William Bauchop Wilson to Woodrow Wilson

June 25, 1917.MEMORANDUM IN RELATION TO PROPOSED RULES ANDREGULATIONS TO BE PRESCRIBED BY THEPRESIDENT UNDER THE MILITARYESTABLISHMENT ACT OFMAY 18, 1917.– – – – – – – – – – –I submit the following thoughts for consideration:First: That the draft should not be made by any system of lottery of the persons between the ages of 21 and 30, inclusive, but the number desired should be selected by calling all of the men between specific ages, as between the ages of 21 and 23, inclusive, or between the ages of 28 and 30, inclusive, or between the ages of 24 and 26, inclusive, or any combination of these. This would get away from the possibility of any claim of partiality or fraud on the part of those intrusted with the selection.
Second: In industrial communities provisions should be made for a representative of labor and in agricultural communities for a representative of agriculture on the district boards.
Third: The district board should not have authority to decide which industries, including agriculture, are necessary to the maintenance of the military establishment, etc. That should be determined in a general way by the President or some board acting for him. When the industries, including agriculture, necessary to the maintenance of the military establishment, etc., have been listed by the board acting for the President, the district board should then pass on the question of whether or not the applicant for exemption is engaged in any of the industries named and whether his continuance therein is necessary to the maintenance thereof. The consideration should include the question of whether or not the local supply of labor is so short in the industry in which the applicant is engaged as to make his continuance therein necessary to the maintenance thereof. When any applicant makes claim for exemption on the ground that he is engaged in an industry necessary to the maintenance of the military establishment, etc., and the industry has not been listed as such by the board acting for the President, such claim should be referred to it for decision. To require any workmen to prove in each instance when he makes claim for exemption that the industry in which he is engaged is necessary to the maintenance of the military establishment, etc., seems to me to be placing the burden of proof on an individual who is not in a position to furnish the evidence. He should only be required to do so in specific lines of industry which have not been recognized by an established general agency as necessary to the maintenance of the military establishment. When he has submitted his proof in such a case it should be passed upon not locally but in a way that will give it general application. The applicant for exemption on industrial grounds or those applying in his behalf should only be required to prove (1) that he is engaged in an industry that has been listed as one necessary to the maintenance of the military establishment, etc., and (2) that his continuance therein is necessary to the maintenance thereof, which may require proof that the supply of labor available for the industry in which he is engaged is locally inadequate for the requirements.