only support of helpless children, having neither parents nor
grown brothers.

Orphans are often thrown upon the charity of a relative, and it seems
right that their support should not be taken from them. In view of the
many difficulties presented by the subject of exemptions, the many
diverse claims that arise, and the impossibility of making a special
provision for each, would it not be better to adopt a few general
principles on the subject, and submit all claims to the judgment of the
boards of enrolment? Thus, instead of clauses second to sixth, inclusive
of the second section, there might be a single proviso that--No person
who is dependent by reason of age, bodily, or mental infirmity, shall,
by the operations of this act, be deprived of his or her necessary and
accustomed support. This would include all possible cases, and would
secure to each the necessary maintenance, as designed by the law. It
would do away with the necessity of an unlimited issue of circulars of
explanation from the Department at Washington, throwing each case upon
the judgment of the board, who are to be presumed able to decide
intelligently on proper evidence being given before them. It would avoid
the unjust and injurious distinctions noticed under clause fourth, and
in the end would secure more men to the Government with less liability
of wrong to the citizen. Clause seventh also could easily be so modified
as to avoid the objections noticed above.

Another evident objection to the act of March 3d, is the limited power
given to boards of enrolment as such. All clerks, deputy marshals, and
special officers, are appointed by the Provost-Marshal alone. Yet a
large--perhaps the _chief_ part of their duty is directly connected with
the enrolment and draft. The judgment of the remaining members of the
board would certainly be of some value in making these appointments, as
they are always residents of the district, and hence acquainted with the
peculiar wants of the service and the character of the applicants. The
duties of the commissioner should also be more definitely stated.
Special duties are assigned to the marshal and surgeon, but no further
definition of the commissioner's labor is given than that he is a member
of the board. Thus there is liability to a conflict of authority and a
shirking of responsibility, which could easily be avoided by more
explicit divisions of duty. The board system is undoubtedly a good one.
It gives _the peop