MARRIED MEN AND THE BALLOT

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3029, 16 March 1917, Page 6

MARRIED MEN AND THE BALLOT

Sir, —It has been said by the Mill* !. tary Boards and newspapers that the' Second Reserve are not to be called up till the first are exhausted. The First! Division consists of unmarried mere (and those married after a. certain date), and in. the majority of case# .these "should go first. The Second Reserve consists of many married men. having a ( family—and it does not matter if they have five children or fifty—• who can well afford financially to go tor the front. I admit the Government) fight shy of the financial question in providing for big families of soldiers, and says it does not wish to take men, with a large family. That reason i 3 open to question, as I hops to explain shortly. But why in the name ofi everything reasonable should the man. who if he were to die to-morrow or was killed honourably at the front (or maimed for life), and can leave his family provided for, bo exempted? In fact, ho should go before the single man. . Is tlio income he has acquired or enjoyed, and which be can leave to his dependants, if he is killed, to exempt him, when many a man single has to sell out, at the best price ho can get, his farm or business? (And, mind you, in somo instances to bo bought by this very same person who' stays behind, and who seizes the opportunity to enrich himself at the cost of the follows who have gone.) Do you not think that the married man (of military age), no matter what family, if he can provide for his family, should go equally with the single man who has to sacrifice his business, etc., at whatever price he can get—albeit, wo. had the case of Nevin before the board, where it was stated his compeers would not buy him out. Patriotic, indeed? Theso fellows are well able to go to races, play golf, bowls, tennis, etc. To my mind, they are the shirkers. To go back to what I said would be open to question—tho man who has a family of five or more, but not sufficiently well off to provide for his family. The Government should undertake their provision in a reasonable way, tho money can well be found by spcoial taxing of those firms (e.g., the Nevin case), who gain by the loss rf competition, and by generally makin<* those who are comfortably off and ing behind paying for it. It is the duty of the "sporting, energetic follows" of under 46 years of age (the law*should be fifty) who like to discuss war, but not fight it, who should bo at; the front, but who unfortunately, think because they have families they should be exempted. Moreover, those who, though family men, can' afford, I say afford advisedly, and don't go'to tjio. front, are onlv sheltering behind their wires and children's petticoats. 1 < I ?. n t Mr. Editor, you would publish m cold print what I think of them.—l am, etc., A. DECLINED OVER AGE.