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"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, whatplement 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'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 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 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 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][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,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 ani>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 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 oftt 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 entitlee 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 sprine 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 descril)eecial 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 esceeut 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