 It's time for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the out, a presentation of the Lawn Jean Wittner Watch Company, maker of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Lawn Jean. Good evening, this is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this evening, Mr. Hardy Bird, author and correspondent, and Mr. William H. Kearns Jr., military editor of Business Week magazine. Our distinguished guest for this evening is General Louis B. Hershey, director of Selective Service. General Hershey, what you say and what you do these days, sir, is very important to quite a lot of people, to say the least. Now, with President Eisenhower's recent action on promotion, there are quite a few authorities who believe that there will be a quickening of action in promotion, a more aggressive policy. I know that you can't give away any plans to the enemy, but could you answer this question? Will there be any stepping up of draft requirements in the forthcoming year? Will more men be needed? Well, yes, there are going to be more men needed. However, we knew it long before General Eisenhower, President Eisenhower, stepped up the present situation because men went in soon after Korea started. Those men are now coming out and they have to be replaced. That's going to take more people than we put in last year. So the answer is yes, but the reason I either don't know or think is no. Well, the Communists aren't going to learn anything from your own prototype, if I can see that. Now, there will be 53,000, I understand, inducted in February. Is that right, sir? That's right. Now, is this very higher than the usual average for inductees? Well, it's 25,000 or so higher than July, but it's only 6,000 higher than December and January. So, by and large, it's not far from the average of 50,000, about what we figured we'd have to induct this year. Do you see about 53,000 a month being inducted for the rest of the year? At least that many, and if it changed, I would think it would go higher rather than lower. Do you expect that it will go up to the 80,000 a month level? No, I don't. I think 60,000 would be high. What is the reason for this need and crease need for draftees? Well, when we started out after Korea, our first job, of course, was to build and also maintain, but maintenance was a very small factor at first, but now maintenance is a whole factor because with a two-year term, men are going out very rapidly because they went in very rapidly two years ago. How many men do you figure you will lose over the coming year? Well, I've heard different estimates and nobody can guess because there's many factors involved, but I'd say 1,100,000. Well, has this increased the stepping up of the number of inductees coming in? Is that going to affect people who have either been deferred? Oh, yes, inevitably because one of the reasons that people have been deferred, of course, there's more than one reason, but one reason has been that we haven't been able to take only about so many, and of course, you defer some people, though you won't have to have too many in 1A, and our potential has fallen from about 3 million 6 to about 1 million 2, and hence by the very mathematics of it, we're going to have to search in the deferred classifications for additional men. Well, I see, sir. Now, let me ask you this. If I were sitting out here and watching this program on television, and I were deferred in the draft, I would ask a very important question, and I don't know whether you can answer this or not, but can you tell us which of those now deferred are most likely to be brought in? No, I don't believe it can. This is true, however, that in the first place, if I were over 26 and became over 26 before June 1951, I wouldn't worry because the law makes me not liable. If I were a veteran, I shouldn't worry. Now, if I am, however, a deferred man, or one who has been rejected in 4F, or one who is in 1A, I would worry about the inverse order in which I've named them. Well, in other words, General, we mentioned earlier that they were a considerable number of men who have been deferred. Now, they are liable up to age 35, is that correct? Yes. Anyone that's deferred before he gets to be 26 gains nine years of additional liability. That is regardless of the reason for their deferment. That's right. General, there might be one solution to this problem. I can't advocate it, but you did. And the Universal Military Training Program, I think you appeared before Congress and wanted that program last year. Is that correct? Well, yes, last year and several years before I've been since about 1908. One of the things complicates it now is that we have other things to do and it isn't quite as easy to institute, although it is possible to institute it. Are you still for it? Absolutely. Now, what is your interpretation of a Universal Military Program? You've got one now in effect. That's right. We have it now and it's just a question of in another year or two, practically everybody will have been inducted and therefore we will have had Universal Training. Unfortunately, at present time, we're only inducting for a couple of years service. And when the man comes back and goes into the reserve, he doesn't obviously want to be remobilized. Whereas if he had a shorter term of training, he could be held to a longer period of, well, it like the farm and being in the firehouse ready to go. Well, I know there are quite a lot of people, particularly mothers, who are very much opposed to Universal Military Training. And as a matter of fact, in his Baltimore speech, President Eisenhower said that he wasn't in favor of it. But I wonder if you would like to give the arguments for it, as you see them. Well, I don't remember. I didn't hear the Baltimore speech, but as I remembered, the question was whether or not you could have selected a service in Universal Military Training simultaneously. Oh, I see. I'm not assured President Eisenhower said he wasn't for UMT. I think it was a question of time rather than effort. Now, I'm been for Universal Training because I think that we in war time or in emergency, all require our young men to serve. And I've always thought it's only fair that they have a chance to be ready to do the things the government required of them. And one of the things about it, if you have something that's a little harder than other things, I think it's in a democratic state, it's better to pass it around and not try by mercenary means to hire somebody to do the unpleasant things. Well, do you see any chance at all of the Congress passing a Universal Military Training program this year? Well, I think there's all of the chance. I don't know how good it is. And I think there's two ways to institute it. One is to institute by additional legislation. The other is to use the legislation which you already have. Well, your present authority to draft expires in 1955. That isn't the liability, it extends, but the right to call anybody expires in 1955. I don't want to be too technical about it, but that is true. Well, then any kind of a Universal Military Training Act would have to take effect after that date. No, I don't have that. There's difference of opinion there, but I happen to believe that we could start now to putting some of our people into a reserve with a seven and a half year liability after six months of training. I see. Well, going back for a minute to the deferment question, how about occupational deferment? Do you see any decrease in deferring men for work, apprentice work, farm work or anything of that order? Well, I think inevitably, if we're going to follow out the legislation, the Congress passed a Universal, I want to repeat, Universal Military Training and Service Act. Now the Congress did not defer anyone except the ministers and divinity students and exempted those. I think the Congress gave the president power to defer with the idea that they could have a fluid, a flexible method by which each in their turn might serve without too much disturbing the public interest. And I'm not so sure that anyone is going to be deferred throughout their entire period of liability. Now, General, of course it's logical. I want to ask a question about this deferment, too. It's logical that an engineer will be deferred before, say, an art student, a student of engineering. Now would a poor, a bad student of engineering be more likely to be deferred than a very good student of art? Well, I think you're being a little unfair at the engineering because in the first place, I was a liberal art student and not an engineer. I don't happen to be a specialist and therefore I probably have a little feeling of frustration. You mean my question is prejudiced so far. Well, no, I'm prejudiced. And I think that we need, one thing we need now are a lot of people to know how to govern ourselves because I think there's a greater need for that than there is things in the physical sciences, but I'm not joined in that belief by the majority of people. Now, this word prejudice, here's another subject, General. It has happened as human nature, I suppose, but I've heard it more than once complaints from parents and from boys who did not want to go into the service right now. And they said that the members of their draft board were prejudiced and that just because this fellow parted his hair that way, they didn't take him and because their son's hair was parted the other way, they took him. Now, what about this prejudice on draft boards? I haven't heard anything about corruption, but what about prejudice? Well, of course, in the first place, the board is administering a law. The board didn't place the liability on the lab. The Congress did. The Congress said he'd serve. They did say that the President might issue some orders about when he would serve. And the fellow who serves on the Selective Service Board has the rather hard responsibility of carrying out a law which did not defer people. And I think, after all, that we probably have prejudice. But on the other hand, I think that the local draft board, through the last 13 years, has done one of the most remarkable services in trying to do without pay and without anything except the knowledge of having well done a very difficult service, namely to keep the armed forces during the war, the 12 million or so, and now the 3 million 6. Well, quite frankly, have you seen any evidence at all of corruption among these boards? I mean, a board member accepting money to defer somewhat. No, we've had, I think, a half a dozen or more people tried in 13 years. I see. Well, now, sir, about this corruption business, about this favoritism business, each board doesn't operate according to the same set of rules, does it? Oh, that's a set of argument, a question of what is rules, what's policy, and what's the implementation of policy. I never have believed in uniformity because there isn't any such thing as uniformity among human beings. But as far as having the same general policy and following the same philosophy, I don't think there's any question. There are a few exceptions. And when there are exceptions, we have the right of appeal very freely given. No one has to take the local draft board. You can appeal to the appeal board without a reason. I see. And that gives you two shots. Just one final question and very quickly, General, we hear a lot about the disadvantages of being drafted and why people hate to be drafted. How about some of the good things about being drafted? Well, I think the man participates in the most significant think of his time. I think he goes out feeling he did his share and he didn't try to push somebody else in his way. And if you want to get into material things, he's got practically three years of education coming to him on Uncle Sam. I see, sir. Well, our time is up now. We want to thank you very much, General Hershey, for being with us. The opinions that you've heard our speakers express tonight have been entirely their own. The editorial board for this edition of the launching chronoscope was Mr. Hardy Burt and Mr. William H. Kearns Jr. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable General Lewis B. Hershey, Director of Selector Service. Now, how would you go about hiring a man for an important job? Well, in a man or in a watch, the record of past performance is the only yardstick of value. That's why so many sensible people own Lawn Jean watches. Now, the honors which Lawn Jean watches have won are a record of past performance. These world's fair grand prizes and gold medals, each a highest award, were bestowed by many men in many lands at many times. Observatory accuracy awards, won just yesterday, so to speak, are also part of the Lawn Jean record. And from the record, there could be no doubt that Lawn Jean watches are above and beyond the ordinary. For almost 100 years, Lawn Jean has been shown to be just about the finest watch in all the world. By every standard, beauty, integrity of manufacture, accuracy, and reliability of performance, Lawn Jean is the world's most honored watch, the world's most honored gift. Premier product of the Lawn Jean with Norwatch Company since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. We invite you to join us for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, the television journal of the important issues of the hour, broadcast on behalf of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittnor, distinguished companion to the world honored Lawn Jean. This is Frank Knott, reminding you that Lawn Jean and Wittnor watches are sold and service from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jurors who proudly display this emblem. Agency for Lawn Jean with Norwatch.