CONSCRIPTION POLICY, CITIZENSHIP AND RELIGIOUS CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA DURING WORLD WAR ONE Donald Charles Eberle A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of The requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY August 2013 Committee: Gary Hess, Co-Advisor Rebecca Mancuso, Co-Advisor Edgar Landgraf Graduate Faculty Representative Beth Griech-Polelle © 2013 Donald Eberle All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Gary Hess, Co-Advisor Rebecca Mancuso, Co-Advisor In democratic societies, governments often assume extraordinary powers during wartime, thus redefining, at least temporarily, the relationship between citizens and the State. During the First World War, the democratic governments of the United States and Canada conscripted their citizens to fight on the distant battlefields of Western Europe. Conscription created unique challenges for both governments as a number of eligible men, in both Canada and the United States, refused to recognize their government’s authority to compel them to take up arms. Though the number of conscientious objectors was rather small, they were a remarkably diverse group that was highly visible. This created challenges for policy makers. The war would not wait and these almost unprecedented conscription policies was being made and revised even as they were being implemented. The war years were a difficult time to oppose government policy as both Canada and the United States employed impassioned rhetoric and expanded coercive powers to encourage all citizens, and resident aliens, to give the government their full cooperation. The young men who would later become religious conscientious objectors were peaceful, industrious and law abiding. They were generally considered to be highly valued members of society. The war, and specifically conscription, changed this positive perception. Complicating matter even further was the fact that many conscientious objectors were German immigrants, or the descendents of German immigrants. They frequently read and spoke German, often more fluently than they read iv or spoke English. These men, and their co-religionists, were now viewed as unpatriotic, untrustworthy, ignorant and dangerous. This dissertation examines the manner in which conscientious objectors challenged, either directly or indirectly, the basic authority of the state. It explores how conscientious objectors were identified as a threat, and how the governments of Canada and the United States tried to contain that threat. It also examines the ways in which citizenship was a contested and evolving concept in both Canada and the United States during the war, and particularly during the period of conscription, especially for recent immigrants and their descendants whose ethnic background and religious beliefs made them a highly visible minority and set them apart from the dominant culture. Examining conscription policy, and how it applied to conscientious objectors, during this particular moment in history not only sheds greater light upon the creation and implementation of conscription policies, but is crucial to answering larger questions about cultural attitudes in the United States and Canada toward vulnerable and marginalized populations. These issues remain highly relevant as both the United States and Canada become more diverse and continue to attract large numbers of immigrants. v To those of the United States and Canada who fought in World War I, those who created conscription, and those who objected. All did what they believed was necessary. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my co-advisors, Dr. Gary Hess and Dr. Rebecca Mancuso. It is a great honor to be Dr. Hess’s last Doctoral student and one of Dr. Mancuso’s first. Your careful reading of several earlier drafts and thoughtful suggestions improved the dissertation tremendously. Next, I would like to thank the members of my committee Dr. Beth Griech-Polelle and Dr. Edgar Landgraf. Your insights were useful and thought provoking. While any errors are mine alone, this work has certainly benefitted from your insights. I would also like to thank the many helpful archivists at the National Archives at College Park, Maryland; National Archives Canada; and the Mennonite Church USA Archive. You helped locate numerous valuable resources and made my research trips extremely productive. Finally, I would like to thank my parents Don and Joyce. Your patience, support and encouragement have made this all possible. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PREFACE ………………………………………………………………………….. 1 PART I THE CREATION OF CONSCRIPTION POLICIES IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA. CHAPTER 1. PRE-WORLD WAR I CONSCRIPTION IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA ……………………………………………………………… 18 CHAPTER 2. THE FAILURE OF VOLUNTEERISM IN CANADA AND THE MILITARY SERVICE ACT ………………………………………………………… 28 CHAPTER 3. THE UNITED STATES DECLARATION OF WAR AND THE PASSAGE OF THE SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT ……................................................ 66 PART II IMPLEMENTATION OF CONSCRIPTION CHAPTER 4. RESISTANCE TO THE MILITARY SERVICE ACT IN QUEBEC …. 100 CHAPTER 5. THE LANDMARK CANADIAN HABEAS CORPUS CASES ……… 129 CHAPTER 6. THE DILEMMAS OF CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR POLICY IN THE UNITED STATES ……………………………………………………… 169 CHAPTER 7. CHRONICLE OF THE SELECTIVE DRAFT .......................................... 199 PART III THE CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS CHAPTER 8. THE FACE OF THE CONSCINETOUS OBJECTOR IN THE UNITED STATES: THE MENNONITE CHURCH, AARON LOUCKS, AND THE PEACE PROBLEMS COMMITTEE …………………………………… 224 CHAPTER 9. PRIVILEGED AND NON-PRIVILEGED CONSCINEITOUS OBJECTORS IN THE UNITED STATES AND GENERAL ORDER 28 ………………… 277 CHAPTER 10. THE FACE OF THE CONSCIENTOIUS OBJECTOR IN CANADA: THE INTERNATIONAL BIBLE STUDENTS ………………………………. 297 CHAPTER 11. CANADIAN MARTYRS – DAVID WELLS AND ROBERT CLEGG .. 316 viii CHAPTER 12. CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS AND CHANGE IN THE UNITED STATES ………………………………………………………… 354 CHAPTER 13. ROUTINE ORDER 208 AND CANADIAN CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS IN GREAT BRITAIN ……………………………………………………… 390 CHAPTER 14. THE BRITISH-AMERICAN CONVENTION AND THE HUTTERITES .. 409 PART IV POST-WAR POLICIES AND EVALUATIONS CHAPTER 15. FINAL EVALUATION OF THE MILITARY SERVICE ACT ………….. 431 CHAPTER 16. EVALUATING THE SUCCESS OF SELECTIVE SERVICE: “STUPENDOUS TASKS ARE APPROACHED AND DONE” .…………………………….. 461 CONCLUSION …………………………………………………………………………….. 477 BIBLIOGRAPHY ………………………………………………………………………….. 487 1 PREFACE Conscription policies and practices during the World War I in both the United States and Canada have been examined many times but rarely have these policies and practices been examined together or compared to one another. Likewise, the experience of the religious communities to which the vast majorities of conscientious objectors in both the United States and Canada belonged has been examined before, but once again the response of these religious communities to the implementation of conscription, first by the United States and shortly thereafter by Canada has rarely been considered in a transnational context. The religious communities were transnational and conscription created transnational problems for the conscientious objector and for the state; therefore, a transnational approach to these questions has advantages that national approaches lack. A comprehensive transnational study of how these religious communities understood their relationship to the state has not yet been written. Sociologist Max Weber defined the state as “a human community that claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.”1 The relationship between the two states and the conscientious objectors during World War I was complex. Although the number of conscientious objectors was not great enough to pose any real danger to the conscription policies, or the larger war effort, of either nation they nonetheless posed a direct challenge, and a very real threat, that the states could not ignore. Yuichi Moroi observes in Ethics of Conviction and Civic Responsibility: Conscientious War Resisters in America during the World Wars that conscientious objectors posed a serious challenge to both the legitimacy of the state and to its authority. By refusing to recognize the legitimacy of the state’s monopoly on the use of physical force, the conscientious objector were 1 Max Weber, Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology (Berkeley, Ca: University of California Press, 1968), pp. 54, 56. 2 placing limits upon the legitimacy of the state itself. By refusing to participate in violence, organized and sanctioned by the state, the conscientious objector challenged the authority of the state to mobilize individuals for any purpose.2 If the state could not entice the conscientious objector to recognize its authority, by accepting non-combatant service, it risked losing that authority; therefore the state felt compelled to direct physical violence (court-martial) against the conscientious objector and to deny him some of the basic liberties enjoyed by citizens (imprisonment). Because the state is a human community, composed of human actors, the states frequently exerted more physical force (torture) against the conscientious objectors than was legitimate, even then they were not always able to compel the objector to respect their authority. Instead they created martyrs. Conscientious objectors also challenged Victorian notions of gender roles which celebrated manliness as a willingness to protect the home front