NEW JERSEY 
 
 SAYS: 
 
 6 
 
 "NO!" 
 
 '/ covet for New Jersey the 
 honor of showing the way 
 to liberty * * *." 
 
 — Gov. "Woodrovv Wilson, in 
 his second annual message 
 to New Jersey Legislature. 
 January 14, 1913. 
 
 REPORT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 COMMISSION 
 ON MILITARY 
 TRAINING AND 
 INSTRUCTION 
 
 IN 
 
 HIGH SCHOOLS 
 
 TO THE 
 
 NEW JERSEY 
 LEGISLATURE 
 
 SESSION OF 1917 
 
 Reprinted in full by the 
 American Union Ae^ainst Militarism 
 
REPORT 
 
 To the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey : 
 Pursuant to an act of the Legislature of the State of New Jersey, 
 entitled "An act to create and provide for a commission to investigate 
 and report upon military training and instruction for national defense 
 in high schools," approved March i8, 1916, the following were ap- 
 pointed to serve upon a commission known under the act as the "Com- 
 mission on Military Training in High Schools": A. Dayton OHphant, 
 Assemblyman from Mercer County, Chairman; WiUiam W. Smalley, 
 Senator from Somerset County; Henry Snyder, Superintendent of 
 Schools, Jersey City; Don C. BUss, Superintendent of Schools, Mont- 
 clair; and Winfield S. Price, of the New Jersey National Guard. 
 
 The Commission suffered a serious loss in the death of Senator 
 Smalley, which occurred December 27, 1916. He was deeply inter- 
 ested in the work of the Commission and took an active part in its inves- 
 tigations up to the time of his illness. 
 
 After their appointment the members of the Commission met and 
 organized and arranged for a series of public meetings to be held in 
 different cities of this State. All persons interested in the subject of 
 military training in the schools were invited to attend these meetings 
 and address the Commission, or to submit to the Commission any per- 
 tinent printed or written data or information. Each meeting was ar- 
 ranged for well in advance of the time for its holding, and press notices 
 were duly placed in the papers published in the vicinity of the place of 
 holding each meeting several days in advance of the date of the meet- 
 ing. The meetings were held at Trenton, Newark, Plainfield and 
 Jersey City. 
 
 The Commission has given full consideration to all communications 
 which have been presented to it and to all available information bearing 
 upon the subject under investigation, has thoroughly studied all plans 
 of military instruction followed in this country and other countries, or 
 proposed for consideration, and has made a special study of the military 
 instruction offered to the pupils in the high schools of the State of 
 Wyoming. 
 
 Photo of President Wilson on cover copyrighted by Harris and Ewing. 
 
*• ^ ^ t 
 
 I- 
 
 Those who urge the mihtary training of pupils of the high schools 
 urge it mainly as a preparation for manhood service in time of war. It 
 is not claimed by recognized authorities, so far as we have been able to 
 ascertain, that such training of pupils will be alone sufficient to make 
 efficient soldiers. It must be admitted that to be effective it must be 
 supplemented by adequate special training subsequent to the period of 
 school attendance. This State has not made provision for such supple- 
 mentary training. Nor has the National Government provided the 
 method or the means whereby adults maybe trained in sufficient numbers 
 to supply the demand in time of need. 
 
 Many persons, who advocate military training in the schools, regard 
 it alone as sufficient for military purposes. This view is very super- 
 ficial and would not be mentioned here except for its prevalence. Such 
 persons do not carry it to its logical conclusion, and perhaps do not desire 
 to do so. Juvenile training must, at some time, be followed by manhood 
 training and service; otherwise it can have no value. 
 
 Furthermore, no effective plan of universal military service by adults 
 or even of the service of classes of adults, selected for the purpose of 
 limiting the number, has been adopted by this State or the National 
 Government. The Commission is aware of the constitutional and 
 statutory provisions made by the nation and the State for the service of 
 the militia of the State, but does not regard these as constituting such a 
 plan. 
 
 It follows that an inquiry such as this, which is limited to the pro- 
 priety of military instruction in high schools, must be too narrow, since 
 it cannot include a consideration of the subsequent and much larger and 
 more highly specialized part of the course of instruction which may be 
 designed to train the soldier. It follows equally, logically, that in the 
 absence of any sufficiently comprehensive plan of the service of adults, 
 the pupils for whose military training we may lay the foundation may 
 never desire or be required to serve as soldiers. 
 
 A complete course of instruction of any kind must aim at definite 
 results and must be designed in its entirety to secure these results. A 
 thorough and satisfactory study of the problem under consideration 
 
2 
 
 would include the whole course of military instruction necessary to pro- 
 duce the efficient soldier, in which the military instruction of high 
 school pupils, if required or desired, would be only preliminary or funda- 
 mental. As has been said, your Commission is not expected to consider 
 the larger problem, but reasoning backward from the results to be 
 secured by a complete course of instruction has endeavored to reach a 
 conclusion as to whether it is necessary or desirable that military in- 
 struction in high schools should form part of such a course. 
 
 Just as it is difficult to consider the military instruction of high school 
 pupils without keeping in mind the rest of a complete course, so it is 
 difficult to see why New Jersey or any State should feel obligated to 
 assume the burden of training soldiers for the national defense without 
 the full cooperation of the other States and of the Federal Government. 
 The common defense is a matter of national concern and duty. While 
 the citizens of this State may feel impelled by patriotic fervor to assume 
 military service, their numbers cannot be large enough unless the citizens 
 of the other States feel the same impulse. For a similar reason, the 
 State is not justified in acting alone, without similar action by othef 
 States, in imposing on the pupils of its high schools the duty of military 
 preparation. In saying this we do not wish to be understood as desiring 
 to urge that the pupils of this State ought to be relieved of the duty of 
 preparing for participation in the common defense, but do desire to 
 insist that such isolated action will be insufficient and comparatively 
 useless. Congress has power "to provide for the common defense" by 
 training those who are included in the militia. It has no power to direct 
 the courses of instruction in the schools of the States. Nevertheless, 
 the military instruction of adults and of the pupils of the schools is a 
 matter of national policy and must be treated as such either by Congress 
 alone, or by Congress in cooperation with all the States. It has been 
 said that if the States legislate independently in the matter, the instruc- 
 tion will be diverse and will follow as many courses as there are States, 
 and that there can be no harmony of action. We do not object to such 
 independent legislation for that reason, but for the reason that there 
 will be no certainty of proper action in any State, that military training 
 will be found "in spots," and might just as well be omitted. 
 
 1 
 
3 
 
 n. 
 
 It is not easy to justify the selection of the high school pupils of the 
 State as the only young people who shall be the recipients of military 
 training. The duty of the common defense is one which belongs prop- 
 erly to all who are physically capable, and none should be deprived of the 
 opportunity of qualifying himself, if such opportunity is offered to any, 
 to perform this duty effectively. It cannot be claimed that the boys of 
 the high schools are exceptional, and that they are the only ones who can 
 receive this instruction profitably. If there is any advantage in it, all 
 boys equal in age and physique to high school boys can receive it with 
 equal probability of profit. If it is claimed that the reason for provid- 
 ing this instruction for the high schools is that the pupils can best aff'ord 
 the time for it, it must be answered that very many of these derive an 
 income from labor out of school hours which enables them to at tend 
 school. These are as worthy of exemption from military instructi ra as 
 those who leave school because they lack the ambition to continue their 
 leducation or because they are compelled to do so by circumsta aces. 
 Whether this instruction is compulsory or optional with pupils ol' the 
 high schools, if required or oft'ered at all, it should apply to all boys, out 
 of school as well as in school, of prescribed ages and strength. 
 
 Such exercises of a military character, as have been introduced into 
 high schools, have not served appreciably to induce pupils to remain in 
 school, or, in other words, to render inoperative those influences which 
 tend to make pupils leave school. It must be concluded, therefore, that 
 if military instruction in high schools is regarded not as a privilege but 
 as an obligation, it will impose an additional burden upon education, 
 which the pupils over fourteen years of age may evade by leaving school, 
 if they so desire. It will, therefore, serve to counteract the influence of 
 the stimuli, statutory and social, which are applied for the purpose of 
 prolonging school attendance. 
 
 Military training and service, if they are necessary, are an obligation 
 of citizenship, not of education alone. 
 
 It is difficult to contemplate with satisfaction or even complacency the 
 social cleavage which is bound to result from a system of military in- 
 
struction which is applied to high school pupils and not to other boys. 
 To assign or reserve the privilege, or duty, or obligation, however it is 
 regarded, of preparing to fight for the country to the better educated 
 class is just as repugnant to democratic ideals as was the practice in days 
 long gone by of leaving it to the nobility. To select high school pupils 
 for this training is open to the same objection as would be a plan of 
 selecting adults for actual military service solely on the basis of their 
 occupations or professions, a plan which would receive no consideration. 
 
 It may be said that military training in high schools can be defended 
 on the ground that the higher education of the pupils makes it possible 
 that they will become officers. But if this is so, what provision is there 
 for training the private soldier? 
 
 Considering the proposition from all points of view, we are forced to 
 the conclusion that it is suggested not by a consideration of military or 
 educational propriety, but by the existence of the public-school organi- 
 zation. In this case, as in many others, the ease with which the plan 
 may be grafted on it, makes a stronger appeal than the merits of the 
 plan or the probability of its success. 
 
 m. 
 
 Thus far we have considered the proposition of juvenile military 
 instruction as involving the separation of the boys of the State into two 
 classes, viz., those attending the high schools and those not attending 
 these schools, and have given specific reasons for concluding that it is 
 not advisable to use only the former for military purposes. There are, 
 however, many important considerations of a general character, which 
 apply with especial force not only to the military training of high school 
 boys, but to that of all boys in all secondary and elementary schools, and 
 which must be mentioned in this report. 
 
 It is specially significant that none of the great nations of Europe, in 
 which the military service of adults has been universal and compulsory, 
 and which have shown phenomenal efficiency in the present war, has 
 thought it necessary to resort to the military training of its boys. With 
 
5 
 
 the most instructive and convincing example of these nations before us, 
 does it not seem incomprehensible that our State and National Gov- 
 ernment should seem to shrink from the compulsory military training 
 and service of adults and at the same time prefer to consider the imposi- 
 tion of compulsory training upon minors, whose dependent condition 
 prevents the possibility of the refusal of such training? Even the federal 
 military system of Switzerland, which exacts compulsory service from 
 men over twenty years of age, and which is looked upon with much favor 
 as being peculiarly adapted to a republican form of government, does 
 not impose compulsory training upon school boys. 
 
 Military authorities are by no means united in its advocacy. General 
 Leonard Wood has recently said, " Personally, I do not believe we should 
 give the training until the year in which the youth becomes 19." Gen- 
 eral Baden-Powell said, "Drill a school boy and spoil a soldier." 
 
 The military training of boys gives no assurance that they will enter 
 military service voluntarily when they become men. It is well known 
 that comparatively few of those who have been members of school cadet 
 corps enlist as members of the National Guard. The recent experience 
 of AustraUa is significant. Although it has for some years had compul- 
 sory military training for males between fourteen and twenty-six years 
 of age, and its people might consequently be regarded as prepared and 
 zealous for service, the number of enlistments in the present war has 
 fallen far short of the expectations and requirements of Great Britain. 
 Furthermore, the people by referendum last fall rejected the proposition 
 to adopt conscription or compulsory service in the greatest crisis in their 
 history. On the other hand, in our Civil War, New Jersey, without 
 preliminary training of any kind, either of men or of boys, furnished 
 10,000 more men without conscription than the National Government 
 required. 
 
 Training in the real work of the soldier, to be of value, should be con- 
 ducted under conditions which are as nearly like actual war conditions 
 as it is possible to make them, and should include such operations as 
 entrenching, marching with full service equipment, all the activities of 
 camp life, abundant practice in the use of weapons — rifles, bayonets, 
 
6 
 
 grenades, machine guns, artillery of all kinds.* It must be admitted 
 that boys of high school age cannot undergo practical training of such a 
 strenuous character with any hope of success, and, it must also be said, 
 without fear of serious injury. At the same time, it ought to be said that 
 much of this work of real training could not be done because of lack of 
 facilities. 
 
 IV. 
 
 It is sometimes claimed that military training is the best agency for 
 inculcating obedience. But if this claim is carefully considered it will 
 be found that obedience to military authority is generally unthinking. 
 It is often blind and superficial, not real. During actual war men will- 
 ingly undergo training because the work is definitely motivated; but 
 when peace comes and men go into barracks, they feel that there is 
 nothing of value in drill and there is a consequent tendency to evade its 
 requirements. This kind of obedience has been and may be secured by 
 similar school methods. It is obedience under restraint. When this is 
 removed, laxity in discipline often follows. The discipline of the schools 
 aims not at isolated acts of obedience under special circumstances, but 
 at the habil of obedience to elders and persons in authority. It is a psy- 
 chological fallacy to suppose that obedience to military authority, indeed, 
 obedience exacted under any peculiar circumstances, may automatically 
 be translated into the general habit of obedience. The same may be 
 said of such qualities as alertness, promptness, industry, truthfulness, 
 etc. It is by no means capable of demonstration that those who have 
 had military training, or been subject to military discipline, are superior 
 to other citizens in the possession of these qualities. 
 
 V. 
 
 The development of patriotism in our youth is sometimes urged as a 
 reason for introducing military instruction in the schools. Military 
 
 * See the testimony on the worthlessness of "conventional military training," 
 given by Major William C. Harllee, of the U. S. Marine Corps, before a subcom- 
 mittee of the Senate Committee on Military Affairs, January 5, 191 7, and re-printed 
 in the Congressional Record, February 17, 1917. Note by American Union Against 
 Militarism. 
 
7 
 
 forms and observances may furnish opportunities for the manifestation 
 of patriotic feeUng, but they cannot be regarded as its cause. They 
 cannot even always be regarded as evidences of its existence. There 
 are more effective, more certain methods of teaching real, intelligent 
 patriotism. Emphasis must be placed upon the study of our country's 
 history, of its social and economic development and relations, of its 
 principles and institutions, of its provisions for the prosperity, happi- 
 ness, and welfare of its people, and of its civic and social life, and not 
 upon such a single, narrow activity as military instruction. 
 
 Obedience, patriotism, orderly behavior, and other desirable traits 
 which have been or might be mentioned, are not results peculiar to 
 military training, nor are they qualities which belong peculiarly to 
 military service. They are qualities which every upright, useful citi- 
 zen ought to possess, and which it is the aim of all school discipline and 
 school exercises to develop and train. Instruction in them is ethical 
 and moral, not military. It is only by impressing upon pupils the truth 
 that they are necessary in all walks of life, and not only in the military 
 sphere, that this kind of instruction may be made universal and thor- 
 ough. 
 
 The education of the schools is fundamental and aims to train pupils for 
 life. For this purpose the whole school period is needed. Real military 
 instruction includes exercises of a highly specialized character and aims 
 at specific purposes which are unduly emphasized and are thus likely to 
 draw the pupil's attention away from the chief purpose of his education. 
 Military training must aim at military service, but military service will 
 not be the chosen occupation of many boys. 
 
 VI. 
 
 It has been our aim to consider effective military training as dis- 
 tinguished from military drill and such similar activities as are often 
 found in schools, and to give our conclusions thereon, particularly as they 
 concern high school pupils. It may be inferred from what has been said 
 that we are opposed to military training in toto. Such an inference is 
 not justified. While the limits of the problem presented to us do not 
 
/ 
 
 8 
 
 r 
 
 permit us to discuss the subject in its broader aspects, it is proper for us 
 to say that we beHeve it is the duty of the citizen to defend the country 
 should the nation decide that circumstances require it. Wliile, as we 
 have said before, it is not within our province to express any opinion 
 regarding the necessity of the compulsory military training and service 
 of adults, it is proper for us to express our conviction that, if it should be 
 determined that preparation for defense in the form of military training 
 is necessary, this should frankly be exacted of those who by reason of 
 maturity and strength of body are able to receive it profitably and not of 
 frail boys. 
 
 The term military training or military instruction is generally misun- 
 derstood or misused. Very few who use these terms think of them as 
 designating the intensive, specialized form of instruction which is de- 
 signed to train the soldier effectively for the practical work of actual 
 warfare as it is now carried on. What most of those who discuss the 
 matter have in mind is military drill, or the exercises of a military charac- 
 ter in which the members of a cadet corps participate. There is a vast 
 difference between such training and the military training which we have 
 been considering. The former with its drills and parades is commonly 
 regarded, even by military authorities, as seriously deficient as a scheme 
 of up-to-date military training. To quote an Australian military 
 authority, "Big parades are not our ideal, nor of any great practical 
 value." 
 
 vn. 
 
 It is to the class of military drill that the Commission would assign 
 the practice in the high schools of Wyoming, which, as has been said, 
 members of the Com,mission observed. In all the cities of the State the 
 membership in the cadet corps numbers only about three hundred. 
 Very little, if any, of the instruction belongs to the category of real mili- 
 tary training. No evidence of regular, persistent rifle practice, or of 
 instruction in the activities of military camp life was found. On the other 
 hand, experience in these activities has been very desultory. Nearly all 
 
9 
 
 the exercises are those which are commonly performed on the parade 
 ground or in school halls, and are characteristic of the school cadet corps 
 with which all are famiUar. Special attention has been given in some 
 schools to "wall scaling," an activity which seems military in character, 
 but which in the actual performance is a purely acrobatic exercise. 
 There is no reference to the ultimate purpose which it ought to serve 
 and for which it is practiced in the army. As conducted in the schools 
 of Wyoming it aims at physical agility and perfection in team work, 
 stimulated by the keen competition which is encouraged and must be 
 regarded as belonging to the domain of physical training. No system- 
 atic plan, followed generally by all the schools, could be discovered; 
 indeed, it is difficult to conceive of any well organized State plan for 
 systematic military training in a commonwealth where only one high 
 school employs a physical and military training instructor, and where 
 the supervision of the drills in all other high schools is delegated to one 
 of the regular teachers, who is paid a small additional compensation for 
 his services. In one city wall scaling was the predominant activity, 
 while military drill was regarded as subordinate. In others the latter 
 was emphasized, while wall scaling was neglected. In one school mem- 
 bership was compulsory for all able-bodied boys, in the others it was 
 voluntary. There was no similarity in the uniforms adopted. In one 
 school the cadets wore a naval uniform. In one school both boys 
 and girls were required to wear uniforms constantly during school 
 sessions. The requirement that girls should wear uniforms was due 
 to social reasons, not military. The practice of enlisting girls as 
 "sponsors" seemed not generally followed. Where the practice was 
 observed, the girls were not instructed in first aid, bandaging, and 
 other duties commonly considered appropriate to girls, but were ex- 
 pected to attend the drills and other exercises for the purpose of influ- 
 encing the personal demeanor of the cadets and stimulating them in 
 their work. While instructors and cadets showed great enthusiasm, 
 the narrowness and monotony of the instruction were clearly demon- 
 strated by the abandonment of wall scaling in two schools, one of which 
 
lO 
 
 had made a record for rapidity, and the abandonment by one important 
 city, whose high school maintained a cadet corps for several years, of 
 the whole plan of military drill. It should be noted that the University 
 of Wyoming, located at Laramie, which gives compulsory military 
 instruction to its students with national aid, has not organized a cadet 
 corps in the high school connected with its normal department. On 
 the whole, while training of a special character may in some cases give 
 special bent or inclination, the exercises of these schools have little 
 military value. At the same time, information which we received proves 
 that the special stimtilus to habitual correctness of personal conduct, 
 which military drill is claimed to give, has no exceptional force. We 
 must commend the enthusiasm of those who organized the cadet corps 
 in the several cities and have maintained the instruction in them, and 
 the high ideals of physical attainment and of ethical conduct which they 
 inspire the cadets to try to reach, but we are forced by our observation 
 to conclude that better and more lasting results in these directions can 
 be secured in other ways. 
 
 If the State should be inclined to consider this form of training, not- 
 withstanding its deficiencies, it should keep in mind the cost. During 
 the year J915-1916, 46,103 pupils were enrolled in the high schools of 
 the State, of whom 24,716 were girls and 21,387 were boys. If we elimi- 
 nate boys who are under age or physically unfit, we should still have 
 available for compulsory training many thousands for whom equipment 
 and instructors would have to be provided. It is clear that the plan 
 would cost many thousands of dollars each year, while the results 
 obtained would be comparatively negligible so far as real military pur- 
 poses are concerned. It is not necessary, however, for this State to 
 incur the great expense involved. In accordance with Section 56 of the 
 Act of Congress, approved June 3, 1916, and with General Orders No. 48 
 of the War Department, dated September 19, 19 16, the Secretary of 
 War is authorized to supply military equipment and instructors for 
 pturposes of military training to schools under certain conditions. Con- 
 
I 
 
 1 1 
 
 has thus recognized the propriety of- handling the matter nationally 
 ■elieving the States of the expense. We are informed that Con- 
 has not as yet made adequate financial provision to carry the act 
 :ull effect. Whether legislative action by the State is necessary to ' 
 )rize the schools to apply the act is a question which should be 
 mined by legal advice. At any rate, if such action is necessary, we 
 )t recommend it, because, for reasons which have been made clear, 
 o not favor the introduction of any form of military training, as 
 into the schools. 
 
 lile military drill is acknowledged to be inadequate for military 
 OSes, advantage is claimed for it as a means of character develop- 
 , of strengthening those desirable personal qualities which are 
 ned to be peculiar to the soldier, and as a means of furnishing exer- 
 )r physical training. We have already pointed out that the devel- 
 ;nt of character should be and is the object of all school exercises, 
 :hat the assumption that military exercises furnish the only or the 
 means of securing it has no foundation. No evidence has ever been 
 ;nted which demonstrates that members of the school cadet corps 
 etter morally or are more free from moral defects than other school 
 
 vin. 
 
 a sole means of physical training it is condemned almost univer- 
 by experts in that subject. Dr. Sargent, of Harvard University, 
 " It is not an adequate means for physical training, being not only 
 limited in its activity, but actually harmful in its effect on boys 
 than eighteen or twenty years of age. It does not offer sufficient 
 irtunity for the development of the individual's powers of muscular 
 mental coordination, and the exercise of judgment under unusual 
 trying circumstances." Dr. Ehler, of the University of Wisconsin, 
 , "Military 'drill' is an enthusiasm-killing, contempt-developing 
 Imill. Preparedness involves * * * primarily and funda- 
 
 I 
 
12 
 
 mentally the possession of vitality, endurance, integrity of structure and 
 function of every organ, alertness, bodily skill, self-control, hardihood, 
 courage — in other words, the fullest development of the physical, mental, 
 and emotional powers, the result of real physical education * * * _ 
 Let us not confound drill with training, nor substitute 'military drill' 
 for physical education." 
 
 The difficulty experienced by all military companies organized in 
 schools, in which membership is voluntary, in retaining their members, 
 and the frequent disbandment of such companies, testify to the monot- 
 ony of their work and their failure to offer permanent attraction to the 
 young. 
 
 But in the matter of genuine physical training, in the full realization 
 of the tremendous importance of the development and maintenance of 
 the bodily vigor of boys and girls, of men and women, in the systematic 
 and persistent training of all the members and organs of the body to 
 perform their functions accurately and successfully, in the desire to 
 maintain a nation of healthy people, we are all on common grounds. 
 
 Military authorities admit that the fundamental aim of every form 
 of military training must be to cultivate physical health and strength. 
 As Dr. George Fisher, Secretary of the Physical Department, Inter- 
 national Committee, Y. M. C. A., and New York State Military Train- 
 ing Commissioner, puts it, " In the training camps in England it takes a 
 full year to get the men in condition after they enlist. England's experi- 
 ence in this war indicates that the big problem is not primarily the 
 training of the men in military tactics or drill, but conditioning the men. 
 Therefore, the lesson to us should be to discover what methods can best 
 be used to put and keep men in good physical condition." 
 
 If any evidence of the accuracy of this opinion were needed, it is 
 necessary only to consult the records of the United States War Depart- 
 ment. The Surgeon-General has courteously supplied us with the fol- 
 lowing statistics concerning applicant for enlistments in the United 
 States Army: 
 
13 
 
 Number of applicants for enlistment in the United States Army, furnished by the several 
 recruiting districts, together with the number accepted or rejected in said districts, 
 fiscal years ending June jo, igii to 1915. 
 
 Fiscal years 
 ending June 30. 
 
 Total 
 Number of 
 Applicants. 
 
 Accepted. 
 
 Rejected. 
 
 Niunber. 
 
 Per cent 
 of total 
 Applicants. 
 
 Number. 
 
 Per cent 
 of total 
 Applicants. 
 
 191 1 
 
 1913 
 
 1914 
 
 1915 
 
 Total for 5 years 
 
 Annual average 
 
 136,978 
 149,693 
 123,664 
 
 168,527 
 168,842 
 
 29,041 
 
 31,587 
 21 ,268 
 35,902 
 39,245 
 
 21.2 
 21 . 1 
 
 17.2 
 21.3 
 23.2 
 
 107,937 
 1 18, 106 
 102 ,396 
 132 ,625 
 129,597 
 
 78.8 
 78 9 
 82 .8 
 78 7 
 76.8 
 
 747 . 704 
 
 157,043 
 
 21.0 
 
 590,661 
 
 79.0 
 
 149,540 
 
 31,408 
 
 
 118,132 
 
 
 Note. — These only include applicants accepted at recruiting stations. They are 
 then sent to Recruit Depots where they are further critically examined by medical 
 officers. 
 
 It will be noticed that these statistics are based on preliminary exami- 
 nations at the recruiting stations, and do not include the final examina- 
 tions which reduced still further the number of men accepted. 
 
 Of 41,168 who volunteered for enlistment in 1915 in the U. S. Marine 
 Corps, only 3,833, or about nine per cent, were accepted. 
 
 Of the men who were in the National Guard of the States when mo- 
 bilized on the Mexican border last year and mustered into the United 
 States service, all of whom had been subject to military training and 
 service and were assumed to be physically fit, thirty per cent had to be 
 discharged because of physical disability. 
 
 It is evident that even if the training of our youth had military service 
 only as its aim, that training should be physical, not military. 
 
 On the other hand, all the statistics furnished by the reports of medi- 
 cal experts in connection with the medical inspection of school children 
 and college students in all countries, of the medical examiners of life 
 insurance companies, and of all organizations for whose employees a 
 sound body and health are requisites, testify unanimously and strongly 
 to the wide prevalence of serious physical defects, which greatly inter- 
 fere with the efficient and satisfactory performance of the duties of civil 
 
14 
 
 life. In order therefore that all citizens may be properly trained and 
 prepared to perform effectively all their duties, no matter what they may 
 be, we recommend and strongly urge that the necessary steps be taken 
 to provide for all the schools of the State a complete and thorough sys- 
 tem of physical training. This system should be compulsory on all 
 pupils, and should include carefully selected exercises adapted to the 
 different ages of pupils and designed to protect their health, stimulate 
 bodily functions and promote physical strength. It should apply to 
 all girls as well as boys. It should aim to prevent bodily abnormalities 
 or deformities, or to correct them, if they are found to exist. It should 
 include personal and community sanitation, first aid in emergencies, 
 bandaging, and all forms of instruction in personal safety. It should 
 encourage outdoor activities. It should provide abundant games for 
 all pupils in which group activities are prominent and in which appeal 
 may be made to the spirit of competition. It may include those features 
 of military drill which properly serve the purposes of physical training, 
 but which must be regarded as subordinate to these purposes. It may 
 even include practice with the miniature or the service rifle, if such prac- 
 tice is regarded as necessary to develop steadiness of nerve, bodily con- 
 trol and accuracy of sight. In the case of such exercises the educational 
 error does not lie in their use, but in the exaggerated military purpose 
 which they are made to serve. All the features and exercises of the 
 thorough course of physical training which we recommend should be 
 intimately connected and interrelated, on the one hand, with the moral 
 or character forming instruction of the schools, and on the other, with 
 the complete provisions for medical inspection which have already been 
 made compulsory by law. 
 
 We take the liberty of submitting herewith two bills which embody 
 the recommendations made above regarding compulsory physical train- 
 ing, and hope that they may be enacted into law. 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 A. DAYTON OLIPHANT, Chairman, 
 
 HENRY SNYDER, 
 
 DON C. BLISS, 
 
 WINFIELD S. PRICE. 
 
15 
 
 r/fw report effectually killed the attempt definitely to fasten com- 
 pulsory military training upon the secondary schools of the State, 
 though the Legislature, as a sop to the militarists, amended the physi- 
 cal training acts referred to so as to give the State Board of Education 
 the power to add military training to the course if it so desires. It 
 is permissive, not obligatory. The Secretary of State reports that the 
 Board has not availed itself of the opportunity presented, although the 
 law has been in force since March 23, iQiy. Others add that the 
 Board is extremely unlikely to do so in the face of the unanimous 
 and carefully considered report of this Commission. In the absence 
 of action by the State Board of Education military training can be 
 imposed on the secondary schools of a given school district or munici- 
 pality only by a majority of the voters in a local referendum on the 
 issue. — Note by the American Union Against Militarism. 
 
 — May, 1Q18. 
 
". . . universal military conscription, a curse — although it may at times be 
 the less of two evils — but in itself a curse to civilization, to nationality, to progress, 
 to humanity, and to education." — Senator John Sharp Williams, of Mississippi, 
 March 29, igi8. 
 
 AMERICAN UNION AGAINST MILITARISM 
 
 Organized to Oppose the Adoption of a Permanent System of 
 Universal Military Training and Service 
 
 OFFICERS 
 
 Oswald Garrison Villard, Chairman 
 Amos R. E. Pinchot, Vice Chairman 
 Agnes Brown Leach, Treasurer 
 Charles T. Hallinan, Executive Secretary 
 
 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 
 
 Emily G. Balch , Owen R. Lovejoy 
 
 A. A. BerlE James H. Maurer 
 
 Herbert S. Bigelow Mary McMurtrie 
 
 Frank Bohn Henry R. Mussey 
 
 Crystal Eastman Mary White Ovington 
 
 John Lovejoy Elliott Norman Thomas 
 
 Edmund C. Evans Alexander Trachtenberg 
 
 Zona Gale James P. Warbasse 
 
 John Haynes Holmes L. Hollingsworth Wood 
 David Starr Jordan 
 
 HEADQUARTERS. 
 
 203 Westory Building, Washington, D. C. 
 Telephone Franklin 5930. 
 
 Send us your name, and a contribution if you can. 
 
 "When a permanent military policy comes to be adopted, it will doubtless be 
 conceived in a spirit ... so restrained as in no event to . . . excite 
 the apprehension of nations with whom it is our first desire to live in harmonious and 
 just accord." — From annual report, 1917, of Secretary of War Newton D. Baker. 
 
GEN. BADEN-POWELL 
 
 SAYS: 
 
 D R I L L A 
 
 BOY 
 
 AND 
 
 S P O I L 
 
 A 
 
 SOLDIER