nth reads as follows: 'Where there are a father and sons in
the same family and household, and two of them are in the military
service of the United States, as non-commissioned officers, musicians,
or privates, the residue of such family or household, not exceeding two,
shall be exempt.'

In reading this clause, the question naturally arises: Why is this
provision made applicable only to families in which the father is still
living? Why should not a widow, having two uncommissioned sons in the
army, have her remaining son exempt, as well as if her husband were
still living? Judge Holt has decided that 'a widow having four sons,
three of whom are already in the military service, the fourth is exempt,
_provided_ she is dependent on his labor for support.' If the father
were living, the remaining son would be absolutely exempt.

The evident design of this clause is to take into consideration the
amount which each family may have contributed to the service. But this
generous intention is practically ignored by another 'opinion,' which
makes it necessary that two members of the same family must be _now_ in
service, in order that the exempting clause may apply. Thus, by the
calamities of war, a father and several sons may have been killed or
rendered helpless for life, yet if there remains a son liable to draft
in the same family, he cannot be exempted unless his mother depends on
him for her support. It must be admitted that the parent or parents who
have had two sons _killed_ in their country's service, have made quite
as great a sacrifice as those who have two sons still engaged in that
service. And if the question of support is involved, it is reasonable to
suppose that two sons in the army would do quite as much for needy
parents as two sons in the grave.

These are some of the inconsistencies of the law, as it has been
interpreted by authority. Other cases also may arise that seem to demand
an exempting clause equally with those in the act. Of such are the
following:

First, the husband and father of a family depending upon his labor for
their support.

Second, the only support of an aged or infirm spinster or bachelor.

It is not unusual for persons of this class to adopt the son of a
relative or stranger. And when the infirmities of age render such
persons unfit for toil, the youth whom they brought up, and who is now
by his labor repaying their early attentions to him, should, not be
taken away.

Third, the