In the midst of reading newspaper articles congratulating Samuel Bean on his admirable achievement of being the first deaf and blind student to graduate from the State of California’s school
in Berkeley, we
need to keep in mind that he was not the usual age of eighteen upon his
graduation.
Sam was twenty-three.
Sam was twenty-three.
Given the time frame in which that marvelous occasion
occurred, we need also to remember the broader perspective of world events
surrounding that date. When Sam was twenty one—ripe for the draft, if all other
considerations were overlooked—he was still laboring over his high school
studies.
Though World War One had been raging on European soil since
late July, 1914, the United
States entrance into the fray did not occur
until formal declaration of war by Congress on April 6, 1917. At that point,
Sam was more than two years away from his formal graduation ceremony.
By July of 1917, with an American draft instituted in the
form of a lottery, every adult male within the designated age limits had drawn
a number, and it was a matter of which numbers would be selected as to who
would be required to report for military duty. (All told, the United States would end up drafting a total of 2.8 million men before the war's conclusion.)
As stories poured in from around the country in the
aftermath of that first drawing, the Oakland
Tribune ran an article on July 21,1917, detailing some unusual anecdotes. In amongst the stories from Cincinnati and Minneapolis,
Pennsylvania and Massachusetts,
was tucked a solitary paragraph about the number two name drawn for Alameda. Can you guess
who that might have been?
Evidently, those counties whose quotas were already filled
by volunteers did not need to participate in the draft, as the Tribune article explained with the
example of the Portland area in the state of Oregon:
As Portland’s quota has been filled by volunteers no man will be called from the list for the first draft, but on the second call the city will have to supply its share. Fourteen counties in Oregon are exempt on the first call.
That, however, was not the case for Alameda County
in the San Francisco Bay Area. In a follow-up article on August 16 of that same
year, the Oakland Tribune explained
why the local region was not only the opposite case of Portland—not having
enough volunteers to negate necessity of the first round of the draft—but also not able to
fill its quota.
The Alameda draft board took up at its meeting last night consideration of the claims and physical examinations of the first batch of men called, the seventy-five who underwent physical tests Monday. Twelve were given discharges as physically unfit for military service. Those not given discharge by reason of failure to meet the physical tests came up for consideration later…. By far the major portion of the seventy-five, allowing for enlistments, necessary absences, etc., filed claims for exemptions….The exemption claims brought forcibly to light the fact that Alameda is a “muchly married city.” It has long been the boast, of real estate men, boosters and even the general run of citizens, that Alameda was a city of homes, but even the most enthusiastic home booster never realized that seemingly every Alameda youth took unto himself a wife about as soon as he was able to vote or graduate from the high school. The exemption claims of married men almost match the number of men called for service. A single man of military age in Alameda appears to be the scarcest thing in the world.
Being single - I think such a exemption is discriminatory and probably unconstitutional. :)
ReplyDeleteI think you need to remember the historical context. Most married women did not work outside the home at that point. If the men weren't earning a salary to support their wives and children, who would? Women had not yet earned the right to vote.
DeleteWould such a draft work today? Probably not, but I believe only men are still required to sign up for selective service when they turn 18.
That makes a lot of sense. Its hard to always know the "context of the times." Thanks genealogylady.
DeleteIt's been interesting reading this brief discussion. It reminds me that we so naturally see history through the context of our own experiences, from a framework of what is current, now. Iggy, while you're right about the constitutionality issue now, Deborah adds a valid concern. And Far Side adds more on the issue below, providing a totally different perspective.
DeleteStill, if you click on the link to that July 21, 1917 newspaper report, among the unusual anecdotes included in the article were some mentioning such scenarios as a husband drafted right after the arrival of his firstborn child. What happened in that case, if all women didn't work outside the home? Was his exclusion automatically granted? Or did some areas adhere to different sets of opinions than others? I think this will take a closer look at the context of the times, from the words of the times, for us to understand the dynamics going on then.
Thanks for the article about Alameda. My great grandmother and her parents moved there about that time. I love all the tidbits about their adoptive city.
ReplyDeleteDeborah, if you have access to Ancestry.com, their historic newspaper collection includes many from the Oakland Tribune like this. It's been a real treasure trove for me, in finding more detail about Alameda, as well as the Berkeley school.
DeleteIt's hard for me to think of WWI, because it was such a horrible initiation for everyone into what they used to call "modern warfare." In the trenches. We saw a dramatic series set in this period just a few weeks ago on TV, from the fiction of Ford Maddox Ford, called "Parade's End" with Benedict Cumberbatch. It was among other things a critical, though also respectful, perspective on WWI, and I'd really recommend it. Thank you for this post about the "much-married city"!
ReplyDeleteI remember reading something about C. S. Lewis' perspective on being in the trenches. It must have been a horrible, dehumanizing experience to be there. Culture shock for those then living through it; culture shock for us in retrospect.
DeleteMarried women needed men back then..they only cared for the home and the children..there would have been too many war widows. ( Victorian thinking was hardly in the fast lane)
ReplyDeleteGood point, Far Side. This really opens my eyes to the need for seeing things through the eyes of that time period's framework. The entire society moved lock-step through those assumptions--a package deal, as I'm seeing while doing background reading on the struggles for "independent living" that the "handicapped" of that time period experienced.
Delete