The Boy Scout movement is founded on such correct principles that it has been strikingly successful in many countries of the world— in England, France, Switzerland, Spain, in this country, and even in Siam and China. In this country the boys are becoming scouts at the rate of about 60,000 a year. The chief limitation of the work of developing these boys and laying the foundations for their becoming good citizens is the number of volunteer scout masters that it is possible to obtain. Practically all of the work of training the boys is done voluntarily. The boys are eager to join because the movement appeals to them, but the scout work ceases to appeal to the boy when he reaches about 17 or 18. The movement is not designed to take him much beyond that point, so there is really no great force at the present time in our life, except the Young Men's Christian Association, that makes toward the development of patriotism amongst boys over 18.

Senator BRADY. If the Chamberlain bill is enacted into law, what disposition do you think should then be made of the Boy Scouts?

Mr. HARDING. They should be encouraged as much as possible. The two things are complementary one to the other. One is not exclusive of the other.

The Boy Scout movement will, as I say, take care of the boys from 12 to 17 or 18. It neither promotes nor discourages military training, but teaches the boys discipline, obedience, manliness, and respect for authority.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me say with reference to the bill which I introduced, which seems to bear my name, that that bill was not prepared in the hope that it would be finally passed in the form that it was written, but rather as a basis for the discussion of the whole subject. It takes the boy at 12, but I had no idea that that would be adopted as the final basis for legislation on this subject. So I want it understood that the bill was prepared mainly for the purpose of discussion and to bring the subject to the attention of Congress.

Senator BRADY. It is quite true that Senator Chamberlain's bill was introduced for the purpose mentoined, but at the same time whatever bill is finally perfected it is my thought that it will be known as the Chamberlain bill, and for that reason I always refer to whatever bill we are considering as "the Chamberlain bill," not with the thought that that will be the final bill that will be passed, but it is a nucleus upon which we shall work.

The CHAIRMAN. Then you think that the interest of the young men in the Boy Scout movement ceases at about 18?

Mr. HARDING. Yes; I think it is apt to cease. Of course, if the young man has the qualities of leadership he will become an assistant scout master and later on a scout master; he will go on into the upper stratum. But the difficulty is that only a small percentage have the qualities of leadership, so they perforce drop out of active work at 17 or 18.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know what the number of Boy Scouts in the United States is?

Mr. HARDING. About 200,000 at the present time.

The CHAIRMAN. Ranging from 12 to 16?

Mr. HARDING. Ranging from 12 to 18.

Senator BRADY. Can you give us any information as to how well they are organized?

Mr. HARDING. Yes; they are very well organized.

Senator BRADY. You understand that there are 200,000 who are very well organized?

Mr. HARDING. Yes, sir; I do. I have been active in the work for several years and have recently become a member of the National Council of Boy Scouts of America, and I am more or less in a position of being in close touch with the movement. Now to go back to the effect of military training on young men. As you gentlemen know, the Government had for boys from 15 to 17, inclusive, a junior training camp at Plum Island, Conn., at Fort Terry. There were about 1,200 boys enrolled there last summer. I have here a copy of a letter that one of the boys who was there wrote. This letter shows the standpoint of many of the boys. With your permission I will read it. It is not long, and I would much like you gentlemen to hear it as the direct testimony of one who underwent military training:

If ever I was for compulsory military training, I am twice as much for it now. I think it is a splendid thing for mind and body.

Now that we are on the last week, it is interesting to look back. Our first parade was without guns or equipment. Our lines must have been terribly crooked. To-night we paraded with guns and cartridge belts. Our officers stood in a line back of the commanding officer. We kept the lines straight ourselves, and I think they were pretty straight.

When we started, kicks and grumbles arose at every march to the parade grounds, and yet we walked along without anything to carry. To-day we walked twice to the parade ground with equipment. The other day with pack we trudged along and no words of complaint did I hear. Yes; we have changed.

I think personally I have acquired certain things which I am terribly glad to have. I have found obedience easy, which is a compliment to those who brought me up. I have a much greater feeling for the flag and my country than ever before. I always feel a sort of thrill at retreat every night, when every man and officer of the regiment stand up like soldiers and do honor to their flag.

When it

I know I have a better sense of neatness and orderliness than before. comes to picking up straws and pebbles off the street, folding your blankets, etc., just the same way every day and keeping your body clean, why, it's second nature to be neat in all things.

I have more respect for myself than before, simply because I feel that I am beginning to do my part in a duty which should draw us all together. I am taking my place in line with others in preparation for defense of our country. As I respect my officers, so that respect goes out also to those who share with me respect for country and those in authority.

Naturally I have benefited physically and mentally, but I think those benefits are minor compared with those I have mentioned above.

Senator BRADY. Who is it that makes that statement?

Mr. HARDING. This statement is made by a boy who went through the Plum Island camp last summer. That camp is a part of Junior Plattsburg. I have not his name. It appeared in an article by Ernest Hamlin Abbott, one of the editors of The Outlook; in The Outlook of August 23, last. That is where I found it and it struck me so forcibly that I took it from there.

It seems to me that universal military training will teach the boy or the man very important things, such as the following: The care of the body and habits of health; second, discipline, precision and a sense of order; third, self-control, resourcefulness, and self-reliance; fourth, cooperation and team work. Universal military training will make the individual trained stronger, healthier, and more alert. It will broaden his mind by bringing him in contact with men from other parts of the country and it will give him an education in many kinds of practical things. It will also greatly increase the efficiency of

the individual in every class of work-in the office, in the factory, or on the farm.

Among the benefits that will accrue to the country will be that it will reduce crime by teaching respect for law and authority. This has been the experience of every country in which military training has been introduced. By making the individual more healthy and more efficient it will increase the collective wealth of the country. By bringing into contact the different classes of the country-the rich and the poor, the educated and the uneducated-it will tend to make for greater democracy, and, last but not least, it will increase patriotism, for the more we work for our country the more we love it.

It seems to me, too, that the people of this counrty do not realize how much good universal military training is going to accomplish in the way of teaching the young men how to do things with their hands. It has been suggested-and I trust it will be possible to work it outthat some system of vocational training be given along with military training. That is done in other countries. It is done noticeably in Germany. Of course there the period of time is longer, but still there is no reason why it should not be done to some extent in this country. Senator BRADY. Do you not think vocational training would be effective in universal military training?

Mr. HARDING. I do very strongly think so. I think the boy on the farm will benefit particularly, because he has little opportunity to get any vocational training. The attitude of people toward military training on the other side of the water is shown by the fact that in some countries it is known as the poor man's college. They get their training and get a large amount of education; they are not only made into soldiers, but they are graduated from a college, so to speak. The college metaphor is also true in that the period of training enables the men to form many friendships, which I think we will all agree is one of the great forces of our college system in this country.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you notice in the papers this morning that Lloyd George emphasizes in the first part of his address the necessity for universal military training?

Mr. HARDING. Yes, sir. As I understood it, he even went further in his new program. They are to have national service extending to all men in all walks of life. A new Director of National Service is about to be appointed to carry out that program.

The CHAIRMAN. Utilizing men in the branches of the service where they are best trained.

Mr. HARDING. Precisely; not only for military service but for industrial purposes, which of course are the bases of all military activities.

Another point of advantage in universal training is the fact that the whole of Europe is being organized industrially on a military basis. Military organizations are being carried through the factories. The result of that is increased military efficiency over the old industrial organizations before the war. Military training in this country would be the greatest possible aid we could have toward applying military organizations in our industries. It would show the country how men could be handled in large bodies on a military basis. It would teach men how to receive a system of military organization that the factory owners will undoubtedly put into effect in the next

10 years in order to compete successfully with the greater efficiency that has been developed in Europe.

The CHAIRMAN. Are not the larger industrial plants in this country now organized along the lines of military organizations-I mean so far as efficiency is concerned?

Mr. HARDING. I understand not. They may be to a certain extent, but not nearly so far as they might be. We are woefully lacking in this country in efficiency. I think it was about seven or eight years ago that one of the present justices of the Supreme Court made the statement that the railroads by exercising greater methods of efficiency could save a million dollars a day. Some of the railroads criticized that statement and said it was absurd and impossible, and was made by some one who did not know. But I notice from some recent reports that the savings in operation at the present time over six or seven years ago amount to nearly $360,000,000 a year.

Now, even with these increased methods of efficiency we still have gaps to be closed in, and while some of the larger and better organized corporations may, as you say, be organized at the present time on a military basis entirely, there are a great many that are not.

(

Universal military training will give to the Nation a large number of men capable of utilizing automatically all the benefits of modern efficiency methods in the conduct of peaceful industrial operations. A basic principle in modern scientific management is the systematic application of the tried military organization to industry. There must be a staff to plan and to control executive work, and there must be a line to carry the staff plans into effect; that is, to be the combatants against the various opposing forces and obstacles, the conquest of which forms the successful industrial career.

Now, one of the greatest difficulties encountered in the development of modern scientific management is the lack of training of the young men of the Nation in their definite relation to their work and to each other. Every employer and every manager knows that the principal difficulty with subordinates lies in their inability or even unwillingness to accept responsibility.

This lack does not exist so markedly in men who have had a military training. A knowledge of definite duties, accompanied by a definite and fully accepted responsibility, forms the basic element of military training. Until recently, however, this idea has entered into industrial activities only in those countries which have possessed the enormous industrial advantage accruing from universal military training.

During the past 12 months two great nations have found it necessary to organize their productive industrial operations upon a systematic and scientific basis. In France, M. Albert Thomas was able at once to create a coherent industrial army because his material, peaceful French citizens, had already been trained in military methods; in England, Mr. Lloyd George was hampered and hindered in the same task because of the lack of such training in the otherwise capable British mechanic.

The whole aim of the modern industrial manager is to organize for peaceful production along the same lines which have been proved successful for national defense. Even if the United States should never have another war, the gain in economic development which

must follow universal training in method, efficiency, and responsibility will far overbalance any cost in time or money.

The question is not, What will it cost to provide universal training? but, rather, What will it cost not to provide it?

The CHAIRMAN. I do not want to interrupt your thought, but have you examined any of these bills providing for universal military training, and have you in mind yourself any bill upon the subject? If you have examined those that are pending, have you any criticisms to make or any suggestions to make with reference to them?

Mr. HARDING. Yes; I have examined this proposed amendment to S. 1695, and I will prepare a short memorandum which I would like to submit to the committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Had it not better go into the record?

Mr. HARDING. Yes; I think it had better go into the record. There are one or two criticisms that I would like to make of the bill now. The bill as proposed to be amended, as I understand it, provides for training at 18, or rather, provides for enrollment to be trained in the year in which the young man becomes 18. Of course, that may work out all right, but if a boy does not reach his 18th birthday until the 31st of December he becomes liable for training practically when he is 17 years of age. I think the provision for training in the year in which the man becomes 18 is too early an age. I have set out in that memorandum the practice in foreign countries. In most of the foreign countries, in Switzerland, Germany, and France the age is 20. In the Argentine Republic they started with 18, found it was a little young, and changed to 19, which subsequently was changed

to 20.

In determining on the age we are between two fires. We want to get the strongest boy physically that it is possible to get, and we want to do that with the least apparent economic loss to the country. The older the boy gets the more valuable he becomes to the country. If we withdraw him at a younger age the country suffers less loss from his withdrawal than if we withdrew him at an older age

It seems to me, on the opinion of a number of medical experts, that 18 is a little young, and I would advocate changing that age to 19. The second point is one not fully covered by the bill but which should, I think, be covered by the bill. Everyone in the Citizen Army should have an opportunity of appointment as an officer. One of the criticisms made of universal military training is that it will result in a military machine being built up in this country at the domination of the military men. That has been true in certain countries abroad. In Switzerland, where notoriously that has not been the case, I think the cause of the good results, namely, the democracy that prevails in the army, is the fact that men recommended for promotion have an equal opportunity to take examination for certain grades of officers. I think that is a very fundamental provision. which should be inserted in any bill passed in this country.

The third point is the maximum length of time that a boy must be trained in camp. The bill provides for six months' training, and it also provides that credits shall be given not to exceed four months, those credits to be based on school courses.

I think that four months is too long a time for credits to be given. That means that every boy will have to be trained in camp for at least two months. I think the two-months period should be increased