What Made Paul Say ‘No’?
Snooping around for family records in the treasure droves of online data is fun and, often, rewarding. But it can lead to real frustration. These databases can likely answer questions like: “what happened?”, and “when and where did it occur?” But you are unlikely to get a clear answer as to “why” your ancestor took a certain action or made a controversial choice — -or “how” they coped with the consequences over the remainder of their life.
That’s where the frustration comes in.
Because, in order to answer “why?” you need original sources such as family stories passed along by elders across the generations. Or letters or diaries from the person involved — -or those close to him or her. Without those sources you can only examine the family, community and social context surrounding your relative at the time and make an educated guess.
I have experienced this frustration as I have tried to uncover the full story of my great-Uncle Paul’s high-stakes protest against the draft 100 years ago during World War I. There are no diaries, letters or family stories. So, I have tried to learn what I could about the context of his decision.
Widespread Opposition to WWI
Opposition to WWI ran broad and deep in the U.S. from its very beginning in 1914. Reflected in newspaper reports, editorials, petitions and the speeches of elected officials, this opposition was truly national in scope. And, it was particularly strong in the U.S. heartland, in states like Missouri and Kansas, and cities like St. Louis and Chicago. Mass protest meetings and peace demonstrations were organized and attended by thousands periodically from 1914 until war was declared in April, 1917. They were organized by broad coalitions that included trade union leaders, elected officials from both major parties, leaders of ethnic cultural and social organizations in the large German and Irish communities, and progressive social reformers such as Jane Addams and Lillian Wald.
New organizations were formed — like the Women’s Peace Party and the American Union Against Militarism — and provided the backbone of the peace movement. They grew to have tens of thousands of members at their peak. These organizations worked internationally as well, holding peace conferences in The Hague with counterparts from the nations on both sides of the conflict. They sought to pressure the belligerent governments to accept an arbitrated settlement to the war. Even industrialist Henry Ford financed the voyage of a “Peace Ship” in the fall of 1915 from New York to Sweden with a large group of peace activists aboard in the hope of negotiating a peace treaty.
In the 1916 elections, President Wilson and the Democrats ran on a peace platform, captured in the slogan, “He kept us out of war.” Following his narrow re-election in November through early February, 1917, Wilson articulated a policy of “peace without victory”. He sought to mediate a settlement that would restore the pre-war status quo among the European powers.
The peace movement was not prepared for Wilson’s rapid swing toward intervention on the side of Allies in February, 1917 when Germany declared open submarine warfare on all shipping in the Atlantic. Peace leaders responded to Wilson’s escalating moves with advocacy for a national referendum on whether or not to enter the war. Their appeals were ignored and Congress declared war on Germany April 6, 1917.
Efforts to Block Conscription
Pro-intervention political leaders like former President Teddy Roosevelt had long campaigned to increase the size of the U.S. standing army and navy. Throughout the early years of the war they argued that the U.S. would need to enact conscription in order to rapidly build adequate fighting forces. The growing peace movement consistently fought conscription as a key part of their efforts against war preparations.
The day after war was declared, the Selective Service Act was introduced in Congress to establish conscription. Debate over the proposed legislation was robust and the opposition was led by the Speaker of the House, Champ Clark of Missouri. Clark and others supported an amendment to restrict the use of conscripts to state militias to defensive purposes only while an all-volunteer force would be required for foreign interventions. Ultimately, the amendment failed and Congress passed the draft in late April in the form that the Wilson administration proposed it.
In May, after conscription was passed, the Espionage Act was introduced. This Act proposed restrictions on freedoms of expression and association under the guise of assuring national security. In the debate around this legislation, it became increasing clear that loyalty was the new watchword. Loyal Americans would volunteer for the armed forces and cooperate with the draft. To do otherwise was to be a “slacker” or a “sissy”. Opposition was now being defined as disloyalty. And disloyalty was supporting the enemy, not distant at all from acts such as spying or sabotage.
Conscientious Objection
Religious beliefs and values were a major driver for many Americans that opposed WWI. Some traditions, such as Quakers and Mennonites, were pacifist and opposed all wars. Others, including Lutherans and Catholics, taught that some wars were just if they met certain criteria. Lutherans, in particular, emphasized the role of the individual’s conscience in determining whether or not they could participate in a particular war. The corollary to this “selective conscientious objection” was that individuals had to bear the consequences of their conscientious determination regarding fighting in, or otherwise supporting, the war.
About 65,000 men registered as conscientious objectors (COs) during WWI. After registering as COs many were publicly harassed and intimidated. For example, two Mennonite friends reported that their grandfathers had yellow paint brushed on their backs and then were paraded down the main streets of their small, rural towns while their neighbors jeered and called them names. COs then were drafted into non-combatant roles or, if they refused, served the duration of the war in prison.
“Here I stand. I can do no other.”
Between 6 and 7 million of the 10 million men who registered for the draft on June 5, 1917 claimed an exemption — -most for family economic hardship. These exemptions were typically granted by the local draft boards. Most historians of the period argue that both the level of exemptions applied for and granted are indicators of the widespread opposition to the war.
My great-Uncle Paul was likely one of many voices in the mainstream of his community that opposed U.S. entry into WW I and opposed the draft used to man the military with conscripts. He likely had the support of his family and his Lutheran church community when he concluded that he had to publicly register his conscientious objection to the draft. For this act was fully within the tradition of Martin Luther who four hundred years before had nailed 95 theses to the Wittenberg Castle church door and famously said: “Here I stand. I can do no other.”
While Martin Luther likely anticipated he would be tried and possibly excommunicated by the church, I don’t think Paul had any idea what would come next. In less than three months he was drafted by the very system he objected to — -and in another six he was being shipped to France to fight.
I can only imagine the soulful internal struggles he experienced. Likely for the rest of his life.
