on sufficiently fortified to
withstand the exposure. Men over forty-five have lost the vigor and
elasticity necessary to long and arduous exertion, and are constantly
liable to become a burden instead of a benefit to the service.

No previous act has so equally disposed the military duty among the
various classes affected by it. It is a well-known fact that the burdens
of military service are wont to bear most heavily on the _laboring_
classes. Probably no legislation can entirely remove this inequality.
But the act of March 3d makes special provision for the indigent and
helpless, and to a great extent relieves the suffering and inconvenience
dependent on an enforced military conscription. Poverty is not left
without relief, infancy without protection, old age without comfort. The
dependent widow, the infirm parent, the homeless orphan, are adopted by
the Government, and their support and protection provided for. And in
order that the character and dignity of the army may comport with the
greatness and purity of the cause for which it is fighting--that it may
be both the power and the pride of the nation, it is expressly provided,
that 'no person who has been guilty of any felony shall be enrolled or
permitted to serve in said forces.' For the benefit of those whose
peculiar business or family relations require their services at home,
Congress wisely inserted 'the $300 clause.' In this they but followed
the established custom in most nations since the days of feudalism. No
part of the act has been more violently assailed than this, none more
unjustly. It is asserted that this clause discriminates against the
poor, in favor of the rich; that it recognizes unjust distinctions
between the classes of society, and assigns military duty unequally
among the citizens. No assertion could more glaringly display the
author's ignorance and lack of judgment.

The law, as originally drawn, required the service of the man drafted or
an acceptable substitute within ten days. Had 'the $300 clause' not been
inserted, the competition for substitutes would have been so great that
their price would have risen far beyond the ability of men in moderate
circumstances to pay, and many would have been forced into service who
thus have an opportunity for exempting themselves. It has kept the price
of substitutes at a low figure, and thus has proven itself emphatically
the poor man's provision.

Nor is the law harsh toward those who may be draf