than the average income, at least
considerably more than the average income. And so again the
amounts that vrere <lotei-mined upon were based on v.hnt we thouglit
was a fair and reasonable amount in view, first, of the conditions
throughout the Avhole country, and second, the average earnings
throughout the United States, the average of families throughout the
United States.
Now, in some States — and we hope it Avill be done in most of the
States — there is State legislation, and in at least one citv — and we
hope it Avill come in other cities — there is such legislation, under
which the families of men from that State or that city will receive,
if they need it, supplemental aid. In those communities in which the
6 LIFE IXSURAXCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
cost of living is above tlic averag-e it is only fair and right that the
State or the community should stcj) in and sui>plement what the Oov-
ernment is doing, and we felt that that is a mattci' that ought to be
left to the State or the city.
Then there are going to be extraordinary conditions in individual
families. There are going to be men who iiavc made commitments
for the future, which because of the loss of their income they are
unable now to meet. It is expected that the bill that Secretary
Baker referred to this morning, and which, by the way, was never
part of this bill but v\as ahAays a separate and distinct bill, will be
enacted at the next Congress, and that bill, which is like those called
in Europe moratorium measures, will grant relief to some extent by
giving men who lune made clohnite commitments, mortgages, in-
terest, insurance policies, and other things, at least some leeway in
paying them.
But, apart from that, it is hoped that men with families in those
circumstances may be helloed through loans by private organizations,
patriotic bodies, such as the Ked Trnss and organizations of a similar
character.
And so, too, there are families who have been and are now on the
rolls of various philnnthi-opic organizations. It is not meant to re-
lieve those organizations of what the^^ have been doing except in so
far as what the Government gives will naturally relieve those organ-
izations. But there will be extraordinary cases, extraordinary condi-
tions in many families demanding more than that reasonable average
mxcasure of justice which the people of the Uiiited States as a whole
ought to be and are ready to give. And in those extraordinaiy cases
the appeal will have to be made in the future as it has been in the
past either to the State, county, or city or to private philanthropic
organizjitions. But fo)- the gi-eat mass of the people, and for the
people Avho will be helped and satisfied wdth this average reasonable
assistance from the Government, we wanted, and Congress wanted, it
understood that it is not a gift; it is not charity at all: it is addi-
tional compensation.
Coming now to the subject of the family allowance, a man's wife
and children are entitled to the family allowance that the Govern-
ment provides from the mere fact that the,y are his wife and children
and there will be no examination into the question of their financial
condition. If they want this aid from the Government they will
get it without question. Of course it is not supposed, and therefore
Congress finjill^y consented to let the provision stand in the way it
was drafted—it is not supj^osed that the wife of a millionaire is
going to make application to the Government for $15 a month in
addition to the compulsory alloiinent that her husband must make
to hei'. In fact it is assumed that she is not going to have her hus-
band gi\e her this allotment out of his pay to be deducted from his
pay. In otlier words, it is not to be supposed that those people who are
in comfortaljle circumstances, who have independent incomes, either
the wife or the husband, and v^ho do not ]e(juire anything from the
Go\'ernment, are going to make application for this family allow-
ance. In fact, it is expected that such people Avill come in and waive
the allotment that the husbaiul would otherwise he compelled to
make out of his pay.
LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 7
COMPULSORY ALLOTMENT.
I have used the words " allotment " and " allowance.'" Let me
get down to still furthei- details as to that. The (jiovcrnment i.^
ready to help the family but the (iovernment does not intend to
absolve the married man from his first and primary obligation — that
is, to contribute to the support of his wife and his chikben. This
law recognizes and enforces that obligation. It is the first time that
the Federal (iovernnu-nt as sucli has recognized and enforced- that
obligation by law. This law says the first tiling that a soldier and
sailor must do is to contribute ill fair measure to the support of his
wife and children, and we are going to make him do it. We are
going to deduct a certain amount fi'om his pay whether he will or
not. We are going to ask him, ''Have you a wife and children!! "
And he must answer that (piestion and he must answer it truthfully,
because the law provides a penitentiary punishment for knowingly
false answers to questions that are put in those printed blanks. He
must answer truthfully whether he has a wife, children, or divorced
wife who is entitled to alimony under a decree of court, and if he
has an,y of these three the (»o\ernment will make what is called a
compuisor}' allotment, or what perhaps might better have been called
a deduction from his pay, and this will be made by the (TON'ernment
whether he Avants it or not.
Now. I s^iid that the wealthy woman or the wealthy mans wife
would v»aive that. We have a provision in the act by which the
wife may waive on her behalf and on behalf of her chihlren; but
wo are giuirding her against her ow^n foil}' or her ultrapatriotism
or the undue pressure from her husband. Because there are some
fellows, and they may get into the Army and Navy, who would be
glad to keep their wiiole pay and let the wife shift for herself; and
there are wives who may be so subdued by their husbands or so
patriotic or who think they are so patriotic as to let their hiisiiands
do this. xViid so, while a wife may waive, she must make a showing
to the bureau by proper atlidavits that she is able to support herself
and her children without this help from the Government. Of course
if she does that the (Tovernment gladly permits it. because the (h/v-
ernnient has no intention of throwing auay money. At the same
lime we do not want to make it difficult for those who really do need
it, and I do not mean only those who would be poverty-stricken v.itii-
out it. but those, too. who need it for a reasonable measure of com-
fort. In order to make it possible for them to get it the Government
makes no intpuries as to their actual dejiendency. If the wife or
children ask for it, they will get it without question.
I say. without (juestion. There is a further provision in the act
that a nian may on his own application or otherwise for good cause
be exempted from giving this allotment; not only that the wife may
waive it, but he may be exempted, and you will see at a glance that
that is proper, for if the husband is away and the wife is not con-
ducting herself as she (jught to conduct herself, that is bad enough
in itself; it would be much worse to make the husband pay her and
thus enable her to keep on in her misconduct; and it is tliat sort of
a case that is intended to be guarded against by this provision per-
mitting an exemption from the allotment.
8 LIFE lisSURAXCE^ ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
VOLUNTARY ALLOTMENT.
Now, it is only as to the wife and children and to the divorced
Aviie that the Goveriinient makes this deduction, whether the man
wishes it or not. In otl-er words, it is only as to them that the allot-
ment is c(»m})ulsory. Subject to any regnhitions that the Secretary
of War or Navy may make, a man may allot as much or all of his
})ay as he pleases for any other purposes. He can't allot it away from
the wife, children, or divorced wife to the extent that they are en-
titled to it under law ; but the rest of it, or if he has not any of them,
then all of it. he may allot as he pleases for any purpose he pleases;
this, however, is subject to regulations, because the Secretary of War
may well say a man musi not deprive himself of all of his spending
money. Now, while he niiiy allot, subject to these regulations, to any
]>erson and for any purpose that he pleases, there are certain persons
lo whom he ought to allot, to whom he may feel that he ought to
allot, and there are certain persons to whom if he does make a proper
allotment the Government will add an allowance.
Now note the distinction. To the wife and to the childi-en and to
the divorced wife the allotment is compulsory. He has not any
option except, as I said, the waiver and the exemption. To these
other people there is no compulsion. If he does not want to support
his aged mother, v.ho is de])endent upon him, the pressure of public
opinion vxill have to make him support her — -the pressure from his
fellows. The Governm.ent will not, without his consent, deduct it
from his pay. But as an incentive for a man to support or to help
support his father, his mother, his grandchildren, his brother, or his
sister, if they need his support, the Government says, " If you will
conti'ibute to their support and they need still more, we will add
something to it." So that while the allotment to these people, these
relatives, is not compulsory, it is a condition precedent to the Gov-
ernment giving an allowance. It is compulsory if the man wants
them to get the Government allowance in addition to what he gives
them, and if he does not want them to get the Government allov/ance,
then lie can do as he pleases.
AMOUNT OF ALLOTMENT AND ALLOWANCE.
Now. to get down to the figures. First, as to the compulsory allot-
ment. A man must allot to his Avife and children at least $15 a
month. That is the minimum. That leaves a private, even in the
United States, $15 for himself.
I ought to have said long ago that this allotment and allowance
article of the act does not apply to commissioned officers and it does
not apply to Army and ISavy Nurse Corps. It applies only to en-
listed mi^n, vv'hich, of course, as you know inchides the noncommis-
sioned officers, and in the Navy the petty officers, and it also applies,
by express statement that it shall .so apply, to the men in the training
camps. Of course, men in the training camps are not officers and are
not ordinary enli.sted men; but we have defined (hem for the purposes
of the act under the v.-ords " enlisted men." Now, the reason for the
distinction a^ain is obvious. The commissioned officers get moi-e
pay, and the Army and Navy nurses are really employees and get the
same salary tliat they get when there is no war, and therefore it was
believed that their families were not entitled to this extra help.
LIFE I^'SURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIl^liS AND SAILORS. 9
Furtheiinore, it was not holieved thai it was eHsentiiil to compol an
otticor to do his duty to his family. We roidd leave that to them.
Now, to come bacfc to the fig^ures. The miiiiminn that a man must
give to wife and children is $15. But he may be comi)el!ed to give
more than that. That depends upon his pay and depends upon the
size of his family and the amount that the (lovci-nment gives, be-
cause he and the (iovernment aie sharing alike in this thing, subject
to a miniminn and u maxinuim that he must give. It is a r>0-.')0 game.
Tiie amount that the (Jovernment gives is fixed in the law — $ir> for a
wife, $25 for a wife and one child, $;52.50 for a wife and two children,
and $5 additional for each additional child.
Now, that is what the Government will gi\e. The man must give
the same, except that the man need n.ot give more than half his pay,
and he can't give less than $15. Of course it is obvious that if he
has a M'ife he can. not give less than $15, because the Government
gives $15, and $15 is half pay of the lowest paid man in the Army
and Navy. But there is ariother example that I \vill give you Avhich
shows the need of putting m that $15 mininnnn, and that is this:
If a man has no wife and has one child, that child gets from the
Government only $5 a month. But the father must give $15 any-
way, so that the child will have $20. You will see that there is
where the minimum becomes important. The allotment must equal
what the Government gives, but it nnist be at least $15; it need not
be more than half pay; so that if there is one child only, that child
g(^ts $5 from the Government, but the man nuist give that minimum
of $15, which makes $20 for that child. On the other hand, if there
is a wife and four children, the (iovernment would give $42.50. but
if the man is a private and is getting only $30 as his pay, all he
needs to give is $15. Or if he is in the liigher ranks of the non-
commissioned officers and is getting $100 a month, he will have to
give not half his pay but what the Government gives, $42.50.
Now, I said $5 for one child, but supplemented by $15 couipulsory
allotuient brings it up to $20. Five dollars for one child. $12.50 for
two children, and $20 for tln-ec children, $30 for four children. You
see those steps are a little bit stf^eper as we climb up. The reason
for that, when you think a moment, is obvious, but it always raises
a questi(m if you take it without thinking about it. The man's
allotment remains the same or mav remain the same. Now the larger
the family, the less each one would got out of that $15 that ho
gives, and therefore the more the Government ought to add per
liead to do justice. You see. adding $15 to $5 gives $20; if there are
two children, vou add $12.50 to that $15, which gives $27.50; if three
children, add $20. which gives $35: and if four children, add $30,
which gives $45; so that if you count it up you will find that as the
family increases the per capita of each child from the allotment and
the allowance combined is just a little less, and that is on tlie t'leory
that it costs a little less per head the larger the familv.
So much, then, for the allowance to those to AAhom an allotment
must be made, unless it is waived. I ought to add what is probably
obvious, that a Avife can not waive the allotment and then come and
ask the Government for the allowance. She can't say to her hus-
band. " You can just keep that whole $30. and T will be "satisfied with
what the Government oives.*' She can't iret anvthing from the
10 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOE SOLDIEES AND SAILORS.
Government unless her husbantl gives her an allotment; and if she
Avaives the allotment., she can not get anything from the Government.
Let me suggest that as I am going on to something else it might
be just as well to interrupt me if you want to ask any question about
the things I have just talked about. You will not disturb my train
of thouglit.
A ^Member. In this allotm-ent to the wife with no children of $15,
and the husband makes an allotment of $15. that means the wife will
receiAe $30 from the Government.
Judge Mack. Yes. I do not like to put it that way. The husband
is giving $15 and the Government is adding another $15,
A !Me31ber. That is with no children.
Judge Mack. Yes. If there is a wife with one child the Govern-
ment will add $25 to what the husband gives, and so on up the scale.
1 ought to say a word as to the divorced wife. A divorced wife
can get the same as a wife — that is, $15 a month — and the husband
must make the same allotment to her. Of course a man's children
by a divorced wife are his; there is no difference between ch.ddren.
The divorced wife without children can get at the best what a wife
can get, namely, $15 a month from the Government and $15 from
the man. But there are certain limitations to what she can get. In
the first place she can not get more, counting the allotment that he
must make and the allowance together, than the alimony which the
court decree provides. Now, suppose the court has said that the
husband shall paj^ to her $20 a month alimony. That $20 a month
would be made up first out of the $15 that the husband must himself
allot and then $5 that the Government would add. On the other
hand, if the divorce decree said $30 a month, then she would get $15
from the man and $15 from the Government.
]>ut the divorced wife is subordinated to the present wife and the
children, and if the entire amount that the husband must give is
needed by them, then the divorced wife can not get anything from
him ; she v.'ould still get a Government allowance, subject, however, to
their prior rights. She comes next to them, ahead of those others
that I am going to talk about, but she does not come equal to them
or ahead of them. Let me put that in an example. Take a man mak-
ing $yO a month. Suppose he has got a wife and three children and
a divorced wife, and the divorced vrife is entitled to $30 a month ali-
money. Well, now, the wife and three children would be entitled to
$37.50 from the Government. They are entitled to the same thing
from the husband. I said he was getting $90 a month. He woidd
be compelled to give the same as the Government gives, but not moic
than half his pay. So that she would be entitled from him to $37.50
a month, the same as the Government gives. But as half his pay is
$45, he can be compelled to give the brdance, $7.50, to his divorced
wife. That takes up half his pay, and that is the extent that he can
be compelled to give.
Now, then, the Government has given $37.50 to the wife and the
children; but the Government is ready to give when necessary up
to $00; this, however, is the maximum that the Government gives
to all put together. Now, as it has given only $37.50 to the wife and
children there is still $12.50 left that can be gotten from the Govern-
ment by the divorced wife. She would thus have $7.50 from the
man and $12,50 from the Government, making $20 a month; she
UFE INSUILVNXE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AXD SAILORS. 11
could not compel paymont of the entire $30 that the alimony' decree
iravv^ lier. That is simply to show how the tiling w(nks out. Of
course if u man is a private with $;iO pay, his wife and chiUlren
would get the entire $15 that he would have to allot; they woidd
get $37.50 from the Government, the wife and three childi'en; and
there wonld still he $1'2.50 Government allowance remaining: tiiat
$l"J.r>() would go to tl)e divorced wife on acct^unt of her alimony.
Col. LoiiD. May I ask you to emphasize the point made there that
not more than $.50 will be paid by the Government on account of any
enlisted nian (
Judge Mack. I will emphasize it agaiji when I come down to the
next head. Now, coming to other relatives Avho may get an allow-
ance
A MiL-^fBF.R. I would like to ask a question on a dixorce matter.
Take a case where a man is divorced and she does not get alimony.
Judge Mack. She doesn't get anything.
A IVIembkr. An.d she has a child.
Judge Mack. The child is the same as any other child.
A Mkmbeh. In that same case, suppose you have a divorced wife
and the wife has three children; does the Government supply any
money '{
Judge Mack. You mean, just take the wife with the three chil-
dren? The man's pay is $90. The Government gives $37.50 to the
wife and the three children; the man must give the same.
A Mkmher. Then she gets twice as riiuch.
Judge Mack. She would have an income of $75 a month.
A Member. The man gives the same as the Government?
Judf^e Mack. The num gives the same as the Government up to
the maxinnun. oxcepi he can not give less than $15. no matter what
the Government gives. Take that case of the one child, where the
Government gives only $5; he can not be compelled to give more
than half of his pay, but he can be compelled to give up to half if
necessary; l)ut he n'nist give $15. If the Government gives $37.50.
all he need to do is the same ; he need not give $45, half of his pay,
if the (Jovernment gives only $37.50.
A Member. If his pay is $80? ^ , ^ ^ *
Judo-e Mack. Still $37.50. If $70, only $35, and the Government
will give $37.50; and il" iie were a private he would give only $15.
and the Government would still give $37.50 to the wife and three
.children.
A Member. Suppose the soldier has a waiver?
Judge Mack. The children alone can not waive — there is no provi-
sion for waiver by these minors — but their mother can Avaive for her-
self and for them, and under proper circunibiances exemption can
be gr tin ted.
A Member. In the case just stated, if the man_^were a private, how
nnich would the Government give over the $37.50 to the divorced
wife— U]) to the $50?
Judge Mack. Yes: the Government is ready to givo, if nt'<evs.sarv,
within the terms btated by the law, up to $50. ]!^ow. the law says
that to a wife and three children $37.50 goes from the Government ; to
a divorced wife. JunI like any wife, $15. That brings it up to $5ii..50.
But the Governnient says that the maxinnnn is $50. Inasmuch as the
wife and children come first, the $ii.50 loss must be suffered by the
12 LItE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
divorced wife. Tlierefore the divorced wife gets $12.50 instead of
$15. Does tlvcit make the situation plain?
A ]>Ikmhek. Yes, sir.
Anoliier Memijkh. A man getting- $70 a month can allot more than
half? Ho can make an allotment of $50?
Judge Mack. He ran make any allotment he pleases, subject only
to tlie Army regulations,
A Me:\iim:r. My question is this, then, whether a man who gets $70
a month, and has a divorced wife and a w'ife, could defeat payments
to the divorced wife by allotting $50 to the present wife?
Judge Mack, No: that is answered by Avhat I said; that while a
man can allot any of his pay he can not allot it until after the com-
pulsory deduction is made. Now, the compulsory deduction would
be for v>ife and children and divorced wife, and therefore those must
come first and come out of his half pay alone. His other half pay is
perfectly free. Now, a man with $70 pay, having a wife and three
children and a divorced Avife, can not be compelled to give anything
to the divorced v^ife because the $37.50 which the Government gives
the Avife and three children v.ould be supplem.ented by all that he can
be compelled to give — half his pay; that is, $35: his wife and three
children wou.id be entitled to that entire amou.nt ; all the divorced wife
could get would be the balance between $50. the Government maxi-
mum, and the $37.50 allowance wliich the wife and three children get.
A Memhee. If a man w^ants to give more than the compulsory allot-
ment does the Government prevent him ?
Judge Mack. No; a man can give as much as lie pleases but tho
amount which the GoAernment adds is definitely fixed for each case.
A MEvinEK. In case of a fine, what happens? Suppose a soldier is
fined. [Laughter.]
Judge IMack. We are going to try to ari-ange for that by regidation.
I don't know whether the interdepartmental committee has taken it
up or not.
Col. Lord. AVe have discussed it.
Judge Mack. What Ave are going to try to do is to have the Army
and Navy Regulations ])rovide that it Avill come out of tlie other half
of me felloAv's pay. [Laughter.]
A Memder. In the Navy there are certain conditions under Avhich
a man's pay stops, Avhere illness has been contracted through some
fault of his oAvn, and he may go to a hospital for some period of
time, and during that period he loses all pay. Wliat Avould be the
result under those conditions?
Col. LoKi). May I ansAver that? That can be covered by regulation.
A INIember. Pardon me, in the NaA-y it is in the law.
Judge Mack. Have you taken that up for discussion?
A Memijer. It Avas passed in the Navy tAvo years ago.
Col. Lord. They haA'^e the same laAv in the Army,
Judge Mack. Have Ave the judge advocate's representative here?
He can ansAver that question.
A Member. INIay I ask that a memorandum be made of that?
Col. Lord, I Avill make a note of that.
A ME:MnER. Suppose the court allows a diA'orced Avife a certain
amount and the Government allotment does not come up to that
amount, does the man have to make u.p the rest from his own pay?
LIFE INSURANCE; ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 13
Judge Mack. AVliat do you mean? As a matter of law, or
morals, or what? A mairs pay from tlic United Stales Government
can not be taken by any court. Does that answer your question^ It
is only tlie United States (iovernment itself that can permit or direct
that. ' Now, a man's pay can not l»e attached. No creditor, Avhether
it is a divorced wife or anybody else, can attach it, and that is why
we made these provisions as to compulsory allotment,
A AlKMiii:i{. Judge, if a notation is made on tiie pay roll, $-20 or
less, the paymaster will do some attaching.
Another Member. In the Navy, if men arc sick as a result of tlieir
own misconduct, they lose their pay just as if absent Avithout leave.
In the case of illness there is absolutely a Jaw on the subject vvhich
takes all their pay, and they must serve additional time when they
come out of the hospital.
Judge Mack. If men get no pay and are entitled to no pay from
the (government, their families get no allotment, because the allot-
ment is dependent on the pay. If the man so conducts himself that
the (iovernment owes him no obligiition, he has absolved the Govern-
ment from this ol)ligation to the family as well. That is hard, but
that is life. Families suffer through the misconduct of the man. They
suiier when a man is sent to the penitentiary, but they have to support
themselves, and if the man misbehaves himself and in that way is
going to lose his pay the family will not receive the compulsory allot-
ment, lie makes them objects of charity, and charity will take care
of them, but they are no longer the charges of the Government under
this kind of a law, except as to the allowance.
Now, on the other hand, if he has done something for which he is
merely fined, the court-martial can not deprive his family of its com-
pulsory allotment; he himself will suiier longer through that fine
and his family not suffer: the fine comes out of his half of the pa}'.
As long as the law itself does not deprive him of that pay, the com-
pulsory allotment continues.
A Member. Is that the answer to that question," or will it be taken
np in discussion?
Judge "Mack. No ; if the law docs not take aAva}^ the pay, his family
is entitled to allotment of pay.
A Member. That is a temporary condition.
Judge Mack. During the temporary condition (lie temporary sus-
pension applies.
A Member. That is the law on that subject, is it?
Judge Mack. Yes.
A Membi;:;. I should like to take it up in conference and discuss
it again.
Anothek T^Iember. The family allowance is absolutely dependent
(.n the allotment?
Judge Ma( K. No: there is a provision that exemption may be
granted from the allotment, but that provision was not intended to
apply to cases of this kind. I gave you the sort of a case to which it
was intended to apply.
A Member. l"''nfortunatcly, you can not explain in detail just to
what that applies, but I think when Maj. Leonard comes bacjj: he
may explain. It hardly seems fair.
1 i LIFE IKSUBAXCE; ETC., FOE SOLDIEBS AND SAILORS.
Judge Mack. There is this provision in the law, that exemption
can be given by regiihitions.
A Member. It hardly appears fair for the dependents.
Judge Mack. A^'Jiat I have been saying does not ax^plj^ to the
allowance but only to the allotment; but if the man is discharged for
misconduct he necessarily injures his family. So, too, if he becomes
disabled through his willful misconduc^t his family as Aveli as himself
are cut out of the compensation provisions.
A Me^ibek. a man is absent without leave. Under certain con-
ditions he is tj-eated as a deserter ar,d his pay is then withheld
until the fjuestion is determined whether he is or is not a deserter.
Does the family allov.ance go on?
Judge Mack. Until it is decided, the family allowance goes on, if
he is in the service. Has he deserted?
A !Me.mup:r. No; he has come back, but the question is not decided.
He is taken from the pay roll. How can they take out the allotment?
Col. LoKD. Take it out when they get a settlement. I do not under-
stand that we are going to v>;)it until we hear from the field or the
ships. We are going to plan to pay in the Army as soon as the
money is clue. We will hear from the field afterwards.
A Membeb. I would like to know alx)ut the family allowanc-e. I
have gained tiie idea thiit the family allovrance was something given
by the Government depending not at all on something else. It is the
Government's busiuess to collect the allotment. If they fail to do it
that ouglit not to affect his allowance. If a man does not get any
pay the Government can't take anything from him. In the mean-
while the man is in the service until he is discliarged.
Judge Mack. Possibly I do not quite understand you when you
eay " family allowance." Do you include in the words " family
allowance" tliat part v>hich lie himself allots or do you mean only
the additional amount?
A ME:\rBEB. I have made in my own mind this distinction : That
having found out that a man has a family the Government contrib-
utes to the support of the famih' and then they ai'e going to make the
man contribule as a secondary proposition.
Judge Mack. The Government payment of allowance is condi-
tioned upon tlie making of the allotment. That is the express state-
ment of the law. Now, the making of that allotment may be waived ;
may be exem])ted by the (iovernuient. But unless the Government
exempts him from paying that allotment the allotment must be made
if he gets pay in order to get the allowance.
A ME">rBER. Yes; but if the allowance is conditional upon the allot-
ment, the allotment itself being compulsory, it follows that the allow-
ance must be compulsory.
Judge iVfACK. The allotment is compulsory if a man is earning it;
if a man has no pay, there can be no allotmont.
A Mk.mber. But h(> is in the ser\ ice just the same. He is serving
his country for hire.
Judge Mack. In the case you put he is serving his country, is he?
A Member. So long as he is in the service he theoretically is.
Judge Mack. You are assuming the case that a man is in the serv-
ice, but nevertheless his pay is suspended.
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOE SOLDIEKS AND SAILORS. 15
A Member. Yes; a iium ^\^ho is absout without leave and is tech-
nically a deserter and is entitled to no pay for the time \MUf£. I^ter
it may he decided that lie really is not a des(Hter, but meanwhile his
pay is withliekh Isow, he is subject to orders. It may have been
a mistake. Jle is there and still in the service and continues to bo
nn(il discharged.
tJud^'e Ma( K. ITnder this lu,vv, unless the pay was earned, that
shaie which he must cojnpulsorily allot to his family would not <ijo
to the family. But if he is in the service, and thougii without pay
temporarily while the allotment is suspen<led, tlie family allownnce
will go on. That should be sim])ly a temporary exemption, ;i!ul when
it is linally determined (hat the man was entitled to his pay that
shai-e of it that ought to be paid to the fanuly will l)e taken out as
back pay, and in the meantiuu' they will hnvc to shift the best they
can because of w hat tha man has done.
A IMEMiJi:ii. Following out that same question, there would be two
items in the payment to the beneficiary, one the amount collected
from the man, if anything, and the other the amount contributed by
the (lovermneut.
Judge Mack. Yes.
A Memher. In the first sentence of section 205 it says, "That
fanuly allowances for memlwrs of class A shall be paid only if and
while a compulsory allotment is made to a member or members of
such class."
Judge Mack. Yes.
A Member. It does not say, "made and paid"; it says that the
allotment is made. Wouldn't that establish the right to the allow-
ance '(
Ju<lge Mack. Yes; it would.
A M?:Mni:R. And c^en if the alloAvance were paid without having
collected the allotment from the man, if there is no allotment to col-
lect, the allowance wotdd have to be made just the same ?
Judge Mack. "While the language could be clearer, the wortl
"made," as here used, is equivalent to "nut waived or exempted."
A ^Ikmbek. If a limn has a family that is only i)artly dependent
on him, does the Government give him the same conditions as the man
who has a family entirely dependent?
Judge Mack. Yes. 1 said that a multimillionaire's wife can apply
for this $15 a month from the (loveriunent, and the (Jovernment will
pay it, and have no further questions if she wants to applj' for it. It
is not exjiectetl that they are going to do that.
A Membei;. These cases that ha\e been mentioned are with refer-
ence to men that have been acting in such a way that they are not en-
titled to any pay. Take the case where a man is paid for 30 days in a
ujonth that has -M days, t suppose the allotment would be payable
under those circumstances.
Col. Lord. Only 30 days in a ])ay moiith.
A Me:mber. Well, take 21> tlays; then, if he happened to be sick one
day his family would go without any allowance: i> that the intej-pre-
tati(tn ?
Judge Mack. Xo; they would not. I do not know whether by law
pay is snsjx^.KhHl in that case; if it is, then allotment but not allow-
ance is also suspended.
16 LIFE IKSUSANCE^ ETC.^ FOR SOLDIEKS AKD SAILORS.
xV Me:mber. One more question: Take the case of a man with a
Ti-ife and one child. She would receive $25?
Judge Mack. Yes.
A Membkr. And no matter what tlie man's pay is, if his allotment
is added to that $25 she gets pay from the husband and pay from the
GoN'eiTiment — U\o sources ?
Judge Mack. Yes.
A Member. And if the man is a private the husband vrouhl give
her $15, because that would be half of his pay?
Judge Mack. You see, pay is defined in the act as pa}'- for service
in the United States, according to his rank and according to the
period of his service; al-OTvances are cut out ; the $3 extra for foreign
service, etc., in determining this half pay. It is the pay that a man
gets v\hile serving in the x\rmy in the TJnite<l States. You will find
that definition in section 22, and I will com.e back to some of these
other definitions in a few minutes — ^' Pay for services in the United
States, excluding all allowances."
A Member. Under your definition of enlisted men I see where it
says " enrolled, drafted, and otherwise." I will ask you what is
mean^ by enrolled?
Judge Mack. That is a Navy term. The Navy put that in.
A ltlE:MBER. That would not include field clerks?
Judge Mack. It Avas thought to refer only to certain men in the
Navy. But I am advised by The Judge Advocate General of the
Arnjy that field clerks, and field clerks Quartermaster Corps, are
enrolled in the Army. They are therefore within ti^e act under the
definition of enlisted men.
"VVe come next to other relatives, for whom, as I said, an allotment is
not compulsorj''. But it is a condition precedent to getting the allow-
ance, unless an exemption from making the allotment is granted. Now,
the situation as to this is totally difl'ei'ent from, that as to wife and
child. The millionaire mother, father, brother, or sister could not get
anything from, the Government, because the Government allowance to
these other relatives is subject to several conditions, and, first, that
they must be actually dependent, in whole or in part, upon the man. If
they are not dependent, they can not get anything, no matter whether
he makes them an allotment or not. And, second, they can not get
from this allotment and the allowance combined more than the m_an
himself has been habitually contributing during the period of de-
pendency, but not exceeding the past year. In other words — ^but
let me give you an example. The amount of the Government allow-
ance is $10 to one parent, $20 to two parents, and $5 additional to
cacli additional parent — because a man can liavo half a dozen [)arents
as the word " parent " is defined by this act — ^$5 to each grandchild,
brother, or sister. Now, as I said, none of those payments are made
unless the individual is dependent in whole or in part upon the uian,
and, second, none of those pa3nnents are made unless the allotment
that the m.an himself must make, if he wants anything to be paid
by the Government, is less than what he has been habitually paying
to them.
How much must the man allot in order to get this allowance?
"Well, that depends. If he is giving a compulsory allotment to wife,
\
LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 17
chilclien, or widowed motlior, tlien, in order to <iet an allovrance for
these other i-ehitives he must allot one-seventh of his pay, but not less
than $5, A man niakiuo- jj;7() a month would have to allot $10. Any-
body getting less than that, in proportion. Now, then, suppose he is a
private. Jle has to allot $1;> a month if he is allotting to a wife, chil-
dren, or divorced wife. If he is not allotting to them, then he must
make the same allotment to these parents. In-others. and sisters that he
would make to his wife or children. In other words, he must give up
at least $15 a month under all circumstances before the Government
Avili do a thing for his wife and children, and if he is not doing this
then he must do the same thing for his parents before the Govern-
ment will step in. If he is giA ing money to tiie first class, then he
must give something to the second class, unless the Government
waives the additionaiamount, and this sum must be at least $5, and it
must be one-seventh of his pny.
Now. to come to an example: A private who hasn't a wife or child
or divorced wife has a father and a mother. They are both de-
pendent upon him. He has been their support. Assume he has been
giving them $15 a month to live on. Now, let us see what the situ-
ation is. He has no wife, child, or divorced wife. He is getting $30
a month. lie must give half his pay. He must give $15 at least,
and as that is half his pay it is both maximum and minimum. Now,
he must give them $15. Two parents can get $20 from the Gov-
ernment; so that they might in proper case get $20 from the Gov-
ernment and $15 from him. That would be $35. But I said that
he had been leaving them only $15 a month before he Avent into
the Army. Therefore they can't o;et anything from the Government.
His $15 that he gives them is all that he gave them before, and there-
fore it is all that they are entitled to under the law.
Now, suppose, on the other hand, that he has a wife and chil-
dren or a wife. He gives that v>ife $15. Now, he wants his father
and mother to get sometliing. He must give them another $5. But
he has been contributing $J5 to them before the war. The Govern-
ment will then add $10 so that they will still get the $15. If he had
been contributing $-25 or more to them before the war the Govern-
ment would have been ready to add $20 to his $5, making a total of
$25. Is the example clear ^
A Member. I suppose if it takes all that a n)an makes for his allot-
ment to his parents the Government will go 50-50.
Judge Mack. Put your example.
A Memker. For instance if you have a widowed mother and you
allot her $30, will the Government go 50-50?
Judge Mack. No: I have explained to you, tried to explain, these
limitations. If there is one parent the Government will allow a
maximum of $10: for two parents the Government Avill allow a max-
imum of $20. Now, that is all the Government will allow under any
circumstances, no mutter what the man gives. The Government will
not allow more.
Now, to emphasize again one more point. Col. Lord asked me to
emphasize the point that the Government will add under no circum-
stances more tlian $50. It does not make any difference what the man
19808°— 17 2
IS IJFE IXSUEAXCE, KTC, FOW SOLDIERS AXD SAILORS.
allots. Tiie ^A ife Jind the children come first, the divorced wife next,
and then come these i)ai'ent.s, brolhers, and sisters in sharing in that
possible $50 that the (jfO\ernuient gives.
A Member. What form of proof is required of the amount that
has been paid by the man to his family?
Judge Maciv. That is a matter that will be prescribed by regula-
tions, but until the bureau can investigate further it is apt to take tho
statement of the man arid his mother as to what has been actually
paid, because a man is gomg to the penitentiary if he knowingly
makes a wrong statement.
Col. Ix»RD. The Army had the same proposition to meet in connec-
tion with the $0,000,000 that was distributed in connection with the
Mexicjin mobilization, and that was a troublesome problem that we
had to solve, to establish definitely and with certainty how much
luid l)een customarily contributed by the soldier tov.ard the sup-
port of the designated beneficiary. But vse solved it.
Judge JvL^CK. It is a difiicult problem, and v/e have endeavored
in this act to get avray as far as we could from the necessity of in-
vestigating (juestions of dependency. That Vvas one of the reasons
why we said, Give the wife and children, if they ask for it, without
going into the question of whether they really need it or not, be-
cause as was said in answer to argnments of Congressmen and Sena-
tors, it will cost the Go\ernment more to invcotigate whether thesi'
wives and children are really dependent than the amount that would
be saved from those Axho did not need it and nevertheless asked for it.
A Me^iber. In the case of petty officers, many of them leave an
allotment of $75 for their families. Maybe they earn $90. Now, we
say that they are compelled to leave one-half of their pay. We Avill
say that it will ])e $50 in tlie case of $100 pay. and that he had a
wife with no cJiiidreii. Would the Government still give $15 in
addition to the $50? The $50 would liot be compulsory.
Judge Mack. It would not be $50 compulsorily. Let me try to
put it again. A man mu>t allot only the same amount that the
(jrovernment itself is paying. But even that is subject to two limita-
tion:-: that lie must allot $15 a month and that lie need not allot
more than half his pay. Suppose that man has a wife and no chil-
dren. How much is the Government going to give her? $15 a
jiionth. So, then, the man must allot the same Amount that the
(t(j\ eminent gives, that is $15, isn't it? That is all that the man
must allot, because it is also the minimum tliat he can allot. But
the maximum half pay is only if the Government were to give up
to that.
A Me3Iber. But what T meant, the point is this, that he has been
leaving $70, but irrespective of the amount that he allots, the fact
that he has a wife, the Government allots, then, $15, irrespective of
Y.hat he has been leaving for her.
Judge Mack. Irrespective of what he gives, in excess of $15, the
Government will give only $15. Now, he may give her another $5
or he may give her his entire pay if lie wants to. but tlie fact that
he gives more than $15 does not influence tlie Goxerniuent in giving
any more. The Governuient amount is fixed.
A Member. A mother has more than one son, say three, in the
service. Does she get allowance from all three sons? [Laughter.]
LIFK IKSURAIfCE, ETC., FOR SOl.DTF.RS AND SMIOKS. 19
Judge ^VLvciv. Yes, she may; that is so for this reason. You will
find an express provision to the contrary when it comes to Uie com-
pensation section; but as io the famii}" allowance section, it is so fur
this reason: First, she must be dependent upon the son, and second.
the total amount that she is going lo get in respect to any of these
sons is not moi-e than the amount tliat slie has been Iiabitually get-
ting. It would have been uniat;i. to coulinc it to one son because tnal
one son n)ioht have given all his allotment to support his wife and
children, therefore there is no limitation to a mother getting from
all of her sons in the Army or Navy, but she can not get more than,
she has been accustomed to get from them. And she must be <!0-
pendent upon each one as to \\ hom she gets an allowance.
A Membkp. I have been trying to follow you very closely. I
v/ould like to ask from a standpoint of financial or domestic interest,
is a man allowed to make an alloimonc to his sister or brother re-
gardless of their present financial state — that is, if their financial
situation is suiFicient to take care of their vital needs, can you make
an ajiotment just the same?
.Itulo-e Mack. If you mean exactly what vou say, the ansv»er is
simple; yes. But if you mean, can he make an allotment and there-
by secure a Government allowance, the answer is no.
A Member, Tluit is v.hat J meant.
Judge Mack. TJie answer is no, for this reason: That they are not
dependent upon him: that is the very hypothesis of your question,
that they were not dependent upon him,
A IMembek. Yes, sir.
Judge Mack. If they are not dependent upon him they would not
get it.
I have tried to say that fiitlier or mother or grandchildren or
broiher or sister can not get a Government allowance unless they
are actually dependent upon the man in whole or in part, and they
can't get it even then to a greater extent than he has been habitually
contributing to them, and his allotment is first taken into considera-
tion, and only if he has been contributing more than he has to allot
to tiiem can he come to tlie (Jovernment for the balance, and then sui)-
ject to the limitation ihat all tlie Government gives to each dependent
parent i» $10, and to each dependent brother, sister, or grandchild, $.").
A Memhek. I'hat was my understanding. I wanted to be sure.
Judge Mack. I am not criticizing you for asking questions. I (^o
not want you to hesitate to ask questions because you might thinlc
that they are foolish (juestious. It is the ai)parently foolish question
that brings out the points.
A Member. In the instance where the parent had three sons in the
service and before they wei-t into the service the three sons ha<l
coiitril)Uted to the support, but had ditr'erent salaries and had con-
tributed in varying amounts, the parents therefore are dependent
on all three sons, but in the event of a son being killed who was in
the habit of contril)uting the largest amount, would the Government
only give them the stun eoiiti-ibuted b\' one of the reuiaining sons!'
JiKige Mack. Under the law each son is considered separately in
the family ^jllowance, because tliat allowance will depend upon his
contributioji ami not on the contribution of his broiher.
A Memrek. Even in the event of the death of his brother?
20 LIFE INSrRAXCE^ ETC., FOE SOLDIERS AND SAILOES.
Judge Mack. It is possible that the words of the law could be
stretched to covei- that case. I say it is possible, but not certain, be-
cause "\\e have expressly pro^'icled for that sort of case in the com-
pensation article. You will find, when I come to that, in article
801 (g), at the top of page 9, that such compensation shall be payable
wheiher her ^^idowhood arises before or after the death of such
pei'son and wlienever her condition is such that if the person were
living the widowed mother would have been dependent upon liim
for support. Now, that is a case similar to the one jou are putting.
Sup]5ose she was not dependent upon him at any time during the
year before he went into the service, but she would have been de-
pendent upon him at the present moment because the family status
has changed ; suppose her husband has died ; if this boy had not been
in the war, she Avould have been dependent upon him.
That may be one of the omissions in the act, or it may be that the
l)ureau can cover it in a reasonable way by a broad construction of
the act.
A Member. It would be Avell to discharge that mnn and let him go
home.
Judge Mack. That would be one solution. [Laughter.] Because
a man can be discharged if after he has entered his people become
dependent upon him.
A Me3iber. His regimental commander is the judge of that under
the War Department's letter of April 4, 1917.
Judge Mack. Now, j^^ou have, none of you, asked about something
provided for in section 208, ])ut I will call jonr attention to it. How
are vou goinir to divide this between wife and children and between
parents, grandparents, and the others? Well, the bureau will pro-
vide regulations. The bureau can apportion it as it pleases. Those
regulations are not yet provided. Experience will have to demon-
strate how best it can be done.
A Member. Judge Mack, if a man's wife is working and makes
enough money to take care of herself, will she get that $15 paid as
an allotment?
Judge Mack. Yes, I will say again ; because it is evident I have not
made myself perfectly clear to everybody; just as that millionaire's
wife can get it if she wants it, so can the working wom.an. And she
has a perfect right to get it. Is that clear?
A Met^iber. Yes, sir.
Another Member. Judge, suppose a man gets married after this
goes through ?
Judge Mack. It does not make any difference when he gets mar-
ried.
A Member. I wanted to get to this point: Is $15 that the Govern-
ment allows at the start allowed on the day you get married?
Judge Mack. Yes. [Prolonged lau.ghter.] I may say that there
was one sailor boy who was as enthusiastic and punctual in his at-
tendance at the meetings of the committee while this was going
through as I was, and the moment I told him it was through and
they had not compelled the wife to be actu.ally dependent upon him —
the Senate already had put in a provision, and it was only at the
last m.bment that they struck it out, that the wife or child must be
just like the rest of the relatives, actually dependent — the moment I
told him that they had stricken that out and that it Avoidd not make
UFE INCURAXCE^ KTC, FOR SOLDI i:RS AND SAILORS. 21
any difference whether that girl wiis working or not, he sent a tele-
gram out to Los Ajigeles to come on. [Laughter.]
Director De Lanoy. The director Avas going to aslv you a.s to
whether he wanted to state wlien this wedding is to be hehl. ^\'e
might make an official m<.'morandum of it.
A Member. If a man gives anything over the $15 to his wife, a
man getting $100, we will say, and allots at least $15. application
has first to be made before the $15 will be given by the Oovernment^
Judge Mack. Yes. In other words, the grant of this money by the
Government is not automatic. Application must be made.
Director De Laxov. That is an important feature.
Judge Mack. The point about it v,as this: While \ve do not for an
instant want to deter anybody who is reasonably entitled to this
money from applying for it, at the same time even tliis millionaire's
wife miglit take it for pin money if she did not have to apply for it,
but she Avould not take it if she did have to make a direct application.
Now, Avhat I want to imi)ress on you, however, in that connection is
this: There are many men in the ranks of the privates and noncom-
missioned ollicers who have made tremendous sacrifices in going into
this work, who have given up salaries of $100, $-200, $300 or more and
are taking the Government's $30 to $100 per month and whose wife
and children hijve Aery little, if anytliing. Noav, there is no reason
in the Avorld Avhy th.ose men or the Avife and the children should not
apply for this. The Government is giving it. and they are going to
have a hard enough time as it is in getting down to a much lower
scale of living than they are accustomed to, and tlie fact that they
may have just enough to keep them from poverty is no reason for
refraining from asking for the alloAvance. because it is intended by
tlie Government that they should have it. The people Avho ought not
to have it are those avIio are abundantly able to take care of them-
selves Avithout it.
A Me:»i!5ek. Judge ^lack, for information, Ave Avill say, a man has
a wife and child. Would it be a proper procedure to immediately
check his pay account?
Judge Mack. Oh, yes.
A Member. Well, theh, Avonld that not automatically start an
alloAvance to his Avife?
Judge IVIac'K. No: the alloAvance unist be applied for anyway.
A ^lEMr.ER. It has to be ai)plied for anyway^
Judge Mack. I>ut the alloAvance ajiplication blanks are being
printed noAv Avitli the information that is necessary to go Avith them,
and the plan is to have them in you)- b.ands to-morroAv morning, so
you may see just what they say; in fact, I hope that before we get
done this afternoon we may have this material. I would like very
much if we could get hold of them, and I Avould like very much to
have the insurance blanks before I get done here.
A Member. Judge Mack
Judge Mai K. Just a moment. Of course. Ave purpose having these
blanks distributed throughout the Army and the Navy, and it is the
duty of every enlisted man, his al)solute duty, to fill out one of these
blanks and to do it right aAvay.
A Member. Judge Mack, might I ask a little elucidation on the
question of the officer here? It Avould 1k^ a matter that Avould be cov-
ered bv regulations, Avould it not. Avhether or not A'ou make a checkauc
22 LIFE INSURANCE; ETC., FOE SOLDIERS AXD SAILORS.
agaiut^t :in enlisted man's pa}' simply because the fact has been devel-
oped tliat he has a wife and children?
Judge Mack. Oh, yes; I ahnost forgot one thing before leaving this
subject; the matter of conipulsory allotment and Government allow-
ance begins November 1. That means that the first deductions will be
on the November pay roll, so that we have quite a bit of time to
gather all of this information.
A Member. Judge Mack, could I ask a question about methods?
Nov.-. from the standpoint of a company commander, suppose he
checks his men up and assorts the bachelors and benedicts, and has his
two lists.
Judge Mack. Let me suggest to 3'cu that you put that question
to-morrow or Thursda}", because I am not novv' prepared to discufjs it,
and that is one of the most important things tliat 7/0U gentlemen a.re
here for — to consider together and to consider with the administra-
tive officials the best methods of actually distributing all of this
information.
A Me^.iber. My point was that if you take your list of ma:iied
men. and some of them do not make this application, is it then the
company commander's duty to send the application to the wife to see
whether she wants to make the application or not?
Judge ^Iack. Well, I do not know, but it is the duty of the man to
fill m the information. Now, that is a matter to be determined and
is a very interesting question, and suggests the possibility of putting
it up to the wife if she Avants it and the man does not want it, because
the beneficiary may apply.
That is the point I make, because the beneficiary may apply.
A Member. Judge Mack, not desiring to interrupt you too much,
I should like to ask v,"ith regard to this matter that frequently in the
Army they have had cases come through the office of complaints from
the Avife that she is not being provided for by allotment from the hus-
band. I know of Aery few cases in which the Army commanders have
not been able by moral or other suasion to see that the proper allot-
ment was immediately made.
Judge Mack. The danger is in the case of deserted Avives. Now,
one of the very important things for you to put up to the men in ex-
plaining their absolute duty undei' the hiAV to fill out these statements
is that the}' must tell the truth about that and not play off :is
bachelors.
A Member. Hoav about desertt'd hu.sbands; I know of cases like
that?
Judge Mack. Deserted husbands?
A Member. She gets this money ?
Judge Mack. Oh, no; a deserted husband wordd haA'e to ask for
exemption from allotment and shoAV that he had been deserted by
his wife. After she has had an opportunity to be heard on the sub-
ject, undoubtedly exemption would be granted to him, and she would
get neither allotment nor alloAvance. Of course, there are such cases.
That is Avhy that exemption provision Avas put in.
A Member. Judge j\Iack, now in case the wife has left the husband,
say, seAcral months ago, and the husband does not knoAv the Avhere-
abou.ts of the wife — all at once tlie Avife should find out he is at a
certain cantonment and she is going after all she can get and tries to
get this allowance
Judsfe Mack. Yes?
UFE INSURANCE^ ETC., FOR SOLDIERS^ AND SAILORS. 23
A MEAruFR (continuing). Has the Government then tlie riglit to
take $1;") of the private's j)ay to go to iho v,ife^
Judge Mack. Yes; it also has the right not to do it. That was
the question I just answered. You are stating the case that was
just stated. A wife h.as deserted her hnshand, now shall she get this
money or not. Well, that is going to depend on circumstances.
That is going to be a pretty hard job for JSIr. DoLanoy and his as.so-
ciates to decide, but it is up to them to decide. If it is a case of a
woman who has temi)orariIy gone away and who woidd have come
back, she imiy be entitled to it; whereas in the case of a woman who
has been av,ay for a lono- time and is coming back just to get the
money, hB will undoubtedly decide she is not gouig to get it; but there
Avill be some very di(U(;ult cases there to decide.
A ]\fE:MrjER. In case she does not show up and there is no other
dependent on the man, will there still be a deduction of half the
salai'Y ?
Judge jNIack. Yoii mean, v.'ill thcie be a deduction in case she
shows up in the future?
A ME^rBEK. Yes, sir; or in case she should not show up and there
are no other dependents?
Judge Mack. Suppose there is no wife? Is tliat your case?
A Member. Yes.
Judge Mack. All right, I will come to that. That is the last thing
in reference to this allowance. The Secretary of War and the Secre-
tary of the Navy have the power under th.is act to adopt rcgidations
that so nuich of one-half of a man's pay as is not allotted either
voluntarily or compulsorily shall be deposited with the Dnited
States and bear 4 per cent interest. Now, the Secretar}^ of War and
the Secretary of the Nasy have not yet adopted such a regulation.
They have tlie power to do so at any time tliey believe it wise. Ii
they do that the result is this, that if a man has no dependents to
whom he is allotting and nobody else to whom he is allotting the
money, instead of getting that $30 per montii paid to him, say. over
in France, the Secretary of ^^'ar or Navy may sa^-, ''We will keep
$15 of it on deposit here for you at 4 per cent interest, com-
pounded semiannually, and you will only get $15." The reason for
that is that it is believed by a good many— and if the Secretary of
War so believes it he will make a regulation — that there is grave
danger to the morale of the Army to allow the men to have $80
spending money over in France. And the great dangers are these:
First, and perha]:)s least, because the Government is not trying to bo
guardian to men as if they were children, the danger to the man him-
self. Second, the danger that arises when men in the same rank are
having a different amoimt of spending money is to l)e considered.
These men who have wives at home must cut down one-half, and the
bachelor will have twice as much. I>ut even that is not as serious as
the next. You are going to bo brothers in arms of the English and
the French, and they get very little pay, and your spending money of
one-half pay is going to Ije a great deal more than their entire pay,
and that may be demoralizing. But even that is not the worst. France
is poverty stricken. The American boys are in grave danger of looking
at money from an American standi>oint vhi-n tlu'V arc over in Franci>
instead of from a French standpoint. For a French pea^ai r in ordi-
24 LIFE INSURANCE^ ETC.^ FOB SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
nurv times a franc is as big as a dollar ; in these times it is a great deal
more than a dollar. But for the American boy going over there
■with comparatively plenty of mone^'^ in his pocket a dollar does not
seem large, and to-day it is not merely 5 francs, it is nearly 6 francs.
When lie throws away that dollar he is throwing away nearly 6
francs, and that in ordinary times to the French peasant is a great
deal, and to-day to most people in France it is a great deal of money.
The result is the demoralizing of the very people we are trying to
help, because of our extravagance and because through that extrava-
gance we are raising the price of all supplies in France.
Now. those are the reasons that are urged by the commander in
chief of the American Army in France, Gen. Pershing, to cut down
the spending money of the boys over there, and to cut it down even
more than this law provides for, because, in his judgment, ex])ressed
and broiigbt over here with his sanction., $10 a month is more spend-
ing money than a man ought to have in the trenches under these
circumstances — not that Americans can not be trusted to spend a
heaj) more than $10, but that under all the circum.stances $10 spend-
ing money for the boys in the trenches is now too much.
A Member. Judge, just a moment, before you leave the subject.
The decision of the Director of the Bu.reau of War-Risk Insurance,
is the director protected ? Is his decision final ?
Judge Mack. His decision is final.
A Member. There is no appeal ?
Judge Mack. No appeal therefrom. His decision ends it ; that is,
his decision is final on all questions under this act with one single
exception — claims under the insurance policies; if the claimants have
a difference with him, they can fight it out in court; but outside of
that his decision is final ; you can not go to court about it.
A Member. If a man has an allotment already going, is it auto-
matically stopped the 1st of November when you make out this com-
pulsory allotment?
Judge Mack. I can not answer that. I do not know. The com-
pulsory allotment will take precedence. I do not know wliat the
War and the Navy Departments are going to provide as to the present
allotments. That is a matter that ought to be taken care of, I should
say. I do not know what they have in mind on that. I have not
discus.sed that with them.
A Member. I do not think the intention is to interfere with the
voluntary-allotment system of 1809.
A Member. The point is. if a man has made an allotment which
runs until it stops, will you take out the compulsory allotment also,
or call it to his attention?
Judge Mack. The compulsory allotment must be attended to.
A Member. Of course, the compulsory allotment nmst be attended
to. He has nothing to sav about that ; but suppose a man at present
is allotting the $15 to a wife, will you take the $15 plus the $15?
Judge Mack. Unless he stops it, which he has a right to do.
A Member. Of course he has a right to do it, but might it not be
better to construe the voluntary allotment as including the com-
pulsory allotment? Would that perhaps not be a little wiser in the
interest of the man? That is a matter that should be carefully con-
sidered. A man to-day allotting $15 to his wife, if a law steps in and
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOIJjlERS AND SAILORS. 25
takes $15 for his wil'e whetber he will or not, I should think it might
be well to consider what he has been voluntarily giving to her, if this
is to be a part of this compnlsnry allotment.
Judge Mack. That ooiikl be done.
A AIp:mbki;. That would be the natural construction of his volun-
tary allotment.
A Me^ibek. I should like to ask if anything in regard to this has
been sent into the field, to the commanders who are there, in reference
to the Liberty Loan bonds. If nothing has been sent out as to Novem-
ber 1, 1 am afraid we will find ourselves in a bad jam.
Jiulge Mack. All 1 can say is, I know the Secretary of the Treas-
ury addressed the cantonments out in the State of Washington in
connection with the Liberty Loan and he told them about the pro-
visions of this act at the time he was talking to tlieni about the
Liberty Loan.
A MK:vrm:ij. Is that just i-ecenlly?
Judge Mack. That is ^ ithin the last week. October 9, but how far
that has been done I do not know: I can not answer tliat question.
A Membkr. The question has come in from most of the canton-
ments as to the eft'ect of the compulsory allotment and the insurance,
and I think with few exceptions the conmianding generals of the
cantonments and most of the large posts have given just the sub-
stance of the provisions of this law as to how it would att'ect the en-
listed men, particularly with a view to opening the way for them to
continue making their allotments for the purchase of Liberty Bonds.
Officer. The lieutenant's suggestion with reference to the I^iberty
Loan, I think, is a good one for this reason. Many of the company
conmianders in speaking about the Liberty Bonds have told their
men that this allotment in the bill as contemplated would not be com-
pulsory, that these allotments Avould be optional on the part of the
men.
Judge ISIack. To the wife and child?
Officer. Yes, sir.
Judge Mack. That is unfortunate.
Officer. Those statements have lieen made in our camp and prob-
ably have lieen made in other camps.
judge Mack. Very unfortunate, because for the last three months
anybody who had asked anything about it would have been told the
contrary. Neither the original nor any later draft of the bill as it
■went through contemplated anything but a compulsory allotment for
wife and child. It is very unfoitunate that any commander should
have made statements of that kind.
A Me.aiber. Judge Mack, in that telegram of The Adjutant General
it was specifically stated that these compulsory allotments were re-
quired.
Judge Mack. But Lieut, i^eebles means long l)ei"ore that, don't
you ?
Officer. No; just recently, Judge, that this has been done, 1 might
add, too, that the oilicers ai'e assuming that this present draft does
not inchide anv men who have dependents.
Judge Mack. Well, that is a pretty broad assumption.
A Me:^iber. Is that not the law. that no num was to be drafted
that has a wife dependent upon him ?
26 LIFE INSUKANCE, ETC.^ FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
Judge Mack. Well, a niaii may })e exempted if he has people
dependent on hini, but that word " dependent ■' has been construed
diti'erently in difi'erent States, and there are rnan^^ men who have
families dependent on them ^\lio have insisted [)atriotically on going
to war an_Yway, and they have done it because a number of them knew
that the (Tovernment was going to make some such provision as this.
Moreover, in the second draft the situation will be different because
of this provision.
Befoi'e I touch on compensation let us go back to these definitions
on page 4. In the first place, so far as the allotment and allowance
is concerned, what usually is called a common-law marriage, if it
has existed for two veal's, will be snfficient. In other words, if a man
and woman have openly and publicly lived together as man and
wife — I mean recognized each other and have been recognized as
husband and wife — for two years and neither of them is debarred by
reason of having another husband or wife, so that if they had gone
through a ceremony there would have been no bar to their marriage,
they ai-e deemed for the purjjoses of this part of the act to be hus})and
and wife. As to the other articles of the act, the law is more strict.
It requires pretty strict proof of marriage in order to entitle the
woman to the rights of a married woman under the compensation
and under the insurance clauses — perhaps much too strict — but, then,
C'ongi^ess put that in : it Avas not in our draft.
Now. then, " child," as used throughout the act, includes not only
legitimate children, but it includes step children when they are mem-
bers of the ho'.isehold. It inclTides adopted children if tliev have been
adopted at least six months before the act went into effect, or six
months before enlistment, if enlistment is after that. It includes
illegitim.ate children, provided the man has acknov* ledged or acknowl-
edges them as his own in writing, or provided a court has decreed
that he must contribute to their support. And a grandchild would
include a child as defined of a child as defined in the act. The child
or the grandchild in order to get the family allovrancc oi* the com-
pensation must be innnari'ied and under the age of 18, or if 18 or over
must be insane, idiotic, or otherwise ]iermanent]y helpless. The term
" parent " includes, as T told you before, not only father and mother,
but step-parents, grandparents, and the parents, step-parents, or
gT'andparents of the wife as well as of the husband. Brothers and
sisters include the half blood as well as the whole blood, step-brother
and sister, and those through adoption.
Now. the military and naval forces that we talked about include
nil of the forces of every kind that are in the actual service. The act
makes no distinction whutsoever })ctween men and women in the same
position. If Ave should get a fighting corps of women like the Rus-
sian brigade thev Avould be treated exactly like men under this first
section: their children and their brothers and sisters and parents
Avould get the alloAvance, luit thoii- husbands Avordd not get anything
[laughter], as it is limited to a wife. Moreover, the aliotm.ent by a
Avoman is not compulsory even as to a child. It is voluntary.
I might S5'.y that there are Avomen in the service. We have some
fem.ale veomen in the Navy, and they would come within this article
on famih^ allowances.
LIFE LMSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SML0R3. 27
The Army and Xavy Nurse Corps (foiiiuk'), ^vhi('h imlude in their
resoFAe the Ked Cross nurses, who have come into the active service of
the Ai'iny or the Navy, and tho'tfori' are no longci- in the pay of the
Ked Cross but in the pay of the Government, are given the compenf;a-
tion and the privilege of insurance tlie sr.me as enlisted men or conunis-
sioned oflicery. They are not enlisted; (hey are not commissioned;
they are oidy emph^yed. but nevertlieless, inasmuch as they incur
the same risk it was deemed right th^it they should be included in
this military and n;i,val bill; and they are specifically mentioned in
articles 3 and 4.
COMPENSATION.
Now, the question of com[x>p.sa(ion : Compensation is very mucli
like the present pensions, except in the fundamental underlyin!^
thought. The pension, evspecially the serWce pension, has been re-
garded by many as a gratuity. This bill is 1)ased on the analogy of
the workman's compensation act. If a civil employee is injured or
dies in and tlirougli his service, the United States or any other em-
ployer pays eompensation to him or to his family for clisabiiity or
deatli: similarly the military employee ought to get it.
The bill strikes a new note, hov»'ever. in one respect. The workman
himself is the employee. He is the nnit with whom the employer
deals. aTid therefore in all the vvorkmen's compensation acts, if a man
is disabled, the amount of compensation that is paid to him depends
npon his salary ii> the business and his family does not enter into the
consideration. We I'elt in drafting this act, however, that the situa-
tion was different, particularly in view of conscription. Under the
conscription law the family is conscripted when the breadwinner is
taken away. The family in giving up its head is serving the country,
and the family, therefore, ought to be looked at in determining the
amount that the Governmeut pays for disability or death: and so the
amount that is paid, if a num becon>es disabled in the service or. as
the law puts it. in the line of duty, varies according to the size of his
family: and. as a matter of justice, it was felt, and Congress indorsed
the idea, that it should vary according to the size of his family fr«:ni
month to month. If the family status changes from mouth to mouih,
from yeai- to year, the amount of compensation payable monthly
should change with it. If a man is a bachelor, he will get so much
for total disability; 15 A'cars from now. if he should have married
and has children, the ann)unt of his compensation will depend at
that time u{)on his status then: and so. if he becomes a widower and
has no children and no wife to look after, the compensation will be
redticed to the same amount as that of a bachelor. Now. the amount
of the compensation you will find fixed in the bill; the amount for
total disability ranges from $30 for bachelors to a maximum of '>~'k
maximum except for this, that if a man, whether bachelor or married.
has a widowed mother dependent on him, $10 is added because of that
fact : further, the bureau may allow him up to $-20 a month if his con-
dition is such that he needs the constant aid of a nurse or attendant.
Congress put in one further provision, borrowed from the pension
laws. It destroys the harmony and symmetry of the bill : but those
of you wdio are injured will care very little for the harmony and
symmetry of the bill as against the increased compensation that it is
going to give you. It provides specifically that, regardless of family
status, a bachelor and a man with seven childien shall be treated alike;
28 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
for the loss of both hands, both feet, both eyes, total blindness, or
for a permanently helpless, bedridden condition, $100 monthly shall
be given.
In addition to this, the man is going to get governmental medical
and surgical treatment, and he is going to be supplied, subject to
regulations to be made by the bureau so as to prevent abuse_ of
it,"^with such appliances as he may need, not merely in the beginning
but as long as his disability continues, artificial limbs and eyes and
things of that kind.
If ho is not totally, but only partially disabled, the amount
that he is going to get Avili be a "percentage of the amount that ho
would have gotten if he had been totally disabled, a percentage of
this $30 to $75 a month dependent upon his family status. That
percentage is going to be fixed by regulations of the bureau, and is
going to be based upon what may be found to be the decrease — the
average decrease in earning power that similar injuries produce in
civil life. Now, of course, that's a mighty hard job. You can not be
exact about it, and experience will determine whether they have
struck the right percentages or the wrong percentages; and they have
the right to change those percentages. Germany and France and
England have given us examples, and the experience of the whole
v."orld will be studied in fixing the schedule. The pension law has
certain fixed schedules.
It was deemed best for the partial disabilities not to have some-
thing rigid, amendable only by Congress, but to have a more flexible
s}'stem. The compensation is paid during the period of disability,
Vv'hether that disability be total or partial, whether it last a month or
last during the lifetime of the man ; because a man may be completely
disabled but only for a month and, on the other hand, he may be only
partially disabled, but for life. Suppose he gets typhoid fever in the
.service ; he may be completely disabled for two months. During those
two months he will get his pay. If he then recovers and is entirely
well again, after that he won't get anything.
A Memijeh, That is, after the mixn is separated from the service?
REEDUCATION.
Judge Mack. I will come to that later. To answer you specifically,
yes: but I will go a little more fully into that later. Now, I say it
is right and just that this should be done, but it is not the most
important thing to be done. The Go\ernment is taking you men
and your felloAvs whole, physically strong; by reason of your patriotic
service you receive these disabilities. The primary duty of the Gov-
ernment is to make you well again, if it possibley can, and to stimu-
late you to make yourselves well again — well physically, well eco-
nomically, and well mentally, of course. Germany has set the ex-
ample in rehabilitating those injured in industry, and the rest of
the vrorld is following. The most important thing the Government
can do is to rehabilitate the injured men; to reeducate those who be-
cause of their injuries are unable, after they get well, to follow their
former occupations. The man who needed liis hands for his job
and has lost them must be trained to do something else without his
hands. It is a tremendous job that this Nation and ail the nations
are facing. This particular bill does not provide how it shall be
done. It merely assumes that it is going to be done and that further
UFE INSUEANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 29
leiiiskitlon is f^oino- to be enacted when it shall have been deteimined
fully al'ter the most careful -tiidy how it can best be done. In tho
meantime the Sui-geon (ieneral's Department has full power and
authority and is making full preparations for the beginning of this
sort of work, because as soon as the man is in the s;?rvice-he is subject
to the serN'ice regulations, and tlie service has full power to go ahead
with this sort of thing. The Sui'geon GeneraT's Ollice begins with
the base hospital; it provides possibilities of emplovment I'ight there.
But on this subject this bill makes two fihx^al provisions. We
start out Avith this thought, that there is grave danger when men go
througii the frightful experiences that some will have to go through
in tho trenches and then the hospital experiences that they will have
to go thi-ough, that they may lose all their stamina. This is particu-
larly lialtle to hap)")en wlien they know that the Government is going to
gi\e them something for the rest of their lives; there is grave danger
that they will be content to go on with that minimum. But life, of
course, is not static. If men do not go up they Avill go down, and
the last men the Government and the people want to see go down are
these men. Therefore tho only thing to do is to see that they go up.
They must be stimulated, and this bill provides. two stimulants — one
negative and one positive. The negative is this, that a man must
take the treatment, must take the course of education that the (gov-
ernment Avill provide or procure to be provided, under penalty of
suspension of his compensation during any period of unreasonable
refusal. But that is negative; there is something better, there is
something positive. It is not only in the interest of the man him-
self that he should be kej^t from going down, that he shouhl be dis-
contented with the dead level of the Government minimum compen-
sation ; it is equally in the interest of the State. It is in the common
interest that every latent power of the man should I'e developed,
that he shou]<l strive for the highest economic level that it is possible
for him to attain; and in order to stimulate him still more to strive
for that, it is expressly provided in this ])ill that tlie compensation
which the Government gives him, let us say for the loss of his legs,
is not going to be taken away from him because he has attained an
even higher economic position than he had before the war. The
compensation will be continued as long as the physical disability
continues, regardless of the economic I'ecupei-ation. After a man's
dischai'ge he ca.n be reenlisted comj^ulsorily under some form of
reenlistment. if he needs reeducation: but. of course, until he is
discharged he does not come within tlie provisions of the compensa-
tion article, because while a man is in the service and getting his pay
he (hx^s not get the disability provision. Moreover, as you know,
ollicers in the Kegular Ariny are not apt to take these disability pro-
visions, because they may be retired and get three-fourths of their
regular yiay on retirement. That does not ai^ply, however to the
enlisted men and it does not apply to the otiieers in the National
Army.
Now, there is, in my judgment, a very .-erions defect in tiie com-
pensation ]irovisions of this U\\x — but Congress thought otherwise —
a defect that may prevent the law from accomplishing one of its
purposes. We hoped in making fairly generous and all-inclusive
so LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
provisions before the men go out, to prevent the special pension legis-
liiti<m, which hiis been one of the chief evils of the past. We at-
teni])ied to do this, following the jinalogy of the workiaen's compen-
sation acts and the precedent, too, of all pension legislation, by bas-
ing the disability^ compensation on the pay that the man had been
receiving; basing it. of course, also, as I said before, on the family
statti.s. The bill as presented to Congress provided not only for
somewhat higher amounts than Congress finally gave — we began
witbi $40 instead of with $30 — but it also provided that the compen-
sation should bo a percentage of the pay with a certain minimum.
Now, the minimum that was fixed was higher than the percentr.g;e
for all under the rank of commissioned officers. But commissioned
officers would have received more, and there would have been a dis-
tinction between commissioned ofiicers and the others. We thought
that this v,-as right and proper, particularly in view of the fact that
the connnissioned officers in the Regidar Army get three-fourths of
their pay on retirement. Congress, hovrever, decreed that no distinc-
tion should be made between disabled privates and officers, and for
this reason, that under conscription the men in the ranks of tho
privates come, as the officers do, from ail the walks of life, and there
are plenty of privates who are nraking greater financial sacrifices
than tlie officers. That seemed to be the reason that influenced Con-
gress to wipe out all distinction between officers and men. The
danger in so doing is, as I say, tliat tliere maj' be pri-s'ate pension
legislation hereafter.
Now, the same thing was done in res()ect to the widows and children
of ofTicers and men who are killed either in the service or as the re-
sult of injuries sustained or diseases contracted in the line of their
duty. Congress again said there should be no distinction betw^een
those of the ^)riA ates and those of the officers. The amounts given
yon will find in tlic bill. They range from $20 for the orphan child,
$25 for a widow without children, running up to $00 for the family,
Avith a possibility of $20 more for a dependent widcnved mother, but
the total not to exceed $75 a numth. I need hardly say that all of
these provisions are eminently more liberal than ever have been given
before, and, at least for privates and noncommissioned oUiccrs, are
very much more liberal than the pensions of any other country.
There is this limitation on the i-ight of a widow to receive the com-
pensation : That she must have married the man either before the
nijury or within 10 years after the injury. If she marries him more
than lo years after tlie injury, she gets no com))ensation as his wido\v.
Of course, his children are treated alike no matter from wliat mar-
riage they result, but the woman herself must have married the man
within 10 years from the time of the injury in order to come within
the provisions of the compensation act.
Thp law expressl}^ provides for burial expenses not exceedirig $100,
but that is only in case death occurs before discharge from the serv-
ice; and it includes the return of the body.
Two more things about this compensation I must call your atten-
tion to: Compensation is dependr-nt upon the injury having been re-
ceived or the disease contracted in line of duty. Now. the director
of the bureau may have a difficult task defining " In the line of duty."
We tried to get Congress to strike out these words, because tliey have
been defined in a number of different ways. I think, knowing him,
UFE INSURAXCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 31
that he is gohijjj to take the most liboral construction that is allowed;
but tlie injury must lune bcf-'n incurivtl in tlie line of duty.
One of thti trouole.s about the administiation of the pension act has
been that men come up 20 or 30 years after the war and say they arc
sick now because of injuries received during the war. The prr'bleni
Avas how to avoid this sort of possible fraud; there was adopted what
v»e Ihink is a fair measure — fair to the man, fair to the Government.
A man must get a certificate as a result of medical examination either
before Ids discharge or within a year after his discharge, stating that
ho has received an injury or contra.cted a disease in the line oi duty
which either has caused his disability or is likely to cause disability
or death. ]\ow, if he gets that certificate, then he has a prima facte
case no niatter Avhen he becomes disabled or dies. If his disability
or death is realh' a result of that injury he comes within the act.
But if lie fails to get that certificate, then he can not get compensation
unless he die-; or becomes disabled within a year after the dischaige.
In other words, he knows that unless he becomes disalded before or
wiihin a year after discharge that he must get this certificate in tiiat
time, stating that he has incurred injury or contracted a disease which
is likely to cause death or disabilitj in the future. Now, of course,
if. on the next day, he should be run over by a street car and killed
and his disability, whatever it might have been, had no conuectioa
with this accident, he would not have died as a result of injuries in-
curred in the line of duty, and his family coidd receive no compensa-
tion for that. But suppose he had become totally blind in the line
of duty, and his blindness caused him after his discharge to be killed
by a street car, then his death is due to an injury that he received iii
the line of dut3^ and the comiHMisation would be paid; and that would
be so whether the death occurred 1 year after or '20 years after dis-
charge.
As to filing the claim, a man or his family must file a claim if he or
they ever want to get anything under compensation provisions, and
that within o 3-ears after the time the claim arises. The claim arises
at the time the disability begins or death occurs.
A Me3iber. Judge, I would like to ask: On page 4, Xo. 6, it speaks
of an (ifficer in active service, does that include a person on the retired
list a.-signed to active duty?
fludge Mack.. Yes; that is why we have used the phrase " in active
service " instead of using the phrase " on the active list." A person
on the retired list assigned to active duty is in active service and it was
intended to include him and does include him.
A Member. Judge, referring to that page, it states there that mem-
bers of training camps come within this act?
Judge Mack. Yes.
A MEMnia:. Now, this training camp ends on November '20, and
on the '^Tth the members are going to be discharged as civilians or
commissioned as officers. Must this allotment for the wife be made
in this training camp for the part of the month of November?
[Laughter. 1
Judge ^Iack. Well, I never thought of it.
A Me^hber. It would not be paid until after the men had separated
from the ser\ice or become commissioned officers ?
32 LIFE JNSURAXCE^ ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
Judge ;Ma(k. I tlo not knoAv. That's a puzzler. I guess the bureau
will have to settle that.
A Me>[bei{. I Avoukl like to know, judge. I come from a training
camp, and would want to get to work right away.
Judge Mack. You bring that up again on Thursday. It's a very
good question.
INSUPvANCE.
The thought underlying the insu.rance article was this, that after
the loss of the ordinar}^ income that is compensated for by the fam-
ily allowance, and the risk of loss of life and limb in the service
that is compensated for by tlie disability and death provisions, which
we have just considered, comes the loss of present insurability. Men
ought to insure themselves against the inevitable; vxhether they do
or do not is, of course, a matter of tlieir o>vn concern. But in ordi-
nary peace times every man who is fit to be in the Army, or at least
to enter the Army, can go out and buy insiirance. The result of en-
tering or ])eing in the service is that he can not buy insurance. I
say c'an not: I mean, practically speaking; literally you can. but at
a proliibitive rate. From your standpoint, the rate is exorbitant,
and therefore prohibitive, even though, from the standpoint of the
insurance company, the rates may well be entirely reasonable. We
do not know what the risk is going to be; we do not know to what
extent the mortality or disability percentage is going to be in-
creased. It's really largely guesswork, even though we take the
European experience as a basis; and because of this the insurance
companies are adopting different rates. Some of them absoluteh'
refuse to insure men against this hazard at all. Others are ready
to insure them at the present time at an additional rate of from
$37.50 per $1,000 to $100 per $1,000. That would mean for you from
$375 to $1,000 a year extra on $10,000 insurance over and above the
ordinary i5remium that we civilians would pay, just because you are
in the service.
Now, it v\-as felt that it is utterly wrong for the people of this
country to throw that burden upon the men in the service, and that
that at least is a definite loss Avhich the Government can replace.
P^urther, it was believed that there is only one really adequate way
of replacing it, of making it good, and that is by giving back in
kind what has been taken away, by restoring your insural)ility and
restoring it on at least as good a basis as the rest of us had. The
only feasible way for the Government of the United States to restore
the insurability of you men is to sell vou the insurance that vou could
have gotten in private insurance companies, and therefore that is
the plan that was adopted. It was urged that the Government pay
this extra premium to the private insurance companies, and the pri-
vate insurance companies Avere ready to be very fair and just and
generous if that liad })een considered. Many were, and I think all
of them would have been, entirely willing that this extra premium
be set aside as a fund, and if there was anything saved out of it that
it should be given back; but, on the other hand, if it was exhausted
and more than exhausted, the Government should pay the difi'erence.
That would have been one way of handling the matter. The Govern-
ment could have said to you, "Take any insurance you please in
an}'' company you please, and whatever extra premium is charged we
UFE INSURANCE^ ETC.^ FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 33
will stand back of you for it."' But the Govorninont of the I'niled
States is not in the habit of cariying its insurance in private com-
panies; it carries its own insurance so far as fire is concerned, and
there is no reason why it should not carry its own insurance so far
as your lives aie concerned.
Then, again, it was felt by many that to make such a proposition
would be to give a general Go\ernment indorsement to e^ery insur-
ance company or fraternal organization of which any of you might
be members, and the wisdom of the United States Government setting
its stam]) of approval indiscriminately upon all comi)anies was
doubted, because, while most of the companies are good and many of
them excellent, the United States is not ready to say that it will back
up every company.
No good reason "was apparent against the United States itself di-
rectly insuring you men. And there are many reasons in favor of it.
Yon are a limited class; but for the war you would be the best class
of insurance risks that could be found in the world. The Govern-
ment of the United States, if it went into the insurance business,
would not have the number of items of expense that the private in-
surance companies have. In the first place, it would not have the
expense of commissions to agents, and that's a heav}* item of ex])ense,
because it has been demonstrated up to now that men will not do the
sane and the right thing for themselves and their families by taking
out insurance in private companies unless they are driven to it by
insurance agents [laughter] — driven to a realization of their obliga-
tions to their families and to themselves. But the United States
Government when it offers you the opportunity to buy this insurance
at less than peace rates does not need any insurance agents; this op-
jxjrtunity is so wonderfully attractive that a man must be a fool or
crazy and not fit to be in the service if he does not avail himself of it
to the utmost extent of his financial ability.
Then the Government pays no taxation; it has no medical exami-
nation fees and medical inspection and supervision, because it is
going to take you all as 3'ou^ are. There are a few of you who may
not be insurable. Some who have been in the service a long time
might not be able to pass an examination now; and yet, compara-
tively, their number is so small that it is a negligible quantity when
you consider the million or two million or more possible risks. The
great mass has just undergone a careful medical examination. They
would not be in the service if they were not insurable, and so the
Government docs not need to incur the expense of medical exami-
nations.
And then the Government need not advertise or look for invest-
ments and employ high-priced and high -salaried men to conduct its
business. Government salaries, as you know, are ludicrously small.
Men work for the Go^■ermuent at a quarter to a tenth of what they
could get in private life for the same amount of work with the same
ability. That is one of the advantages the Government has, because
it is the (lovernment and because men are patriotic or want the
honor and are ready to serve the (Jovernment for so much less. And
so the only expense that the (xovernment has is that of the actual
administration of this insurance oflice; and as this insurance is lim-
ited to our fighting forces, it seemed only right and proper that the
19S0S°— 17 3
34 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
cost of administering it should not be charged up to tlie men, but
should be deemed a general governmental war expense. When that
■svas once decided, it followed that the Govcrmnent could well afford
to sell this insurance not merely at peace-time rates, but at peace-
time rates less the loading which private companies add for expenses
and emergencies. Now, this so-called loading runs from 20 per cent
to 35 per cent of the amount that would otherwise be charged, and
therefore, if you deduct this, the Go^'ernme^lt could afford to sell its
insurance "from, say, 20 to 30 per cent less than the private companies
would charge. That is quite an item in the premium, and that is
what Congress decided to do.
Then came the question what kind of insurance should the Gov-
ernment sell. Should it sell every kind that the private companies
are selling or not? There are many reasons, dependent upon the
particular circumstances of the individual, that would lead him to
take, at some particular time of his life, some one or the other of the
many forms of insurance that are offered, and there are very valid
arguments that are urged by the insurance agents in support of tho
one or the other kind of insurance, as being the best kind for the par-
ticular individual at any particular period of his life.
Now, let me illustrate: A young man unmarried feels that he
wants to have something substantial at the end of 20 years. He says
" I do not want to pay out all my money just for the insurance pro-
tection alone as I pay my fire-insurance premJums. I want part of
it to be a saving." Welt, the man that feels that way will take, wo
will say, a 20, 25, or 30 year endowment policy. If he takes out*
$10,000 of that kind of insurance, then at the end of that time he will
get the $10,000. He has created this fund for his subsequent use.
The other young man is married. He says, " I want to protect mj
family more than myself. I do not want that money, I want my
family to have the $10,000 when I die. I want to get it for as littlo
money as I can, but I want to get done paying for it in 20 years."
That* man will take a 20-payment life policy. And another man
says, " I want to pay still less. I can do it by paying all ray life,
instead of for only iO, 15, or 20 years. I know that I will alway?
have enough to keep this up, but I don't w^ant to pay in so much as a
20-paymont life will cost, and I will take an ordinary^ life."
Well, then, another man says, "I need as much insurance as I
can possibly get for the money that I can afford to spare during tho
next five years. I want the cheapest safe insurance that I can get.
I am just about to go into business. I can' not see ro.y way clear tor
the next five years. If I should die during that time, it is going to be
very disastrous for my family. I need every penny that I can spare
to put into my business during these next five years, and yet this
is the time of all times when I need all the insurance that I can get.
Now, after five years either I will be down and out or I will be
prospeious, and then I can afford to take better insurance." Well,
now, that kind of a m.an if he is properly advised by the insurance
agent, will take what is called a five-year convertible term policy.
He will take a policy that costs him very little during those five
5'ears, but that will give him the right or perhaps v.ill compel him
at the end of five years to convert it into something else that is more
permanent in its character. During those five years he must ge^
LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 35
all he can for his money. It is a particnlarly ha/.anloiis time fur
him. Suppose, again, that he is going into an occupation thai is
particuhirly risky, and that he knows is not goij)"^ to hist more than
that time. He says to himself, "This is a very risky job that I am
going into. 1 would be a fool if I did not take the very cheapest
kind of safe insurance, because it -will bring mo just as much, if I die
during this period of extra hazard, and then '.vhen the period of
extra hazard is over and when I am in a normal situation, I will takd
the kind of insurance that is best suited to my then circumstances,
something that will not compel me to pay money all my life."
The kind of insurance that man would take is what is called a
five-year convertible term or a five-year renewable term. Let mo
explain tlie word " term."' Straight term insurance is something like
fire insurance — you are insured for a term, and Avhen that term is
over you are not insured. Now, if you were to take insurance for
a term of years, and at the end of that term you were down and
out and had no insurance, you would be talking a very foolish kind
of a policy, unless it were a case where you had to protect some-
body for five years, and you were absolutely certain you would not
neod the protection after that time. But, of course, thai is a very rare
case. Most men, if they want to take a term insurance, want to fake
something tliat w ill be very cheap for the term, but wiiich after that
time will enable them to go on with some other kind of insurance.
That is called renewable or convertible term insurance — insurance
companies issue it. "\Miile it is like straight-term or like fire insur-
ance^, it difi'ers in one very important respect, that you can keep up
the insurance as long as you live; the company can not say at the end
of tlie year, "We will not renew your polic3^" But it is like firo
insurance in this: Wlien you go into a fire insurance company you
pay your premium for a J'oar; if your house burns in that year, you
get your insurance money; if your house does not burn in that year,
you are lucky; but at the end of the year you have nothing; your in-
surance is done for and J'ou do not get anything back.' Why?
Becaus-c the premium that you paid is the cost plus whatever profit
there may be — the cost of that risk during that one 3^ear. Xow, term
insurance is like that, too. At the end of the yeai- you are lucln' if
you have not died. You have paid the cost of carrying you during
that year.
Suppose, for instance, that there were a thousand men aged 20
that banded together, and thev said, " Xow, we want to protect our-
selves against death dtiring t\us next year; what will it cost us?''
Well, if they turn to the sort of tables tliat are used by the American
insurance companies, and thai arc called the American Experience
Table of Mortality, they would find that, out of a thousand men aged
29 living at the beginning of the year, in the long run and on the
average about eiglit of those men would die during the year. AVell,
now, if they were to chip in, each of them taking out $1,000 worth of
insurance, the eight who died would have to get $8,000 from the 1.000
men. That would mean that each man would have to pay $S. and
that would I. ring the $8,000. The fellows that die would get their
$1,000 apiece, the eight of them, and those that live wouhl have
nothing at the end of the year. The next year they would begin (iver
again, ^ow those men are 30 years of age, and, instead of eight
36 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOE SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
dying, the percentage would be, we will say, eight and one-quarter, and
for that reason they would have to pay $8.25 apiece to make up the
amount ; and so, of coui-se, as they grow older the chances of dying
are greater. The number that Avould die each year is greater; and
therefore, paying in the amount that each would have to contribute
to make up the death losses that are expected, the expense or pre-
mium would grow heavier *and heavier as they grew older.
Most of you would be surprised at the proportion of men who live
to a real old age; the United States Life Tables, 1910, show that 40
per cent of men 20 years of age live to 70. Those are the figures that
are given in the United States tables. Infant mortality is very high.
A large percentage die the first five years; a fair percentage the first
10 years; a very small percentage the next 10 or 20 years; then the
percentage goes up higher, and yet at the end of TO years 31 per cent
of males born survive; this equals 40 per cent of those who reach the
age of 20. Then they begin to die ofi' quickly. And so when you
come to real old age, the cost of term insurance becomes tremendous
and is a terrible burden. Noav, it is very unwise for men to take out
insurance that costs them a very few cents when they are young but
an excessively burdensome amount when they are old, and are least
able in all probabilit}'^ to pay it. And therefore it is very unwise for
men to take out renewable term insurance as a permanent thing.
It has no paid-up value; if premiums are not paid it is not kept
up and the insurance is not extended. Now, that is the principal
and the best reason why insurance companies and insurance agents
do not advise men to take yearly renewable term insurance, con-
tinuous for the man's life. But there are companies that issue it.
Others change it a little; instead of the premiums going up each
year they increase each 5 years or each 10 years. Now then, let us
consider the two propositions that I have tried to state: First, that
it is a bad thing for a man to take out yearly rencAvable term in-
surance with the intention of keeping it up for his life, because Avhen
he gets old it is going to be difficult for the average man to keep it
up;- second, that if a man is going into an extra hazardous occupa-
tion for a short period he would be extremely foolish if he did not
take the very cheapest kind of insurance he could get, provided only
that after the hazardous period is over he has the right to change it
ijito some one or other of the forms best suited to his circumstances.
Now, the kind of insurance that the United States Government is
issuing is based upon the validity of those two statem.ents. The mili-
tary and naval forces are going into an extra hazardous occupation.
That is evidenced by tlie fact that the insurance companies are charg-
ing them the heavy extra premiums. They would be foolish during
that period of extra hazard if they took anything l)ut the very cheapest
insurance that they could possibly get. The United States in issuing
this insurance is not trying to make money out of the boys; it is not
trying to do jjomething for its own good. It is trying to do the b?st
it can for them. Therefore it was felt that the United States should
issue only that insurance which is most desirable for the men. And
therefore it is provided in this bill that during the period of the war
the only kind of insurance that the X'nited States Government will
issue to you is this so-called yearly renewable term insurance, the
cheapest possible insurance that you can get. But it would be equally
wrong for the United States to tempt you into keeping up the kind
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIKRS AND SAILORS. 37
of insurjincc \vliicli for the gi-;'at mass of the men in the service —
of com-.so, tluTc are excoptions, hut wc have fjot to go hy the great
mass — vvouhl become impossible to carry Avhen Ihey readied old age
and would therefore be nothing but a snare to them. And therefore
it is provided that while the United States will sell only this cheapest
kind of insurance during the Avar, and while it will permit you to keep
it up, if 3'ou want to, for five years after the war, so that you Avill have
plenty of time to consider what is best for you as a permanent policy,
when those five years are over, or earlier if you want to, you must
change that insurance into one of the more permanent forms. It will
cost you more of course, but whatever it costs you you will more
than get vour monej^'s worth.
And what is Ihis renewable term and this converted insurance
going to cost 3^ou? Let me explain the method of determining
premium rates. All insurance premivims are l)as(^d upon this term
insurance. If you take what is called an ordinary life policy, you
do not pay a premium which increases each year, but if you were to
live out your full expectation of life j'ou would be doing the equiva-
lent thing. Instead of the yearly increasijig term rate, the company
charges you the same amount every year. But how do they arrive
at the amount that they ought to charge you? By a pure mathe-
matical calculation. An average premiiun is arrived at due to the
fact that those dyiiig young will pa}- few premiums and those living
long Avill i)ay many. Of course, the result of that is that when you
pay exactly the same premium in youth and in old age, you are
paying more than the insurance costs at the earlier period and less
than the insurance costs at the later period. Now, if you Avant to
cut your premium payments doAvn so that j^ou will pay them for
oidy 20 years, a similar mathematical conversion is made. Instead
of paying every year of A'our life so and so much, you concentrate
the payments in the first 20 years of your life, paying more during
each one of those 20 years than if you paid during each of, say, 40
years. It is all calculated out to a penny on the basis of the Ameri-
can Experience Table of Mortality and on the basis of money bring-
ing a certain income. In some companies 3 \)qv cent is the basis, in
most companies 3i per cent, and in a few companies -4 per cent. The
United States Government selected 3 J per cent because that is the
rate of most of the comjxTnies and because at the time the bill was
drawn the Libert}'^ Loan brought oj per cent.
Now, what is the result? The exact figures that the insurance
companies use as their basis in determining the ])remiums have been
adopted. But the Government has not added the loading for ex-
pense and safety margin that they add. It has taken the true, the
natural premium, based on exactly what the insurance companies
base their premiums on, the American Experience Table of Mor-
tality and a 3.] per cent interest rate. The premiums are determined
according to the age at nearest birthday. In Hullctin Xo. 1 you will
find the jn-emiums for each age.
Now, there is nothing remarkable about the figures being so low;
there is nothing remarkable about our statement that this insurance
costs a man aged 20 about $8 per thousand per year. Life insurance
companies could sell it for that but for the $2.50 or $3 added for
38 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
expenses. But ordinarily yon do not 'near about this kind of insur-
ance, and for the reasons that I have stated ordinarily it is Vv-ell that
you should not hear about it. In this particular crisis, however, it
is a great thing for you that the United States GoveiTunent decided
to sell you only what is best and cheapest for you, and then to make
you convert it within fi^e years after the war into one of the more
permanent foi-ms if you want to keep it up.
In an insurance contract you never bind yourself to anything. It
is the company that binds itself. It is the United States Government
in this case that is bound. You are under no obligations at all. You
can take this insurance, or you can decline to take it; j^ou can keep it
up or you can drop it; moreover, you can drop it any month you
please, because, while the premium is based on yearly renewable
rates, really it is monthly renewable insurance. You are insured
from month to month. Any month that you want to stop you need
only say to the Government, " I do not want to keep up my insurance
any more," and automatically you are released. The Government
does not care. If you think you can carry the risk yourself, well
and good. There is no compulsion about it. The Government has
given you the opportunity that the war deprived you of. It is up
to you to say whether you want to take advantage of it. It is not
giving you the insurance, because it did not take insurance av;aj
from 3'ou. It is giving you the insurability, because the war did
take your insurability away from you. But if you do not want t&
avail yourself of your now new insurability, that is your privilege.
It is only right and proper that you should have a limited time
within which to make up your mind, and the law fixes that limited
time at 120 days. You can decide during the 120 days vrhether or
not you want to buy the insurance. If you indicate that you want
it, well and good; it will be issued to you. Then, as I say, you caa
give it up w-henever you please, the^ whole or any part of it. You
can keep it up for life or during the war; after the war you caa
keep up the term insurance for five years and then convert it, or
you can drop it at any time; at the end of the five years, you can con-
vert it, or if you do not want to convert it, you can »ivo it up. But
unless you take it during the 120 days you won't get it at all. Unless
you take all that you want up to $10,000 during the 120 days, you
can not increase it after that; you can decrease it, but you can not
increase it. You must fix your limit during the 120 days.
The law is thoroughly democratic. Some of you might want
$100,000 insurance, but it would not be fair and just for the Govern-
ment to give you that. The Government can only give you a
reasonable measure of protection, and Congress finally decided in
accordance with the original suggestion, strongly urged by Pres-
ident Wilson, that $10,000 of insurance was a resonable measure
of protection. Every man and woman in the service, officers and
men, are entitled to this service in equal measure. It is true that
the average American policy is only $1,800, and it is likewise true
that the average young man fails to take any insurance. But no-
body knows wiiat he might have done, pai'ticularly in view of the
war, and it is but reasonable and just that the people of the United
States should give him this chance. He is a free American citizen
LIFE INSUR.\XCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 39
nnd it is up to him to decide what use ho wants to make of the oppor-
tunity. But it is democratic in this; the right to buy up to $10,<X)0
insurance is not onli^r planted to all alike, but every private can
afford to buy tlie limit, if he so desires.
It was felt that the insurance of this kiiid ought not to be the
subject matter of speculation. Therefore, these policies, unlike the
])oIicies issued by private companies, are not assignable. Other peo-
j>le can not take out this insurance on your life and make a specula-
tion out of it after your death. Your creditors can not touch it any
more than they can touch your pay. It is given that spcxjial protec-
tion. Further than that, inasmuch as a man can so arrange his pri-
vate insurance that it will go to his wife and children free from the
claims of creditor^-, it is specilically provided in this bill that the
ci-editors of the beneficiaries can not attach it. And thus it is a pecu-
liarly protected kind of pioperty for you and for them.
Ill line with this idea that it should not be as:^ignable or speculative,
the law specifically provides that it can be payable only to certain
classes of beneficiaries, Avife, husband, child, gi-andchild, parent,
brother, or sister; nobody else. But the definitions of section 22 ap-
ply here. too. Personally, I think that is too narrow. As the bill
passed the House of Representatives it provided that the bureau
would have the right to extend the classes of beneficiaries. The Sen-
ate struck this ouL I think that is a defeet in the bill, a defect
"which I hope may be corrected in the future.
Now, even the permitted class of beneficiaries can not speculate on
your life. If a wealthy brother pay the other brother's premium.
he gets no vested rights because the insured has the absolute right at
any and all times to change the beneficiary, cutting out one member
of the class and putting in some other. He can not go beyond the
permitted class, but he can change within that class just as he pleases.
Then, another provision that the Government generously added:
While it based the premiums upon these extremely low term rates,
it added this provision that not only on a man's death should tho
policy mature, but also on his becoming totally and permanentlj' di.s-
abled. This has nothing at all to do with the compensation pro-
vision. You pay nothing for that. Tlie compensation is given only
if the injuries are received in the line of duty. Your insurance
agains-t total disability or death is against total disability or death,
no matter how it arises or when it arises, whether in the service or
out of the service, because of the service or not because of the
service. It is like insurance in any private company and covers all
contingencies. But, as I say, added to the life insurance, the Gov-
ernment throws in for good measure the provision that if before
death you become totally and permanently disabled, the policy u ill
then become due.
Now, in its solicitude for the men and for the families, and act-
ing — and properly actinp- — in a .somewhat paternal manner, the Gov-
ernment has provided tnat you can not get this insurance paid out
in a lump sum, and tliat your family can net get this insurance paiil
out in a lump sum. It is not only free from cTeditors, but it is going
to be paid out only in monthly installments over a period of 20 years,
which means i^40 monthly installments. If, however, you become
40 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
totally disabled and the total disability continues more than 20
years, the same monthly installments will be kept up for you as long
as the disability continues.
As to your wife and children and the other beneficiaries, these
payments cease at the end of the '20 years. You or they can, however,
arrange that instead of 240 installments of $57.50 per month (because
that is what a $10,000 policy is converted into) there shall be 240 in-
stallments certain, and they shall continue as much longer as the wife
or child may live; but in that event the amount of each installment
is cut down, dependent upon the age of the m ife or the child or who-
ever the beneficiary may be at the time of your death. All of that,
however, Avill be figured out just as private insurance companies
figure it out.
The installments are calculated on a 3-|- per cent interest basis.
Tliat may seem pretty low to some of you who may be accustomed
to getting 6, 7, and 8 per cent in the western country. But the United
States Government is not in a speculative business. It can not expect
to get more for its money than 3| per cent, although, of course, just
now it is paying 4 per cent on the new liberty loan ; but that was a
fair, conservative basis. And any man can well afford to leave with
the United States Government, the safest debtor on the face of the
earth, some part of his money for the protection of his family, even
though that debtor paj^s only 3J per cent interest, instead of taking
the chances that his wife and child will speculate with his money in
the hope of getting a larger rate of interest.
There is one other provision that I must call your attention to;
it is a little difficult to explain, and yet I must try to explain it
clearly because it is in the blank applications, and it is due to a little
slip in the law. You will find in the application blanks at one place
in heavy type, " Strike out whichever is not wanted," and just before
that is, " Date of signature or February 12, 1918." Now" here is the
situation : It was felt, and this suggestion came directly from the
Secretary of the Treasury — it was felt that the men who should have
become totally disabled before this laAv was passed, ought, to some
extent at least, to be put in the position of the boys who are now in
the service. And so it was suggested that they be given some amount
that would be a fair average of the insurance that could be taken out,
It was finall}^ decided that any man who had l)een killed or had be-
come totally and permanently disabled before this law Avent into effect
should be considered as if he had taken out insurance which couA-erted
into installments would bring $25 a month.
Now. $10,000 brings $57.50 a month: on tliat basis $4,500 would
bring $25.88 a month, therefore $25 a month is the equivalent of
something less than $4,500, and .something more than $4,000. In
other words, if a man took a policy for $4,000 his family would be
paid at the rate of $23 a month, and if he took a policy for $4,500
his family would be paid at the rate of $25.88 a month, and if he
didn't take out any policy at all, but died or became totally disabled
before this law went into effect, the Government gives them or him
$25 a month. But moi'e than this; you have 120 days from the time
that the terms and conditions of the policy Averc promulgated, Oc-
tober 15. That is until February 12, 1918, to make up j^our mind
Avhethor you Avant to insure, and if so, for Avhat amount. If you
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 41
shoind (lie or l)econie totnlly ;ui(l pormancntly disahlcHl wliilc yoii
liave this option an<l l)efore applyin"^ for llic insuranco, yon or tliey
will likewise get the $25 a month. But now the unfortunate slip in
the Avording of the law was in the use of the expression, " without
havin<r applied for the insurance."
Now, suppose you had ai>i>lied for $1,000 worth of insurance, inas-
much as you would have applied for insurance, you would have cut
yourself out of that $25 per month, even though the $1,000 insurance
would bring only $5.75 per month. That would be very foolish, and
therefore the bureau would have pi'eferred to say that if you a})ply
for less than $4,500 it would in every case regard it as an application
not for an immediate i)olicy, but for a policy to be issued on February
12. the last day on which you could apply. In this way you would
have been fully protected. But there was this one obstacle: The $25
that the Governmeut gives the man who does not take insurance is
payable to the man himself as long as his disability lasts, but if he
dies the class of people to whom it goes is still more restricted : only
his wife, his child, or his Avidowed mother can get it. Now, suppose
he has no wife, child, or widowed mother; suppose he has a father
or a mother and a father and he would like them to get the benefit
of the insurance. If he ai)plies for insurance and maWs it payal)le
(o them, they will get it. If he does not apply for immediate insur-
ance, they can not, in any case, get the $25. Suppose he applies for
$1,000 worth of insurance ; here is his dilemma, due to this little slip in
the law. He has applied for insurance, and therefore he can not get
that $25 per month if he is totally disabled. A thousand dollars
insurance brings him, however, only $5.75 per month. Therefore if
his application is to be effective right now he would get only $5.75
instead of $25 per month should he become totally disabled before
I'ebruary 12, but at his death his parents would get $5.75 per month,
whereas if his application is to be effective only on February 12 he
would get $25 per month during his disability ; but, on the other hand,
if he died his parents would ^^t nothing. Now, there you are. There is
the dilemma. The man must choose the lesser of the two evils: the
bureau can not choose for him.
There is. however, a May to avoid this dilemma by taking at least
$4,500 of insurance; and that is the thing for him to do. l)ecause even
if he does not want to keep it up after February 12. he can drop any
])art of it that he pleases: and rather than lose or run the risk of
losing something by death or total disability between now and Feb-
ruary 12. the wise thing for him to do. even if he wants only $2,000
permanently, is to make his application for $4,500 now. He can not
lose much by it, anyway, because the whole cost, at age 20, for $5,000
is only $3.45 a month. Then he and his family are protected against
all contingencies. Personally I think that if a man insists on taking
less than $4,000 he would better strike out "■ Date of signature '' and
leave in " February 12. 1018 " ; if he then becomes totally disabled be-
fore February 12. he will get the $25. Of course, if he dies l>efore that
date, he cuts out his father or married mother. But it is up to him;
he must make up his mind, and the best decision is to take at least
$4,500 of the insurance. In that case he does not have to answer that
question, because, as you see in that application, in that event the
application states that it is to be elTective at once. But if it is for
42 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
less than $4,500, and in favor of a wife, child, or widowed mother, it
is to his interest to have the new insurance date from February 12,
because in that case he, his wife, child, or widowed mother Avould all
be better pn^tected with the $25 monthl}' in case of death or disability
before that date.
A Member, Judge, that is rather complicated, and it is rather hard
for us to understand. Does not your ingenuity prompt you to put
some sort of clause there that will waive all this ?
Judge Mack. Not only have I tried, but a half dozen of the best
actuaries of the country have tried. We can not. I want to say that
this bulletin of the terms and conditions of the contract of insurance
has gone through the hands of some of the most experienced actua-
ries of the countr}^, both in cooperation with me and sul)sequently in
criticism. I must confess a slip in omitting a w'ord or two in thelaw
that would have obviated it; but until Congress meets again tho
law can not be changed, and even then it will be difficult to get an
amendment through right awav. As the law now stands, the sltua-
tion is as I have explamed to you. If a man wants less than $4,500
insurance, and if he wants the beneficiaries to be other than wife,
child, or widowed mother, he is up against a dilemma because of the
generosity of the Government in giving him som.ething for nothing,
in case he becomes totally disabled or dies before Febiiuiry 12. Thera
is only one of two solutions to the dilemma. Either take $4,500 in-
surance or more and by all odds the simplest thing for you to ex-
plain to the men is that, or go into an explanation and tell them why
they must choose between one or the other, and I admit that will be
difficult to do.
A Member. 1 am going to avoid the explanation.
Judge Mack. Well, I do not doubt that practically all the men in
this room are going to avoid the explanation, because when you con-
sider the amount, the cost, the \Q,rj low cost during the war, and for
five years afterwards, cf the entire $10,000 Insurance, there is no
reason why a man should not take out the whole amount. Now let
me add, in conclusion, a very few words :
There are many unmarried men in the Army. A great majority
of them are unmarried. It is not always easy for unmarried young-
sters, particularl}'^, to understand the need of insurance. I think it
is your duty to bring home to them a realization of one fact, which
is very important for civilians but infinitely m.ore Impoi-tant for these
men to understand; the fact that a man is uninsural^lc practically
never prevents hJm from getting married and having children. I say
practically; of course his degree of uninsural)illty may be such that
he would not marry; but even then it is not the more fact of iniinsur-
abllity that prevents him; it is some disease or something of that
kind.*^ The important fact, that the insurance companies say he is
not healthy and that they won't insure him, rarely if ever stops a
man from getting married and having children. Now, he can not
prot<;ct them with life insurance. A civilian, therefore, ought io
take out life insurance when he is well, because he may, through an
accident, become uninsurable any day. Infinitely more important is
this for the boys in the service. Of course, every one of them realizes
that he is running risks. For them this is a tremendous opportunity
to get protection for the future. They are the ones who are most
likely to become uninsurable; and yet the desire to marry and to
have children will not be given up. They won't be able to protect
LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 43
that wifo and tlioso cliililron by iiihUriinrc 1if'r;';iff<'r. If lli('\ lik"
it now, tlicy have the protection.
There is not a private in the service who can not a fiord to take tlie
full anionnt of $1().(H)0 insurance, even though he givi's ?;15 n month
to his familv. Take the average of, sav, 29 — $(3.90 niontiilv for
^i;lO,(JOO. Add that to the $15— less than $22. He is getting for serv-
ice in France $*^;) and for service in this country $30. He still lias
Ruflicient spending money, and he is building up a tremendous pro-
tection I'oi' the future l)oth foi- himself and his family.
One of the main reasons for the Government giving this insur-
ance op]iortunity was this: The two things that have given the
pension system, justly or \m justly, its present name are. first, the
s[)ecial legislation for private pensions, and, second, much more
than that, the so-called service-pension legislation. That began
25 years after the Civil War. Now, as I said in the beginning, no
one begrudges the man who is injured in the service or as a result of
the service, or the family of that man, in case he dies as a result of
that service, anything that the Government may grant him. But
there is a tremendous difference of opinion as to whether because a
man served in the war and has now reached the age of 62, or has
now become disabled or has been killed in a street car accident out in
the street 25 years after the war, death or injury that had absolut^lr
nothing to do with his war service, that man or his family should be
given a pension. The majority decided in the general service-pension
legislation that he should. A very strong minority thought that to
be a degradation of the pension system. I am not saying which was
right and which Avas wrong. It may well be that the majority wa.s
right ; that because the Government, when these men went out to
service, took no care of their future, unless they were disabled in tho
.service, that they were justified in asking service pensions of the
Government.
Now, one of the main objects of this insurance provision is to stop
that sort of thing in the future. To some extent, it puts him in the
position of appealing to his Government for help, not because he
has become disabled in serving his Government, but merely because
he once served his Government patriotically. Men do not liko to bo
put in that position. An infinitely preferable method of meeting tlie
need is by self-jn-otection. A man can protect himself against dis-
ability and the inevitableness of death and their consequences by
insuring himself, insuring himself when he is well. in'=uring himself
at the i»eginning of his service so that hiter on in life, through his
own efl'orts, he will have saved something for himself and for his
family, and will not have to go to the (Jovermncnt and say. "Just
l)ecause I served you patriotically, despite the fact that you cared
for me then, and that you promised to care for mv family in case
disaster came upon me as a result of my service, t now say that T
want your help." This insurance is intended to protect men fi-o!n
being compelled, as our Civil ^V.xr veterans felt comjielled, to put
theinselves in that position. Whether or not service pension legishi-
tiou will lie averted, of courst^ no man can foretell. No Congress
can tie the hands of any subsequent Congress. But this Cimgress
has erected a moral barrier on the firm American basis of self-
reliance and self-protection. Every man in the service should avail
himself of the o[>portunity, not merely for his own good, not merely
for the good of liis family, but for the good of the whole country^
44 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
because, wlietlicr we consider service pensions good or bad. surely
■we will all rejoice if, through this insurance opportunity, the heroes
of this war will be spared the necessity of asking for service pen-
sions.
A Member. There is a provision in the Army Eegulations that an
officer or enlisted man losing his life by death or otherw ise while in
the service is entitled to six months' pay.
Judge Mack. Yes.
A Membj:r. Is it Avritt^n out?
Judge Mack. That is written out. The existing pension laws and
these other laws are superseded by the new pro\isions. The compen-
sation and the insurance take the place of it. Whatever rights a nian
has that have accrued in the past are retained; a man who is getting
a pension to-day continues to get it.
An impoitant question was just asked me. I ought not to have
assumed you know the answer. This insurance, once issued by the
(government, can be kept up forever, not only during the w^ar, but
afterwards; not oidy during the period of term insurance, but when
you convert it. It has nothing to do with private insurance companies.
It is Government insurance forever. It applies for all time to all
men Avho take it out while they are in the active military and naval
service, not only to those now in service, not only to those serving
during the present war, but to the soldiers and sailors for all time ;
{'lid it will be continued for them after they leave the service.
INSURANCE INFORMATION BUREAU.
Section 24 provides that the bureau shall on request give informa-
tion and act for the men in reference to any policies of insurance.
That means this: There will be an insurance department; it will have
experts in charge; and it will, if it can, be helpful to you, because
most men are wholly ignorant of insurance iind of all the technicali-
ties in their policies. Those of you who have no place to leave your
insurance policies can leave them on deposit there. Those of you who
have no one to be notified when your ]:>i'emiums are coming due on
your private insurance policies can have the bureau act as your
agent. Supply it in some way or other with the money to pay your
premium, so that you do not lapse your policy. The bureau wants to
be a real help not only as to this Government insurance but as to
other insurance which }ou may carry.
FILLING OUT APPLICATION BLANKS.
Let me again impress upon you the exceedingly important obliga-
tion to r3-present to the other fellows in the camp what you have
gained from these three days of conference, so that they and their
families may know their rights. And, secondly — and this relates
to the i)rivates and to the noncommissioned officers — that they
may know their duties under the act. For the enlisted men have
an absolute duty under this law — to fill out these allotments and
allowance l)lanks. It is the duty of every man under the grade
of conunissioned officer, whether he is claiming an allowance for
his family or not. wliether he is under compulsion to make an
allotment or not, to fill out a blank giving the information, because
only if he does fill it out can the department know — at least
LJPE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 45
know priiiKi facie — whether or not an allotnu'nt is compulsory. That
f<)lh>AV8 from I lie provision of the law tiiat if lie has a wife, child,
or former wife, (li\()i-ce(l, to wiiom alimony has been decreed, auto-
matically a deducton from his pay must be made. Therefore every
man must answer the question whether he has anyone in this class.
If he answers it in the aflirmative, he must then go on and state who
they arc, and that irrespective of whether he wants them to get an
allowance or whether they want to get an allowance, or whether they
want his allotment or whether the}^ don't want his allotment, because
he hasn't the final decision as to whether an allowance shall be made.
The family has the right to claim the allotment and the allowance
against his will. The bureau has the right, and even though the
family should be inclined j)atriolically or for other reasons to waive
the allotment, to compel him to pay the allotment.
Now, the nien in the Army are gathered from all ranks of society
and all classes of men, and it would be incredible if there were not
some men in the Army who woidd be inclined to shirk their duty in
this lespect. Therefore it is important to acquaint the men with the
instructions that you will find with the allotment and application
blank. It is important that they should know at once that the United
States Govermnent recjuires absolute frankness and lionesty in the
statements that arc made, and in addition to its being a military of-
fense, a willfully false statement will lead to civil proseciition for
perjury, with the penalty of imprisonment in the penitentiary and
a heavy fine.
It docs not make any difference whether the man has gone into the
army as a single man or not; when he comes to give this information,
if he has a Avife or children he must come out and say it. So far as
illegitimate children are concerned, unless he has acknowledged
theni in writing as his own, or unless he has been decreed by the
court to support them or to contribute to their support, he can not
be required to give any information. But as to any illegitimate
child that he lias in writing acknowledged as his own or that he is
ready at this time to acknowledge in writing as his own in order
that it may receive the governmental support, and as to any illegiti-
mate child to whose support he has been decreed to contribute,
whether he says it is his child or not, if the court has found against
him, it is his absolute duty to give the information.
This information, of course, that is given in these blanks is not for
public circulation. It is to a very considerable degree confidential,
for the use of the bureau and for'the use of the Army. Men ought
to be impressed with that fact in order that thev inav not bring
upon themselves the penalty for frivinor false information and in
order that they may not by "their false information tend to deprive
those who ha\ e a claim under tho law of that claim.
Of course, it is just as serious to overstate as to understate. Unless
the man is really married to the woman, at least in the sense that they
have openly lived together as husband and wife for two years — when
I say openly lived together as husband and wife I mean held them-
selves out to the communitv and l^een considered by the community as
husband and wife day after day — he must not say that the woman
is his wife if she is not. But for the purposes of the allowance and
the allotment article the law expressly says that when a man and a
woman have lived together openly and publicly in the acknowledged
46 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
reJation of husband and wife, thai will suffice, and in the absence of
a legal spouse who, of course, has the only claim, the first claim and
the only claim, the marriage between these two will be conclusively
presumed. That does not apply to the insurance article or to the
'•ompensrttion article in case of disability or death, but only to the
family-allowance section.
Now, gentlemen, I was asked at the beginning of the session about
this compulsory deposit. Let me say first that no regulation has as
yet been made by the Secretary of War or the Secretary of the Navy
compelling a deposit, and I Avas asked whether the amount that a
man pays for his Liberty bond would be considered. The answ^er
is, that the law says that the most that you can be compelled to
deposit with the Government is one-half oi your pay. Now, that is
the most; but before any of that half pay is to be deposited there
will be deducted from it any allotment that you make, whether it is
a compulsory allotment or a voluntary allotment. Now, then, let us
illustrate that by an example. Suppose a man is getting $90 pay, and
suppose he has not allotted anything. The Secretary of TVar can
say, by regulation, " You must deposit so much of one-half of your
pay: that is. of $45 as is not allotted." Suppose a man has allotted
$15 to his wife, $5 to his mother, and is paying $15 a month insurance
premium. That is $35 already ; assume that he promised $10 monthly
for a certain period for Liberty bonds and told them to take that out
of his pay. That is also an allotment. You now have $45. That is
half his pay. There is nothing left that the Government can compel
him to deposit. One-half of his pay is subject completely to his own
will. Of course, if that man wants to allot $30 to his wife and $15 to
his mother, that is $45. If he wants to allot $10 for a Liberty bond,
that is $55. And if he wants to allot another $10 to pay his insur-
ance, that will be $65. That will all be deducted from his pay, and
he will get the balance of his pay, $25.^
A Member. Let mc ask you a question, please, right there. Do not
talk about the $60 man or the $90 man, talk about the $30 man.
Judge Mack. The same thing applies. Suppose he is paying $15
to tiis wife and two children. The other $15 he can do with as he
pleases. He can allot it or any part of it subject to some possible
regulations that may be made which may say that every man ought
to kf>ep s-omething out of his pay.
A Member. Suppose that in the meantime he has already obligated
himself for $20 for a Liberty bond.
Judge Mack. If he has allotted $20 for a Liberty bond, he can
not pa}' it out of his pay, because the first thing is the compulscny
allotment to his wife and children. That comes first.
A Member. He is already under the contract obligation to pay
$20 for Liberty bonds.
Judge Mack. Well, he has no outside resou.rces.
A Member. No, sir.
Judge Mack. He can't meet that obligation. But the Govern-
ment will have to relieve him of that. In my judgment, some general
order ought to be issued, and ought to be issued mighty quickly, to
answer that question. But this law has nothing to do with it. A man
can't allot away from his wife and his children, because that is a
compulsory deduction, and he can't get away from it. His eutiro
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 47
pay is iiol witliin his control. If ho has i\ wife and ohihlivii, or ti di-
Aorf'od wife who has a clahn on him for alimony, the compulsory
allotment comes first and will be dt-dncted automatioally unless he
asks for exemption, and i-easons are found to exempt him, or unless
she wai\es it; ))Ut otherwise that has irot (o be deducted.
A Mv-MfjEK. I would like to brin<; up the (piestion presented in the
prec^nlinff (juestion. Suppost> he j2;ets $40 a month. lie has a vv^ife,
two children, and a dependent mother. All of them dependent upon
him for sup]K)rt. Let us assun^c Ihat that man has oblii^ations, old-
line iiisui'ance companies or otherwise, wiiich he feels compelled to
meet, and he feels he can not contribute more than $20 to the com-
pulsory allotment. How can he best place the allotment so as to
meet the compulsory family allowance?
Judge Mack. In the lirst j3!ace Ik; mu.st pay $20 to his wnfe and
children. If he wants his mother to get the Government allowance
he must do one of two things, either pay her nearly $G, which
is one-se\enth of his pay, or apply for exemption from that payment.
If a man's circumstances are such as you state, that he has nothing
but his pay, that he needs $20 for hLs wife and children over and
above the $32..50 which the Government gives a wife and two chil-
dren — that is, $52.50 as the minimum on which that wife and two
children can live — if that is his status, and if, in addition to that,
he has some fixed obligation which he has no other way to meet
except through the balance of his $40 pay, I have little doubt that
the bureau would consider that it was a special case
A Membkr. I think we are talking at cross-pnri)oses. The propo-
sition I put up was that he feels that he can put in $20 for his
allotment and he wants to so place it.
Judge Mack. He can so place it.
A Mkmfku. He can allot $20 payable to his wife?
Judge Mack. He not only can but must; $20 is his compuloory
allotment for a wife and child. He hasn't any choice.
A Mkmfkr. Then the Government will allot this for him.
Judge Mack. The law provides how much allowance he will get
in that case. The law says that a wife and two children shall set
$32.50.
A Mf.mp.f.r. Then the family allowance Avould not exceed tli«> com-
pulsory allotment?
Judge Maik. That is not correct; the compulsory allotmeit fol-
lows the allowance. The family allowance is fixed in the law. It
is $15 for a wife, $25 for a wife and one child, $.'V2.50 for a w iie and
two children. That is the problem that you stated. Tlie familv
allowance is fixed. Now, the family allowance being fixed at $32.50,
what must the man allot to his wife and two children. He must
allot the sjime amount that the Governmenl gives, $32.50, with this
exce]>tion. that he can not allot less than $15, and he need not allot
more than half his pay. Wliat is half his pay? $20 in the case
you stated. Therefore he must allot $20 to his wife ar.d childi*en,
and that family of a wife and two children will ci^A from allotment
and allowance together $52.50. Now, so far it is clear.
A MF.Afiuat. Ju.st one point to clear it. Does a man have to take
any steps to make this allotment of $20?
48 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
Judge Mack. Ko.
A Member. What if he does not feel that he can afford this $20?
Judge Mack. It doesn't make any difference. If that compulsory
allotment of $'20 is going to be more than he can pay he should apply
by M riting to the bureau for an exemption, but he is not apt to get it.
A !Memher. It might be a good thing to persuade his wife to send
him a check for $5 or $10.
Judge Mack. Yes; there is no objection to his wife doing that if
she wants to.
A Member. Does he have to apply for the allowance?
Judge Mack. That wasn't the question. The question was, What
steps must he take so that the family may get this compulsory allot-
ment ? I said in the beginning, before you were here, that every man
must fill out this blank ^^hether he wants the allowance or doesn't
Avant the allowance. Every man under the grade of commissioned
officer must fill out this blank. Now, when he fills out this blank, as-
suming that he is filling it out honestly, we know that he has a wife
and two children. Automatic-all}^ that wife and two children get the
compulsory allotment. That is automatic. Now, if he wants an al-
loAvance for them he must apply for that. If he doesn't apply for it
and if they want it, they must apply. Now, that application is
erinted on the same form as this information wdiich he must give.
[e can't get out of the compulsory allotment simply because he does
not want the allowance or because his wife does not want the
allowance. His wife, however, can say, " I waive this compulsory
allotment," if she wishes to, and if she does not need that sup-
port from him, the bureau will let her waive it. Then the com-
pulsory allotment is at an end and he can then do as he pleases
with his money, except for regidations that the Secretary of War
may make.
A Member. While we are on this subject I would like to raise a
question as to what is to be done with the faix sex, the ladies that we
have in the Navy as yeowomen. There are thousands of them. If
these ladies are to be treated according to the strict terms of the law
they will be badly treated.
Judge Mack. They are treated exactly like men in the same posi-
tion. It makes no difference, the law says expressly.
A Member. On the question of allotments and the benefits to be
derived therefrom.
Judge Mack. The difference is that you can not subject them to
compulsory allotment. The law gives them absolute equality with
the men.
A Member. On the same footing?
Judge Mack. On the same footing, exactly, and in every respect.
There is no difference between thorn. You will find enlisted men in-
cludes men or women, and Avhei-ever the term enlisted men, or men
is used, it refers to men or women in the same position.
A ME:\rBER. Then the compulsoi'v allotment will apj')ly to them also.
Judge Mack. Except only compulsion as to allotment. The wife
is not defined as including the husband; therefore, if one of these
young women has a husband she need not make the allotment to him.
[Tjaughter.]
A Member. Suppose the Imsband can not take care of himself?
LIFE INSURAXCF., ETC., FOR SOl.DTFRS AND SAILORS. 49
Judge M.\( K. All I <im sny is that the law doos not compol hor to
make the alloiincnt. Sho can do as she ph'asos ahoiit it.
A Memisi:!}. I notice that hoth in the law and the application blank
f(ii- insurance that an enlisted man is to have the premium taken out
of his pay.
dudire Mack. If he want- it.
A MK.AtiiKi;. 'J'hat is what I wish to know; is that compulsory?
Judge Ma( K'. Not at all. "^'ou will notice if you read that clause
" I authorize the necessary monthly deduction from my pay. or if in-
suHicient, from any deposit with the United States, in i>aynient of the
premiums as they become due, unless they are otherwise paid." If a
man does not want his i)reiuium to be deducted he can send his check
to the bureau each month, or he can send it now for a year in advance,
or anything else that he pleases.
A Member. There is one other question that T would like to a.sk.
It has been gone over, and i^eihaj-js cAcrybody in the room is familiar
with it, but there are some of these things that I woidd like to em-
phasize. Now, I believe it comes under the compensation feature of
tile law. When does this compensation feature begin and when does
it end?
Judge Mack. Compensation for disability begins with the disabil-
ity, subject, however, to this: That while a man is receiving pay in
the service he docs not get his disability compensation. It liegins when
both elements are there — disability and discharge from the service.
A Me^h'.eij. Then it runs 2-10 months from that time?
Judge Mack. No; you are talking about insurance.
A Member. It runs for life?
Judge Mack. So long as the disability lasts. If it is a disability
that lasts a month, at the end of the month, if he is Avell again, it is
stopped. If the disability begins again, it goes on. If a man has
both legs off, the disability in the nature of things is permanent.
From the moment he is discharged he has to be paid i^lOO a month for
life.
A Meaiber. One other question. I think a man is given 120 days
to accept the condition^ of this insurance or reject it. and in the mean-
time he is covered for that 120 days to the extent of ^25 a month in
case of death or permar:ent disai)ility. Now. does that cease on Feb-
ruary 12, or is that continuous during his service?
Judge Mack. That depends on what you mean. If you mean will
he continue to be nisured if he has become totally disabled before
February 12
A Member. And at that tinie does not desire insurance.
Judge Mack (continuing). And at that time does not desire insur-
ance he still gets the $25. It means that if he has not taken out
insurance and has been unfortunate enough to become totally disabled
before February 12 the payments will be continued for life. I(«
means that if he dies on or before February 12. without having taken
out insurance, that $25 will be jiaid to his wife and children and his
widoAved mother as long as they live, but no more than 240 months.
If, including the months that he himself receives it. all of them die
before the 240 months, it ceases altogether. It means that if he be-
comes totally disabled on or before February 12 and he begins to get
$25 and at the end of 12 months he dies and leaves a wife, child, or
lOSOS"— 17 1
50 LITE INSUKAXCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
widcwed mother, that the payment of $25 a month will be continued
to be paid to them as long as they live, but in that case not exceeding
19 years. That is, 20 years, including the one year he has been receiv-
ing the $25 a month.
A Member. Now, I would like to ask this question: There are a
few boys over in the hospital wlio will probably receive their survey
shortly ; are they going home disabled without having the privilege
of this insurance?
Judge Mack. No, sir; any man before he is discharged, while he
is in active service, has a right to take out this insurance; but if he
Vv-aits until he is totally disabled he can not take out insurance against
total disability. He can take out insurance against his death. But
if he is totally and permanently disabled before February 12, then,
he won't want to take out insurance, because he is going to get $25 a
month, automatically, as long as he lives. If he is going to take out
more than $4,000 — say, $4,500 or upward — the longer he waits the
more chances he takes that he will be caught without having any
insurance, and the difference bet^veen $25 and what he would have
would represent a loss to his family.
A ]MK.M!iEit. In section 401 the men who were in the service on the 6th
day of April and have died between that time and now, it would
seem that tliis act is retroactive for them.
Judge Mack. Yes; the families can get it. If a man has died and
left a wife, child, or widowed mother they will get this $25 as long
as they live, but not exceeding 20 years; and after he has become
totally disabled he will get it in exactly the same way. The act is
retroactive in that respect.
A Member. I would like to ask one question to supplement this.
There is a man in the hospital who has been discharged. Has it any-
1 hing to do with the question that the trouble originated before this
bill passed?
Judge Mack. Yoa mean as to total disability?
A Member. No; partial disability.
Jiulge Mack. No. If these men are not totally and permanently
disabled tiiey do not get the $25 monthly insurance, and they do not
get compensation. They are taken care of under the pension laws.
In other words, the jiension laws are in operation up to Octolx;r 6,
the date that this compensation law was passed, for anything that
liappencd before that. Those men, however, who were permanently or
totally disabled or who died between April G and^October 6 get this
$25 mo]ithly insurance as an additional allowance to them over and
above what the pension laws give; but the pension laws and the
gratuity laws vrere in full force up to October 6. On and after
Octobei' G they v>-ere supplanted by this law.
A Member. It is not quite clear now whether or not the compensa-
tion act pays in the case of death arising in the line of duty in addi-
tion to this emergency insurance. In other words, if a man leaves
a dependent wife and has been injured, and as a result dies while in
the line of duty and takes out no insurance, he receives $25; that is,
his wife receives $25 in compensation in addition to the $25 provided.
Judge Mack. Right. In other words, the language of the act is
that he will be deemed to have talvcn out and have been granted in-
surance bringing $25 ; that is in addition to what she gets under the
compensation article.
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 51
A Member. I would like ;i ruling on whether ov not oftlr.ero wlu)
hnve been retired and returned to active duty — retired from aftive
list, but put on active duty by the Pret^ident during the war — are
entitled to this insurance?
Judge Mack. *\'es; I answered the other day that they are, and
for this reason: The expression "On the active list" is not used in
the law. The expression used in the law is "In the active service."
Men on the retired list who have been brought back to tlie active
service are in the active service and are covered and Avere intended
by the use of that phrase to be covered by this law.
A Me.aiber. Judge, now when we return to our cantonments, are
Ave to encourage the writing of insurance in amounts of $5,000 he-
fore the date of February 12 or not? Now, as I understand it, the
law provides that insurance shall be given up until that date for an
amount around forty-five hundred dollars w ithout premiujn charged.
.fudge Mack. The law does not say without premium and it does
not say with premium charged. You certainly do not have to pay
any premium. If a man dies, I can not answer whether the premium
is going to be deducted.
A Member. Well, then, am I not to understand, for instance, if I
take out a $10,000 policy to-day, I am to get the benefit of that forty-
five hundred dollars?
Judge AL\CK. No; your premium is on $10,000 insurance. I think
it is very desirable to encourage them to take out the insurance at
once, Ixx'ause the insurance which thev take out is a great deal Ijetter
than the free insurance which the (jovernment is giving. In the
first place it is payable to a larger class of people, in the second place
the insurance which the Goveniment gives them is equivalent to »idy
forty-three hundred dollars, so that if they Avant to take out more
than that they Avill get more for their money. If they want to benefit
father, married mother, brother, or sister, the only way they can do
it is to take out insurance, no matter Avhat the amount, because the
automatic insurance is limited to the Avife, child, or widoAved mother.
In the next place it is not for 240 months straight, but for that tinie
AA'ithin 240 months that these three specific classes survive. The in-
surance that you buy is for 240 months straight, and you can leave it
tf> the larger class. Now. of course, if you have nobody Avithin the
larcer class and the whole class dies out and there is nobody at any
tii/ie left, that comes within the broad descriptions of grandchild,
l^arents, brothers, or sisters there Avould not be anybody to tako it,
but those terms are very broad, and include a good many people.
A Member. May I go into that further? Suppose the man who
does not want insurance for class B, but for class A, and therefore he
Avould not be benefited, say, by taking a $:.,0<')0 policy?
Judsre Mack. He Avould not be much benefited.
A Member. He Avould not be much benefited by taking that ])olicy.
Now, if he does not take any policy, he avoids tiu' payment of the
])remium on the basis of six or seven dollars a thou.-;and. It Avould
cost him, say. for the four months. tAventy-four or tAventy-fiAV dol-
lars.
Judire Mack. Yes; and he runs the risk during that time of berom-
ing totally disabled. Now\ if all he Avants is $.5,000, it is, of course,
immaterial, but suppose he wants to take eventually $10,000, and
52 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS,
he savR, "Well, I will be satisfied with this $5,000 now and 1 will
take $10,000 beginning February 12, 1918." If he should become
totally disabled before that date'^he would get the $25 monthly for
his life, but he could not increase that amount for total disability
by taking the insurance thereafter. If he shor.ld die before February
12, 1918, of course he could not increase that insurance. The $10,000
insurance would not go into effect on February 12 if he died before
February 12. His automatic insurance of $25 monthly would be in
force. But if he intends to take $10,000 on February 12, he w^ould
better take it right away, even though it cost him a little more for a
period of three and a half or four months, because if he waits he is
taking the chances of intervening disability or death, in which case
he will not get the increased amount that he wants. Now, if he
wants only $4,000 of insurance, he need not bother.
A Member. All he would have to do if he wanted more would be to
make his application dated from February 12. That would not
interfere with his temporary insurance.
Judge Mack. No; he could not get his insurance from February
if he dies in the meantime. You know a man can not apply for the in-
surance to become effective after his death. [Laughter.]
A Member. I understand, but he would get it temporarily.
Judge Mack. No ; here is the problem I was trying to state : It was
not quite the question that was asked. A man eventually wants
$10,000 before this four months' time is up, so he says to himself, "I
will take this insurance beginning February 12 and I Avill save that
four months' insurance premium." Now, if he wants to save that
four months' insurance premium he can do it, but he is taking these
chances, that he may become totally disabled, or that he may die
before February 12. If he does, he will get the $25 a month, but
he can not take the ten thousand insurance against total disability if
he becomes totally disabled before February 12, and he can not insure
against death if he dies before that time. Now, if he becomes totally
disabled, he can still take his ten thousand insurance against death on
February 12, but it w^on't give him an increase in his total disability
insurance. It will become effective only when he dies; he will not
get the $57.50 for his total disability, but oidy the $25.
A Member. He will get the twenty-five until he dies, and the fam-
ily gets the fifty-seven fifty.
Judge Mack. Yes.
Another Member. In order to save insurance ])remius, insurance
for forty-five hundred dollars between now and February 12. He
wants $10,000 insurance from now on. Can he take out tw^o policies
now, one for fortv-five hundred dollars and the difference between
that and $10,000. '
Judge Mack. No: the moment he takes out any policy from now
on, his automatic insurance is at an end; in other words, under the
law, as it is written, he can not get the automatic insurance and also
get a policy for any amount at the same time. The two do not run
at the same time.
The Member. The thing to do is to tell them to write their policy
now for as much as they want. Suppose we tell him he can take out
ten tliousand, and if he wants to take a thousand we can go into
details and explain to him.
UFF, INSURANCE, KTC, FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 53
Jndgt' .Ma( K. ThiUV just wliat 1 say. T would ti-y to <:^ct every
fellow to take out at least Toity-fhe hundred dollars and make it
elfective immediately. Tiiat is mueh simpler; everythinfr would bo
much better for the man, his family, and the bureau; but tliere are
lots of fellows who do not want to take out forty-five hundred dol-
lars, and when you go to those fellows you must explain. I wouhl
certainly advise the men, because that's mighty honest advice, to
take forty-five hundred dollars insurance. I woukl be glad to have
every man in tl'.e service earrying at least fort,v-five hundred dollars.
It gives him little enough, and for his family it is the best thing, and
even if he has no family it is the best thing, because after the war he
may get married and have a family. You do not go astray when you
advise him to take at least forty-five hundred.
A Mkjibicr. Is no premium required after a man becomes totally
disabled?
Judge Mack. No. The moment a man becomes totally and per-
manently disabled his policy is due just the same as if he dies.* Ilis
l)olicy is matured, but of course it is paid out only in installments. I
mean it's all ow ing from that moment on b}' the Government, and it's
duQ in 240 monthly installments.
A Member. That is not expressly stated in the bill, but inferen-
tially.
ffudge Mack. Yes; exactly. The fact that the policy matures is in
itself a statement of a cessation of premiums because you do not pay
for insurance that is due.
A Mejiber. Your statement. Judge, of total and permanent dis-
idjility — suppose a man is pronounced totally and pernuinently dis-
abled by a board of physicians, and thereafter it de\elops that he
has recovered somewhat ; would he still be considered under tliat
condition, or would that word " permanent '" come in ; and if so, what
is the effect?
Judge Mack. That is a problem.
A Member. That's got to be settled.
Judge Mack. And I think the bureau will settle the problem lib-
erally.
A Member. Can insurance be taken out after February 12?
Judge Mack. No, sir; not by a man who was in service on Octol)er
15. A man who enters the service at any time after October 15 has
120 days from the time he enters the active service to take out the
insurance. A man who was in the service on October 15 has 120 days
from that time, ahd that 120 days ends on February 12.
Prof. LiM)sAY. There is a question that can now be answered, I
think. It has been asked by several men this afternoon with respect
to approximately the cost of conversion of tliis insurance at the end
of the war into eudowment insurance.
Mr. Young, will you give us approximately the cost of two or
three age periods, say 21, 25, and 30, if you can. of endowment in-
surance per thousand. I think you ga\e those figures the other day,
but if you can give them approximately now, several men have
asked how much it would cost to carry $10.0(X) insurance converted
into endowment iusuraiu'c at ages 21. 25, and 80, say.
Mr. YouNCJ. Twentv-vear endt)wments? About $40 a vear. age 21.
54 LITE INSURANCE, ETC., FOB SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
Prof. Lindsay. Forty dollars a thousand? That would be $40^
for $10,000 at age 21 ?
Judge Mack. A 20-year endowment, you know, is a very expensive
thing. A 20-3'ear endowment is a great luxury. A man coming out
of the Army at 25 that wants to protect himself against old age docs
not need anything better than a 40-year endownnent, not a 20-year
endowment. A 40-year endowment would cost less than $18 a thou-
sand.
A Member. As I understand the law, there is no provision yet
made that that 20-year endowment could become a lump sum or
spread over 20 years. If it is spread over 20 years you are not mak-
ing any money on it.
Judge Mack. Why ?
A Member. The remaining money for the 20 years is still on de-
posit. TVlio gets the interest on it?
Judge Mack. I don't quite catch your problem.
A Member. Suppose, if you convert the policy into a 20-year en-
dowment policy.
Judge Mack. Suppose a man is 25 when he wants to convert, and
he wants a 20-year endowment policy, which is expensive and iv groat
luxury. His policy is di^.e w'heu he is 45. Is that right?
A Member. Yes.
Judge Mack. It is not going to be paid to him in a lum_p sum.
Congress has provided that it shall not be paid in a lump sum, but in
20 annual installments; $10,000 on the 3| per cent basis brings
$57.50 a month straight over a period of 20 years. Now, if the man
lives until he is 65 he will have gotten all of that, and if he dies be-
fore G5 his family will get wdiatever he has not got, just the same
whether it is endowment insurance or life insnraiice. Does that
answer your question ?
A Member. Judge Mack, there may be cases in which men want
insurance and who have no relatives of the classes prescribed. Will
they be allowed to take insurance?
Judge Mack. Yes; they may take the insurance, and in case of
total disability it w^ill be payable to themselves, and in the future
they may get some of those rclatiA^es that they haven't now.
f Laught<3r.] If they should be so unfortunate as to acquire no such
relatives and to have nobody whatsoever within the permitted class,
and if Congress adheres to the rule laid down in the present law —
which I did not favor, do not favor, and shall attempt to get
changed — I can not say with what success — that man's policy would
go to his Government, because he has nobody else in the world to
get it.
A Member. In that case, as a practical matter should we write in
that situation in the policy?
Judge Mack. No; that is taken care of by the law. You do not
need to wnte anything in the policy. If you will look at that bulletin
No. 1 ^ving the terms and conditions and giving you a sample policy,
you will find in it tliis statement :
" If no beneficiary within the permitted class be designated by the
insured, either in the insured's lifetime or by his last will and testa-
ment, or if any above designated beneficiary is or "becomes disquali-
fied or does not survive the insured, the insurance (or if any above
designated beneficiary shall survive the insured, but shall not receive
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 65
all the installments, then the remaining installments) shall he [nxy-
able to such person or persons within the permitted class of Ikmk-
liciaries as would undei- the laws of the insured's place of residence
be entitled to his personal property in case of intestacy."
Kow, (he man can change that whenever he pleases, because ho
can change any beneficiary whenever he pleases, and he can tell the
de]>artinent " I said my wife shall get it, and then the next of kin
shall get it. My next of kin will be my children and I do not want
my children to get it. I want my property to go to somebody else
if my wife dies or after she dies." He can change that whenever
and as oft<?n as he pleases, but if he then dies and his wife dies bo-
fore him and he has no next of kin within the classes permitte<l
under the law, and there is nobody therefore who can take the in-
sm-ancc inider the law, the insurance falls to the ground and the
Government does not have to pay anybody ; except only this, that if
he has converted his insurance, and if therefore he has a kind of
insurance that he could have sold out to the (lovernment the day
before he died — what we teclinically call insurance that has a re-
serve value, an insurance that has a cash surrender value, an in-
surance that does not eat itself up as a term insurance does, an
insurance in which there is something more than insurance by the
year, in which you make an investment for the future — and that is
the kind of insui-ance which it will be converted into — if that is the
kind of insurance that he has, his estate will be paid the whole re-
serve value; his estate will get whatever he could have sold out for
before his death. That is the only value of the policy if there are no
beneficiaries within the class.
A Membkk. When the policy is fiirst gotten for the man who haa
no relatives, could he write down in the blank the name of the
beneficiary in the blank left for the name of the beneficiary that fact?
Judge Mack. Write down nothing in that. If he does not want
to designate anybodj' he does not have to, because the printed part of
the policy says that it goes to his next of kin, and if he hasn't any
next of kin at his death, then it automatically goes to the Govern-
ment, because there is nobod3'^ the Go\ernment has obligated itself
to pay.
A Member. A number of men have not bean able to give their ages
to me. How would we handle that situation? They don't know
when they were born nor whore.
Judge ISIack. The only thing that you can do in those cases is to
get their best judgment as to their ages and to have them endeavor
the best they can to get their ages, and advise them to give them a
little too high rather than too low. because if thoy give them too h)w
and it is afterwards determined that they have given them too low
and they die, they would only have the amount of insurance that the
sum that they paid would l)uy at their proper ago. Suppose it costs
twice as much at age 40 as it does at age 20, and suppose a man says.
" My age is *20," and he pays, say, $7 for $10,000 ni.stead of paying
$14.*^ Now, that man afterwards is discovered to be 40 instead of
20; and they would get only $5,000 of insurance instead of $10,000,
because that is all that $7 would have paid for. I give that as a
striking and impossible example to illustrate merely that it is wise
for the man who doesn't know his age or the date of his birth — and
56 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
there are plenty of tliose men — it is much better to give his age too
high than to give it too low.
A Member. Suppose a man is porm.ancntly, though not totally, dis-
abled. He must pay the full premium regardless of his rec^uced earn-
ing capacity ?
Judge Mack. Yes.
A Member. I notice in the application for insurance that we au-
thorize the necessary deduction from our pay. Now, in case we
decide not to carry that insurance, what is necessary, written notice?
Judge Mack. Yes.
A Member. That is sufficient?
Judge Mack. Yes. A man can send in notice to tlie War Risk
liureau, " I do not want your insurance an}^ more." That ends it.
A M£:mber. Judge Mack, you stated that it would be unnecessary
ill the event of a man Avith no dependents to put anybody in as a
beneliciary in the aj)plication.
Judge Mack. He does not have to put in anybody if he doesn't
want to. He can always put in somebody afterwards, because, as I
said before, we have already put in somebody for him. We have
put in the class that would be entitled to his insurance in case he
died intestate.
A Me:mber. I understand that, but wouldn't that create an im-
j)ression in the mind of the bureau that the applicant has made a
mistake by failure to state dependence. Wouldn't it be better to
make an explanation of the fact that there was no beneficiary rather
than send it in blank?
Judge Mack. I think not. The bureau might want to ask in those
cases, but I think it would be better to take it up as an individual
matter. As Mr. De Lanoy says, as to enlisted men, he would get
the information from his allotment blank.
A Member. Of course you would not liave that as to an officer.
Judge Mack. You sec the man insured in that case would get a
copy of his policy and he would find that there was a blank there
iind if he Avanls to correct that all he needs to do is to send in word
of his mistake.
A Member. I would like an interpretation of the Government
allowance relative to class A and clas-s B. Take a man getting $30
under class A; he has deposited $15. Now, for one additional de-
])endent in class B, he has to allot one-seventh of his pay. Suppose
lie has two or moie dependents additional in class B. Would he
have to allot one-seventh for each of those in class B?
Judge Mack. No. The total allotment to class A need not exceed
(•ne-half of his pay. The total allotment of class B need not exceed
one-half of his pay if he is making no con)pulsory allotment to class
A. If he is making a compulsory allotment to class A of one-half
of his pay, he must then, if he wants to get an allowance for class B,
make an allotment to class B. It Avill not be to each person in it. but
it must not be less than $5 a month and it need not be more than
one-seventh of his pay. That is the most, but that would be in ad-
dition to the half pay that he allots to class A. If this is not clear
under the law, it will be made so by regulation.
A Member. In a case of this kind Avhich is liable to come up. a
man enters the service and has no de])endents. His mother and
father and sisters are living. The father dies during the term that
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 57
he is in the ser\ ice, and in oi\\vr foi- liis nufthcr imd sistei- to appi'oach
the standard (if living tliat lliey did prior to his term, it will he neces-
sary for tiiat man to contrihnte. Wonid it he possihle for him to con-
tiiHie Hn(h'r that dass B and tluMi <rot the Government allowance?
Judge Mack. I said in ans\ver to that same question on Tuesday
that that is going to be a question of interpretation by the bureau.
I believe the bureau Avouhl have a right, and if they have tlie right I
have no doubt that they will exercise it by giving a liberal interpre-
tation to those wor^ls that the relatives of class B must be dependent
upon the man and that the amount to be given shall not exceed the
amount hahitually contributed l)y him during dependency. Now,
there is one case, the case j'ou put, which is not covered by the express
letter of the law. It Avas covered by the express letter of the law. as
has been pointed out, with reference to compensation of a widowed
mother, w^ho must also be dependent. In reference to a widowe*!
n!<:ther the law says that she u\n>t have been dependent, or the situa-
tion be such that she would have been dependent upon him. In other
words, if at the time of his death there is no widowed mother, but if
in the next month the father died, so that the second month he has a
widowed ruother. inasmuch as the amount to be paid is to be dtHer
mined month by month, that widowed mother would receive compen-
sation provided she is dependent upon him. But of course she can
not be literally dependent ujjon a dead man. Therefore the language
was put in " Or would have been dependent upon him.'' Now. if the
family relation is such that she would have been dependent u})on him
in life, as, for example, if he were the only son of a father who had
died, then she can get that compensation nnder the compensation
clause. Now, under the allotment and allowance section the words
used are not "would have been dependent upon him"' or "that the
amount that he would have contributed if he had contributed any-
thing because of the dependency," but the statement is "the amount
that he habitually contributed during dependency." My judgment
is — I can not answer positively, because I am not going to be the at-
torney for the bureau — but my jndgment is that those words can be
fairly interpreted to mean the same as the language used in the com-
pensation section, namely, that if there is such a condition that the
mother would from month to month be dependent upon him, that
then she can get what he normally would contribute during depend-
ency to her, and that would have to be a question to be determined
from all the circumstances of the case. I do not say that ihis inter-
pretation can be made. I do not know. It is one of the questions
that will have to be determined by the bureau in the future.
A ME:\rnER. Suppose a man has been discharged froni the Army.
Of course, after the war he converts the policy. It is left optional on
his part the form he prefers. Through misfortune or otherwise,
remuneration for his labor in case he is dependent upon his labor
ceases. Is there some provision made whereby he can deposit this
policy until he can take up the payments again i
Judge ^Iack. No; payments are obligatory in an insurance policy.
A Member. Thev act as their own collateral, do they not ?
Judge ISIack. This is the theory of insuriuice. You are insuriuix
for the time being and you pay for the time. The regulations have
allowed you a period of grace. In the first place, in private com-
panies tliey always require you to i)ay in advance. The Government
58 LIFE INSURAXCE^ ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
has said, " TVc will trust you until the end of the month." The
Government says, " If necessary, we will trust you another month.
AVe will give you 30 days of grace in which to pay." Now, under
this term insurance, just because it is term insurance, just because,
as I said, it is like fire insurance, from month to month, at the end
of the mouth there isn't anything left. You have had what you paid
for, namely, the insurance, and there isn't anything left there that
belongs to you, so there is notliing tliat you could borrow from the
Government. There is nothing that the Government could use to
protect you if 3^ou failed to pay after tliat, but they are willing to
protect you an additional month notwithstanding that.
Now, if you have converted your policy into one of the other forms,
these other forms give you more, for this reason, that in addition to
buying prot<'ction from month to month you are also buying an in-
vestment. You are building up something for the future. Now, in
an endowment policy you are building up a great deal for the future.
You are making a pure investment in addition to buying insurance.
But even in an ordinary life policy you are building up something
for the future which in your 3'ounger days is an investment. I tried
to ea:phiin that life insurance is founded on this. You contribute the
annually increasing amount you ought to pay for the risk that the
insurer runs in carrying you, because as you grow older the chances
of your dying increase. Now, the converted policy would not be of
that kind'. The converted policy will be the kind that companies
ordinarily issue. We will take the cheapest form, ordinary life.
You are going to pay the same amount during your whole life, but
to pay the siime amount during your whole life means that in your
younger days you are paying more than the cost of the insurance,
and in your old age, you are paying less than cost. If it costs to carry
$1,000 $8 and you are paymg $15, what is that $7 that you ara
paying? I will explain to you what that is. That $7 put away and
earning 3 J per cent compound interest will represent the amount that
the company Avill need in your older years to make up the deficiency
cost. We will say that to-day it costs to carry you $8, and j-ou are
payirig $15. The day will come when it will cost $20 to carry you,
still you will pay only $15; in this way the company can afford to
carry you for the same amount each year. In your younger years
you pay more. In your later years you pay less. If you live longer
than the average of your age, it will cost you more than the com-
panies and you expect. If you die earlier, then it costs the company
more. All insurance is based upon the fact that on the average the
men insured are going to live at least a certain number of years. In
fact the companies have taken a low period and their policyholders
are going to live longer than that on the average and that explains the
profit.
MEN IN TRAINING CAMPS.
Director De Lanoy. Gentlemen, in the matter of members of training
camps, officers' training camj)s, they are under the act and may there-
fore apply for insurance before they are discharged from tlie camps.
Those who do not get a commission, however, must arrange to pay
yjremiums after leaving the camps, to the War-Risk Bureau, as natu-
rally insurance lapses if payments are not made. Men who have
taken out insurance and who receive commissions must notify the
Bureau of War-Risk In.surance, so that proper entries of rank, com-
UFE INSUBAXCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 59
pany, and legiinent may bo made on their policies, and arrangements
made for deduction of premiums from their pay. Men in these train-
ing camps are suljcct to compulsory allotment and their families
entitknl to family benefits. Unless their families ajiply for it, men
in the present oAicers" training camps are exempted from the com-
l)nlsorv ulh.tments in view of the fact that the camps tei ininate on
November 2G. Men in the training cam})s are entitled to compensa-
tion nnder the act, and regulations ^vill be made along these lines by
the liureau.
ALLOTMENT AND ALLOWANCE FORMS.
Judge Mack. Notv, gentlemen, let us take up this allotment and
allowance blank.
A Memrek. I want to call attention to ^vhat might be misunder-
stood in the blank. The voluntary allotments are now, of course,
paid by the various bureaus, Navy Department, etc. Now, on these
blanks here it says that allotments must be made unless a special
exemption is granted by the bureau.
Judge Mack. That is what I am going to explain, because the in-
s-tructions are on the opposite side, and the instructions explain all
of that. But I am going through the instructions first to call your
attention to it.
The first thing is the penalty. T call your attention to that. The
men must know that if they are going to lie willfully about the filling
up of these blanks it is a serious matter. In connection with that let
me turn to the other side: "My full name is," "Home address,"
"Date of birth,-' "Age nearest birthday." Now, of course, if a man
does not know, he ought to say, "As near as I know ; as near as I can
judge," or something of that kind. " Present rank," " Present sta-
tion." " Date of enlistment."
A Me-aibkk. Current eidistment, time drafted into the Federal
service ?
Judge Mack. The date of di-aft into the Federal service; yes. Of
course that isn't so important for the men who are in at the present
time. That is important for the men that come in after this act goe.s
into efl'ect. It is simph- a question of the date from which these
things begin, and all the men who are in on the 6th of October or
1st of November will be afl'ccted as to the allotments anyway.
NoWj note the next. This is his statement:
I hereby certify that the folU>wJnK-nnniod persons aiul no others come witliia
the chiss of my wife, former wife divorced, or child as doliiiotl in the net, and
entitle<l thereunder to eompulsory allotment, and that the informntii)n stattnl
opposiK' their ri'spwtive nainps is rorret t. (If as to any of tlics*^' tJH're Is no
person so related to you, v. rile " None " iu the namt- eoluinn.)
Now, the point aViout that is we want fo know whether a man has
these people: and if so. the information in regard to them; and if
not, we want him definitely to say that he hadn't any. We d(»n't want
him to come back afterwards and try to sneak out of that by saying,
'• I did not say anything. I did not deny that 1 had a w ife. 1 simply
did not give her name." We want a p«-)si(ive statement, and we
have told you how to get that positive statement. I do not mean to
say that he has got to write ''None'' a half dozen tirae.s. He can
make a bracket there, signifying wife and children or use ditto marks
or write "None" as to all of them. It is immaterial, but we want
the information in the answer — yes or no. He has or he has not;
60 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
and if he has not, we want him to say so. If he has, we want him to
give the information.
NoAV, to go back to the other side. " Form 1 is to be filled out for
each enlisted man in the mijitary or naval forces of the United States
(' enliste<.r men here means either a male or female')" — that answers
the question as to the yeowomen — "" enrolled or drafted into active
ser^'ice and includes noncommissioned and petty officers and members
of training camps authorized b}- law."
Of course where v>e say "" Date of enlistment " they can say the
time they went in.
A jMember. They have enlisted for three months.
Judge Mack. Before going into the training camp?
A Member. They enlist for the period of the camp.
Judge Mack. Then they are enlisted men ; that answers that.
A Member. This is to be filled out in ink?
Judge JVIack. Yes, sir.
A Member. I would like to call attention to what is a serious omis-
sion on this blank. There is no place to give organization.
Another Member. No soldier is permitted to sign any paper in the
Army without putting his rank afterw^ards, so that when he signs at
the bottom of a page he w^ill always put his rank underneath.
Judge Mack. Then when he signs his name, you have all the in-
formation.
A Member. It says here, " I hereby make voluntary'' allotments in
addition to compulsory allotments, as follows." It seems to me that
that should be in the first part where he makes the compulsory allot-
ment, because, if I understand you, if he gave $20 a month to his
wife before he made this allotment the Government will only give
him $5. He gives $15, and the Government gives him $5. That is
how I understood you.
Judge Mack. Wait; you have a total misunderstanding. Let me
get it clear. Otliers may have the same understanding. I was talk-
ing about the divorced wife, not about the \yife. What you under-
stood about the wife referred only to the former wife divorced.
I said as to the former wife divorced, that the highest amount that
she could get was the anuxmt of the alimony. Up to that she can
get the same as a wife, and has both an allotment and an allowance.
But if the allotment alone is sufficient to pay the order, the amount
of her alimony decree, then she does not get any allowance. She
can not get more than her alimony decree provides that she shall get,
and the allotment must be used first and then the allowance. That
is, if the allotment is not used by the present wife and children.
Judge Mack. A wife and childion are absolutely entitled to the
allowances that are fixed in the bill. The only way they could be
deprived of them would be if they waived them or if the Government
for some reason exempts a man and takes away the allowance. Oth-
erwise the wife and cliildren got the amount fixed by laAV. More-
over, the man nuist give them the allotment in addition to what the
Government gives them ; that is compulsory,
A Member. He must also fill out, then, this bottom blank about
allowances.
Judge Mack. Certainly; because they get the allowance only on
application. A woman, even a woman and children, do not get the
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 61
allowanro htiIcss tlic iippJicilKMi is mkkIc f< v it. Thi'V ^«'t tlic allot-
ment, Ijtit not the allow anee unless an apj^lkation is made for it.
That application may be made by the man; it may be made by the
Avoman herself; it may be made l)y the children: it may be made in
their name and on I heir behalf by anyliody else.
A Mkmukr. I know of a case in our company where a man was
married last year in November, say, and he and his wife parted in
the sprin<j. fie knows that he has got a wife, and lie knows that his
^vife was j)re.<inant when she left him, but he does not know lier
V herealjouts.
Judge Mack. He had better give as much information as he can.
Under those circinnstances he had better say that her last place of resi-
dence A\as so-and-so. The last he heard of hei- was so-and-so, and
that he may have a child and that he may not. The last he knows
was that she was pregnant, and that she left him at such and snch a
time and at such and such a place. That wonld give sufficient infor-
mation to investigate; but he mu.st give the best information that he
can. If he can not give exact information, let him state that it is
not exact. Let him be honest ; that is the main thing. Let us keep
on with this form.
The first thing is the relationship, wife, child, and divorced wife;
then the post-office address, date of birth. They want to get the ages,
the ages of the children; not the age of the wife or of the divorced
wife. That isn't material. It is the ages of the children that is
material, because the childivn do not get these allowances after they
have reached the age of 18 yeai's unless they are insane, idiotic, or
permanently heli)less. Therefore you will find, turning back to the
instructions, that " child " includes certain people, and you will find
that if any child is permanently helpless you should write in the re-
marks column, '"helpless." The reason for that is that if the child
is over 18 and is still heli)less the allowance goes on. If the child is
18 and is not permanently helpless, then the pay as to that child
ceases.
Of course, If the chihhvn are married they do not get the money,
and therefore the question is asked as to whether they are married or
not. And so if a divoiced wife has remarried she does not get any-
thing. It is only until she remarries; and the amount payable
monthly hy coiirt order must be given, showing what she is to get.
Now, the reason for other information is noted in the instructions.
" ' Child ' includes child legally adopted befoie April 6. 1017, or more
than six months before enlistment, whichever date is the later.''
That is, if a man enlists on October 20. and he had adopted a child
six months befoi'e he eidisted, that would be .Vpril 20 instead of
April (t, that child would come within the act. The j^oint about it is
that Congi'ess did not want a man to adopt a bunch of children in
order to get allowances for them. So a peiiod of six months before
enlistment was fixed. If a man had ad()i)ted children before that
time they ai-e just as much entitled to his allowance as if they were
his own children. So, too, a ste])ihild. if a member of his household,
is the same as a child; and certain illegitimate children, too. The
law states the exact situation as to illegitimate children. They must
be, or must have been, acknowledged in Avriting by the father, or a
court must ha^e ordered him to contribute to th-'ir support.
62 LIFE iin-suraxce, etc., foe soldiers and sailoes.
A Mk-MREr. You need to put nothing for them but "Ack.," if 5^011
liave acknowledged or are willing to acknowledge them.
Judge Mack. That is all.
A Member. If it correct that this blank is the only blank to be filled
out for allotment and allowance?
Judge Mack. Yes; both in one.
Anotuer Member. Suppose I started to fill in this blank. Under
the head of pay, we will say $30. Now, besides a wife and child, we
will say he has a grandmother or mother. Would he put in the
'joluinn of allotment anything in that case?
Judge Mack. If he wants to allot to her.
A Me?jber. lie must allot $5, must he not ?
Judge Mack. It is not a question of what he must allot, it is a
question of what he wants to allot ; the sum total of what he wants to
allot each one. and if he wants to he can add an allotment for tlie
wife and children over and above the compulsory allotment.
A Member. Would the bureau pay that?
Judge Mack. Yes; it will deduct it from his pay if that is sufficient.
A Membfj?. I thought these outside matters would be deducted by
other departments.
Judge Mack. No; by the bureau.
A Member. Suj^pose he wants to give $5 to his grandmother and $5
to his mother; that is $10. That being the case, the bureau would
send to the mother $15 and $15 to the grandmother.
Judge Mack. What do you mean by saying the bureau would
send it?
A Member. He makes an arrangement to send some money to these
people. How much will the bureau send ?
Jiulge Mack, How much additional allowance will it send?
A Member. I know what they are goin^to send to the wife. They
will send $-10 to the Avife and child. Now, he wants to make an
arrangement to send $5 to the mother and $5 to the grandmother.
Juclgc Mack. The mother and grandmother together will get a
check for the $5 allotment apiece, which makes $10, and $20 from
the Government, which makes a total of $30 for mother and grand-
mother together.
A Member. Who will get that check, the mother or the grand-
mother ?
Judge Mack. Each will get a check; the inother will get at least
$5 and the grandmother at least $5. I should say that each would
get $15.
A Member. Is there any special form of application for allow-
ance and allotments?
Judge Mack, That is what you have before you.
A Me'mber. I mean for the beneficiai'V",
Judge Mack. No; this goes to the Government. The form for
the beneficiary to sign is not yet prepared.
A MEivrBER, Is one to be attached to this?
Judge Mack. No ; this goes out to the man. Of course, the example
that you gave did not call for more than $50 from the Government.
I only want to repeat I hat the Government does not add over $5©
under any circumstances.
LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. G3
Now, coming back to the fonn. you seo (he slatoinont thai iho
allotment of pay is compulsory. The instruction she^t tolls the rea-
son and the amount of the compulsory allotment.
Then comes the statement that I went over with you this mornin;]^,
that marriage will be conclusively presumed if the nxaii and woman
have lived together in the open acknowledged relation of husband
and wife during two vears before this time. Of course, there ougrht
to be added, unless you h;ive a hiisb;ind or wife living."
A Memtu-ir. a question in regard to that: What form of such
proof is to be presented, and at what time? In other words, are
you to submit such proof of marriage at the time you make your
allotment, or would that develop from investigation?
Judge Mack. That would develop from tlie irivestigation. Your
statement will be sufficient prima facie.
A Mfmber. Judge Mack, my imtlerstanding is that this blank is
also to l>e filled out by commissioned officers for the compeiLsation.
Judge Mack. Can you fill out anything for compensation before
you are injured? When you are once injured, a blank will be sup-
plied. Give the full name of a wife or mother in the form of " Sarah
Jane Smith"' instead of "Mrs. John William Smith."
Then comes the statement :
Tliese allotments may be waive'! upon written consent of wife or divorced
wife, siipportetl by satissfactory evidence as to her ability to .supiwrt herself and
children.
Yon may allot whatever yon -wish from yonr pay remaining after de<luctin,!}:
the compulsory aliotTviciits, if any. to suih person or persons ns yon direct, sub-
ject, howcvi-r, to regulations pri>scril)e<l by the Secretary of War or tlie Secre-
tary of the Navy.
Allotments are not compul.sory toward the support of parents (including
grandiiaionts and step-parents, \\hether of the man or of the wife), jrrand-
children, brothers, and sistei"s, whether of tlie whole or the half blood or
thi-onsrh adoption, or stepbrothers and stepsisters, but must be made, imlcss
sj>ecial exemption is granted by the bureau, if you want them to get a Govern-
ment allowance. In that event your allotment to them nuist equal the CSovern-
ment allowance stated below except, first, that yon need not allot to them more
than half yoni' pay, and. se<'on(l. that you must jillot 1o (hem at least !i;5 a month,
or one-seventh of your pay, whichever is greater, if you are allotting to wife,
divorced wife, or child, riid at least i?to a month if you are not allotting to wife,
divorced wife, or child.
A Member. The yeowomen — if they make an allotment to parents,
will the Government add to that?
Judge Mack. Certainly. I said this morning that they are going
to be treated exactly as men would be treated under the same circum-
stances. Now, if a man makes an allotment to his parents and that
allotment is less than he has been habitually contrilmting, the Gov-
ernment Avill add to the extent of $10 to one parent and $20 to two
l^^arents and $5 to ench additional.
Judge Mack (reading) :
If one-half of your pny is not allotted, regulations by the Secretary of War
or Secretary of the Navy m;iy require that any portion of such of your half psiy
as is not allotted shall be tleposited with interest thereon to your crwlit.
Family allowances according to the amounts in the following schedule will
be jtaid l\v the Unitinl Stntes to your wife or child while you are making com-
pulsory allotments to them.
The monthly allowance, however, shall not escee<l $50.
64 LIFE INSURANCE^ ETC., FOE SOLDIERS AXD SAILORS.
The monthly allowance to a former wife divorced shall l)o imyahle out of the
difference, if any. between the montldy family allowance to a wife and children
and the sum of .$50.
For a wife living separate and apart, under court order or written agreement,
or to a former wife divorced, the monthly allowance toiiether with the allot-
ment, if any, shall not exceed the amounts spwilied in the court order, decree,
or written asreemeut to he paid to her.
For an illegitimate child to whose support the father has been judicially
ordered or decreed to contribute, it shall not exceed the amount fixed in tlie
order or decree.
Note. — The amounts of the allowances to others than wife. diYorce<l wife,
and child will he paid only if they are actually dependent upon yon and, added
to the allotment, shall not exceed the average sum habitually contrii)uted by you
to their support monthly during the period of dependency but not exceeding a
year immediately preceding your enlistment or October 6, 1917.
If any allowance is paid to wife, child, or divorced wife, the total allowance to
be paid' to the other stated dependents shall not exceed the difference between
the total allowance paid to wife, child, and divorced wife and the sum of $50.
That means that $50 is the most that the Government Avill pay under
an}^ circumstances.
After YOU have that compulsory allotment part filled in, then the
voluntary allotment, and the relationship to the man, whether it
is his father, mother, sister, or brother, wiioever it may be, you -svill
read, " Upon the basis of the foi'egoing information, which I hereby
certify to be correct, I hereby apply for allowances for the following
persons." Here he inserts the names of the persons for Avhom he
Avants the allowance — wife, children, divorced wife, father, mother,
brother, sister, or grandchild.
A Member. May I a.sk one question : What are you going to do when
you can not reckon Avhat the average contribution was?
Judge Mack. You .should reckon the best you can. Suppose a man
has an old mother living in his household. He did not give her
cash. He keeps it in the family. What is that board and living
worth ? He must make an honest determinat ion of what that is worth.
A Member. Just what we think would be the amount thnt it would
cost. There is no criterion to decide by.
Judge Mack. I can't give you any. I don't know of any.
A Member. If a man gets $100 a month, now. he Avill have to allot
$25?
Judge Mack. He may have to allot $50.
A Member. To wife and children?
Judge Mack. That is all.
A Member. He doesn't lune to allot $45, just $25, to a wife and
one child?
Judge Mack. Quite right.
A Member. Then his wife would get a check for $50. Noav, he has
got a mother and grandmothei', and he has got $15 to pay if he Avants
to give each one $25, and he puts that down here. That being the
case, the Government Avould not add anything?
Judge Mack. It will add to that if he has been giving them more
than $25 before.
A Member. He only gave them $10.
Judge Mack. Then the Government' Avould not add auA'thing.
A Memp.f.r. The War Insurance Bureau Avill send that allotment
to grandparents. Avill the}'?
judge ^Iack. Yes.
LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 65
A Mi:Miu;it. Tlie reason I asked that is because the various depart-
ments do tliat now.
Judge Mack. That is a matter that is going to be recommended.
A Mkmmeh. Then the allotment is made tlirough this bureau.
Judge Ma( K. He makes it on this Idank. Thoy will attend to how
they send out the checks. The coinniand'-ig olKcer need not bother
about that.
A Memhki}. On the allotment formerly in use regulations formerly
required that they be witnessed by the company comuiander.
Jutlge Mack. Ves.
A Member. Now, these can be witnessed by anybody. Do I uiuler-
stand rightly?
Director De Lanoy. They should be witnessed by the company
commander.
A Member. AVhat will become of the allotments that are now in
f(uce^
Judge Mack. Well, the allotments that are now in force will be
subordinatetl to those that are made in this blaidc, and if a man wants
this to take the place of it, all he needs to do is to revoke the allotment
now in force. Any nuin can revoke allotments that he has nuide.
Now, if he wants both of them to be kept up the}' can be. If he wants
to revoke them, he can.
A Member. I would like to ask a question. There has been some-
thing saitl about officers making allotmejits. That is not covered
under this bill.
Judge Mack. That has nothing to do with this bill. Another law
provides that they may make allotments, but that has nothing to do
with this bill.
A Member. In the right-hand corner is a place for approval by the
War Department. Xow, if these forms go out to ditferent branches
of the Navy they may think it doesn't apply to them.
Judge Mack. That Avill be changed to War and Navy Depart-
uients.
A Member. If I may ask a question about this allotment: Suppose
a man is getting $50 a month and has a wife. He is entitled to allot
$1.5 or $20 in his case. Suppose ho has a voluntary allotment now in
force under which he is liable to $40 to his wife. That allotment
automatically stops under this legislation.
Judge Ma( k. Not unless he revokes it. The $15, $20, or $25 would
be assumed to be part of the $40.
A Member. Then if ho fills this out and puts $40 down hero she
gets the allowance just the same?
Judge Mack. Yes, she gets the allowance anyway; he asks for it.
A Membeh. He does not have to uudvo two allotments?
Judge Mack. Ho doesn't make tho allotments. That is compul-
sory. If he wants to make an additional allotment, let him put his
wife's name down again.
A ME^rBER. The present allotuiont will stop?
Judge Mack. Yes.
A Member. Mr. De Lanoy said this morning that the old allot-
ment would be fused with the new. He allotted $20 to his wife and
now under the bill she would receive $15 half pay.
19808°— 17 5
66 LITE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
Judge Mack. Yes, that is true ; if you had heretofore allotted $20
and fill out this form, your compulsory allotment would be taken as
part of that $20, if you say $20 is the total that you want to allot.
The way to do it is this : If he has a wife and no child, his compul-
sory allotment is ,$15. Now, in the space for additional voluntary
allotments he will put his wife down for $5 — that makes $20 in all
out of his pay.
A Member. And no other action on the part of the soldier neces-
sary ?
Judge Mack. No. He says, " I make this allotment in addition to
the compulsory allotment," if any. He need not as to his wife and
children fill out the habitual contribution column. That is only as
to other dependents. But if he Avants his wife to get more than the
$15 that he is compelled to allot, then he fills in this amount for the
additional allotment that he wants to make.
INSURANCE APPLICATION FORM.
This question has been raised: If a man takes out his insurance
now, he has to pay for October; if he waits until the 2d of Novem-
ber, he does not have to pay for October. That is true; but it evens
itself up in the long run. If a man wants to take the chance of being
killed any day, he can do so.
A Member. If he takes it out now, he is only charged for the pro-
portion, isn't he?
Director De Laxoy. He will have to pay for the full month.
Judge Mack. But insurance is due from the moment you take it
out. Suppose a man takes it out to-day. The only difference is that
instead of getting 30 days credit he gets 15 days. He does not have to
pay any more. That carries him not only for the half month already
passed l)ut the half month in the future. While he pays at the end
of the calendar month, he is jDaying in the middle of his insurance
month. He will never have to pay more than the amount for that
month, because the insurance goes from month to month. His pre-
mium advances at the thirteenth monthly payment.
A Member. While we are talking insurance, will you tell us about
the beneficiary on this application. Suppose a man puts in his
wife and his children. In case of the death of his wife and at the
same time his, or following his own death, how would it go? Sup-
pose the wife and child are both alive; does it go to one or both?
Judge Mack. I ought to have told you this. Now, 3^ou see, there
is room there for three, four, or five different names and the amount
of insurance that you want each of them to get. Now, suppose you
want your wife to get it all. Suppose you have children. You really
need not say anything about your children if you want your wife to
get it all at first, because if you were to die your children are your
heirs; they are the first people to come in after your wife. Suppose
3'ou want your wife to get half and the children half; put down your
wife for $5,000 and your children for the other $5,000, and then two
policies would be issued, one to the wife and one to the children,
jointly, and to the survivor of them.
A Member. Sup])ose you wanted it all to go to the widow, if she
is alive, and in the event of her death to your brother?
Judge Mack. Would your brother be your natural heir, or would
he not?
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 67
A Memrek. No; he might or he might not, in accordance with
other lehitives.
Judge Mack. After your children come your brothers and sisters,
according to the hiw of some States.
A Memmkk. You can have three or four brothers and sisters alive,
but want one to get it.
Judge Mack. You could put him in as a, contingent beneficiary if
you want to.
A Memher. That is just what T did do.
Another Membeh. You stated that the wife would get the policy.
Would tlu; policy be sent to the beneficiary or to the insured — the
policy itself?
Judge Mack. It will be sent to the man unless he names someone
else.
A Member. A little while ago you stated that in the case of death
of the soldier and there were no heirs in the two classes A and B
the insurance reverted to the Government. Is that correct?
Judge Mack. Well, I didn't put it quite that way, I don't know
just what you mean by A and B.
A Member. The beneficiary named in the policy.
Judge Mack. Yes; in case there was no beneficiary who came
within that class.
A Member. Then, how would you interpret this part of section
402. "If no such person survive the insured, then there shall be paid
to the estate of the insured an amount equal to the reserve value"?
Judge Mack. I will explain that. I explained that this forenoon,
I explained it in this w ay : That after a man converts his policy, the
kind of policy he gets has a reserve value, and I explained that there
would be j^aid to the estate of the man, even if he left nobody within
the class, the amount for which lie could have sold it to the Govern-
ment the day before he died, and that is the reserve value or sur-
render value. This is the amount which I explained this morning
the Government saves up for him. That is the reserve value. In
the term insurance there is no reserve value; in the convertible there
is. Now, if he dies and leaves nobody entitled to his insurance, his
estate will get that reserve value and the rest will not be paid.
A Me3iber. I want to ask: There are two limits that have been
specified, two compulsory limits — one is not less than $1.5 and the
other is net more than half your pay. Now, won't that be covered
lai'gely by the number of dependents?
Judije Mack. Alt( gether by the nuniber of dependents; because
the allotment is equal to what the Government gives subject to these
two limitations. Now, suppose the Government gives $32.r)0 to a
wife and two children. That means the allotment must be $32.50,
But there are two limits. It can't be less than $1;"). But it can't
be more than half his pay. So that if he gets $40 pay he must
allot $20.
A Me:mber. Then a man, if he has a wife who wants an allotment
of $15 from the (ilovernment, only has to ]>ut up $15. irresjjective of
the reouirements?
Judge Mack. There is no other requirement. The requirement,
subject to these limitations, is that he put up what the (lovern-
68 LIFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
ment allows. The Government puts np $15 and he puts up $15.
Take the case of a $80 private who has one child, no wife. The
Government puts np $5. What must he put np? He must put np at
least $15 and at most $15. He equals the Government allowance bnt
with a minimum of $15. And even if he had $50 pay he would have
10 put up only $15 and the Government $5 for that one child; but he
could voluntarily allot more.
A ^Member. In the case of an allotment of a man who has no wife
or children, but has another to whom he wishes to send a sum of
money, what is necessary to be clone?
Judge Mack. Then he makes a voluntary allotment and he doesn't
ask for any allowance. He wouldn't get it, anyway, except for a
member of class B.
A Member. Should the Secretary of Wf r or Secretary of the Navy
provide regulations for compulsory deposits in an outside fund,
would it have to be refunded in monthly payments by the Govern-
ment ?
Judge Mack. Xo: there is no basis for that.
A Member. I want to present the following resolution :
We. the members of this conference, express om* deepest appreciation of the
efforts and kindness of the officials and their associates who have so patiently
presented, explained, and discussed the various matters pertaining to this con-
ference.
We present that as a slight testimony of our appreciation of your
efforts.
Judge Mack. Xow. gentlemen, on behalf of my. associates as well
as myself, of course. I acknowledge your expression and I want to
repeat what I think I said — if I did not say it. I ought to have said it
at the outset of my remarks on Tuesday — that I can never be tha.ik-
ful enough for the real privilege that came my way in having been
given this sort of an opportunity, an opportunity that accords so
fully with my personal wishes. If I had been asked to choose the
sort of war service that I should like to perform, it would have been
just this sort of service. No man deserves, no man wants thanks for
what he is doing in connection with this war. Each one of us is en-
deavoring to do the best he can, ought to be endeavoring to do the
best he can in whatever field he has been called or has volunteered
f)r has been drafted into the service of his country. We are all
felloAv workers for the same cause. One is doing one thing, the
other is doing the other. Our end and object is the same — to make
our side prevail, in order that civilization may be bettered, in
order that the opportunity for every man on the face of the earth
may be increased, in order that democracy may prevail. And the
full spirit of democracy at home would never prevail if the whole
people failed to give at least a reasonable measure of justice to each
one within his sphere. This act is intended, as I said at the outset,
to grant that reasonable measure of justice to those of you who are
going to encounter the risks that you are facing, that you will face
on behalf of your fellow citizens and on behalf of the world. It has
been a very great pleasure to me, a tremendous inspiration for me to
be able to be with you, and I am sure that I shall be excused for
departing from my official duties on the bench, the position in which
UFE INSURANCE, ETC., FOR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. 69
I am appointed primarily to serve my fellow citizens, in order that I
nii<rhl be able to help alon^ in the understanding and in the admin-
istration of this particular act.
I express to you thanks on behalf of tlie Treasury Department,
althoujfh I am not authorized to speak for it. I have nothing to (lo
with the Treasury Department, except as a vohmteer. I wish,
on behalf of your fellow citizens generally, to express to you their
thanks for the work that you are goino; to do for your fellows in the
Army and the Xavy as the result of the information that you will
take with you from these three days of conference here.
1 trust that the whole proceedings have been mutually heli)fid
and mutually stimulating. 1 know that from oiu- siile thty have
been greatly so.
Director De Lanoy. Now, as far as the director is concerned, the
big task is ahead of him. I want you to feel that you can come to nie
personally or by letter. I stand here, and will continue to do so,
with an open mind. I want all the suggestions, all the help, you can
give me. Please be patient. I will do my best.
o
i
I