Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

CIRCULAR No. 8.

MY DEAR REPRESENTATIVE:

LYNN, MASS., Dec. 30, 1918.

This Camp, which I have the honor to command, desires to call your attention to the especial qualifications of Rev. William F. Dusseault, Chaplain of the Department of Massachusetts, United Spanish War Veterans, for the office of Chaplain of the Massachusetts House of Representatives.

Rev. Mr. Dusseault is a native of this State, and now resides in Essex County (Lynn), Massachusetts. He was educated in the public schools of Somerville and finished at Tufts.

Mr. Dusseault's wide experience as chaplain of great organizations of men for the past thirty years, we believe, has peculiarly fitted him for the honorable position to which he aspires. He has served as a military chaplain for the past twenty years. He was commissioned chaplain of the old Massachusetts 6th Regiment, and when war broke out with Spain he was mustered into the service of the United States and served with this regiment in Porto Rico. While off Cuba he was requested by Captain Sigsbee, of the ill-fated battleship "Maine,” then in command of the auxiliary cruiser "St. Paul," to go ashore at Guantanamo and act as chaplain to the famous Marine battalion after their heroic fight.

During the trouble on the Mexican Border he was with the officers of the 6th Regiment in Framingham, training the boys for active service, and when our country entered the European war he gave up all his church work and devoted his energies to the welfare of the boys and the winning of the war. In appreciation of his services he was promoted to major, enjoying the singular distinction of being the only chaplain so honored.

Mr. Dusseault is Chaplain of the Department of Massachusetts, United Spanish War Veterans, and has held the office of Chaplain-in-Chief for three terms. He also has the endorsement of our great parent organization, the Grand Army of the Republic. He has been lecturer for the Massachusetts Volunteer Militia Publicity Board for several years. He delivered the address on the National Guard for the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company's Fall Field Day at Atlantic City, N. J., in 1916, and in June, 1917, again made the National Guard address under the same auspices at the Copley Plaza, Boston. At that time he was in the regular United States service.

He was a minister of the Universalist Church, an able and forceful speaker, and is intensely American and patriotic.

We advocate the candidacy of Mr. Dusseault, on his patriotic service and his long experience in work along similar lines, to that of Chaplain of the House.

Very sincerely yours,

JOHN R. MALONEY, Commander,
For the Committee.

CIRCULAR No. 9.

DEAR SIR and COMRADE:·

BOSTON, MASS., Jan. 22, 1919.

The Department Council of Administration meeting held January 16 discussed the proposition of the relationship of our organization to the veterans of the present war, and the council felt that the matter was of such vital importance that a general meeting of the prominent and influential members of the Department of Massachusetts should be called to handle the subject.

The meeting will be at 41 City Hall, Boston, Sunday, January 26, at 3 P.M.

You are most urgently requested to be present and to bring any Comrade with you who you feel is interested.

The importance of this meeting cannot be brought to your attention too strongly. Report promptly.

[blocks in formation]

SIRS: On January 28 the Committee on Public Service gave a hearing on Senate Bill No. 87, asking preference for veterans of the Spanish and German wars equally with veterans of the Civil War, with certain restrictions. (Read copy of Bill enclosed.)

On January 29 the Committee on Reconstruction gave a hearing on several bills for preference, including Senator McKnight's bill, No. 283, which proposes to suspend civil service for two years. There was much opposition to Senator McKnight's bill, principally on account of the effect it would have on the police and fire departments, and because it gave no real or permanent preference. No such opposition was offered to Senate Bill No. 87.

[ocr errors]

The question was raised by Senator Charles L. Gifford, whose father is a veteran of the Civil War, and besides drawing a pension of $40 per month from this government, is entitled to a preference in the civil service under the so-called Veterans' Preference Act, and has always opposed - to the present time the granting of this preference to the veterans of other wars. "Don't you think the men would rather be given a sum of money for their services?" (Like the British gave the Hessians!) In answer let me say this: Although it is more than twenty years since the Spanish War, our organization has not asked the government to pension the men for their services. We, like the veterans of the World War, ask no charity,

but work! The Rev. Philip A. Nordell, Chaplain-in-Chief of the Grand Army of the Republic, and a Comrade of Senator Gifford's father, said at the hearing that the veterans of all wars should be given this preference as a matter of justice. Now, these two gentlemen radically disagree. In your estimation, which opinion is right? It is universally agreed that our boys did a very thorough job "over there," and you, sir, as a member of the Massachusetts Legislature of 1919, have the same opportunity to do likewise. Do not consider temporary or anonymous propositions. Give the boys of this war what was given the veterans of the Civil War.

Mr. Arthur H. Brooks, for many years a paid lobbyist for the Civil Service Reform Association, submitted a proposition to give the boys some sort of preference; in fact, every one seemed to agree that some preference should be given. The question was, how much? Mr. Brooks submitted another plan, somewhat different from his own, to grant a preference, and when asked by a member of the Committee on Reconstruction as to its author, he stated it was anonymous. Gentlemen know what class of people usually circulate anonymous matter! The person who did this is a paid agent of this same Reform Association. It is left to your judgment what weight should be given this person's evidence. Mr. Brooks, who endeavored to impress the committee with this anonymous matter, has persistently opposed preference, to the present time, and would have you believe that the man who bared his breast to the furnace of fire is unworthy of any consideration from the government and State he so faithfully served. How does the opinion of Mr. Brooks impress you when weighed against that of the immortal Washington? I quote from Washington's address upon the dissolution of his army, Newburgh, N. Y., June 8, 1783: —

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Where is the man who wishes to remain indebted for the defence of his own person and property to the exertions, bravery and blood of others without making one generous effort to repay this debt of honor and gratitude? In what part of the continent shall we find the man, or body of men, who will not blush to stand up and propose measures purposely calculated to rob the soldier of his stipend, or the public creditor of his due? Suffer me to recommend those of this description belonging to your State, to the warmest patronage of Your Excellency and your Legislature.

Very truly yours,

TIMOTHY W. KELLY,
Department Commander.

CIRCULAR No. 11.

MARCH 12, 1919.

SIR and COMRADE:· Send to Department Headquarters immediately names and addresses of delegates, alternates and past Commanders for the purpose of making records for the Department Encampment, Lawrence, April 25, 26 and 27, 1919. Unless this is promptly and properly attended to much inconvenience will result to your Camp representatives.

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

MARCH 24, 1919.

COMRADES: It will, no doubt, be of interest to you to know that for nearly fifty years the veterans of the Civil War, and for twenty-one years the veterans of the War with Spain, and “The National Tribune" (the soldiers' newspaper) have maintained a constant fight to have an actual preference in public employment for the appointment, promotion and retention of veterans and their widows.

The vicissitudes of that fight, through all these years, have been so many and so important that it would take a volume to tell in detail. Every successive President has been visited, every member of the Cabinet and Congress has been importuned, and Legislatures have been besieged. The courts have been brought into the contest to interpret and enforce such measures of preference as have been secured.

In spite of all that could be done, in spite of Presidential orders, in spite of even some punitory legislation put through Congress by Speaker Cannon, the preference for veterans has been, at times, quite illusory, and the utmost that could be gained from the civil service was a concession giving veterans an eligibility slightly superior to that of civilians. Even this concession became more or less of a camouflage in the hands of the appointing and administrative subordinates.

The Civil Service Reform Association has always fought this preference on the grounds that it established a "privileged class" in the country. This fallacy has been made a convenience by Senators, Congressmen and appointing officers to excuse themselves for not doing what they did not want to do. The sounding argument that to give veterans a substantial preference would create a "privileged class," had no logical basis. The United States army and navy have always insisted upon the very best material for its personnel, and it is a matter of the highest public policy that the very best men should enter the army and navy, and that after that service they should be given a preference in public employment. There can be no question that the training and experience of men under the flag makes them far more capable and reliable public servants in any capacity than those that have not had the advantage of such discipline as to duty and responsibility. The army and navy to-day are made up of men of the highest ability, and from them can be selected the best employees for our public service. There can be no contradiction as to this.

This long fight has just ended in a complete and substantial victory for the advocates of an actual preference. Comrade New, United States Senator from Indiana, had an amendment placed on the Census Appropriation Bill granting a preference to all veterans in all executive departments and independent government establishments. His amendment passed the Senate and went to the House, where the fight was continued. Our Commander-in-Chief, Congressman Carl C. Van Dyke, had the following amendment placed on it, which a committee on Conference from the Senate and House adopted:

Provided, That whenever possible, women and honorably discharged soldiers, sailors and marines shall be employed in the positions herein provided for, if, in the judgment of the director of the census, they are found to possess the business capacity necessary for the proper discharge of the duties of such positions.

The conferees' amendment was in the nature of many futile provisions that have heretofore defeated the efforts of the Civil War veterans to secure a substantial preference. With this experience in mind, determined effort was made to have the House accept the Senate amendment. Comrade Van Dyke, our Commander-inChief, led the fight, and was assisted by the Civil War veterans and their friends. Comrade Van Dyke made a splendid fight, as can be seen in the columns of "The National Tribune," and lined up twenty-six Spanish War Veterans, members of the House, a solid phalanx which made a real “shock battalion” for the measure. Around Comrade Van Dyke rallied the friends of the veterans of the Civil War and the soldiers of the present war and their widows, and the measure was carried through by a magnificent majority.

There is now an actual preference for all men who served the flag, and for their widows, at last written into the statutes of the United States, and the fifty years' fight of the Civil War veterans and "The National Tribune" is won. Preference

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »