there being nothing in the character of the population of New York to cause it to differ from the other States and districts-we should expect to find the enrollment of so large city and State about on an average with the other States-that the enrollment would be a medium or mean between the two extremes, and not the most extreme. Nothing will be found in the character of the population to account for the difference that actually exists. In the city, as well as in the entire State, the females exceed the males in number.
In New York City it is true that there is a greater, proportion of males within the military ages than in some other districts, but this is more than compensated by the large number of aliens and other exempts found in the city. So that there is nothing in the character of the population of the city or State of New York to call for a larger enrollment than is made in the other States.
The result of the draft was resorted to as another test of the enrollment, it being supposed that if the enrollment was uniform and equal in the several State and districts the result of the draft would be substantially the same in all.
Upon investigation it was found that in the districts where the enrollment was largest, and especially in those districts where, for the reasons suggested, if anywhere, an excessive enrollment might be looked for, the results of the draft were the least favorable to the Government, the fewest men were obtained, and the greatest number failed to report, or have been since found.
The inference is that many of those enrolled and drafted were nonresidents, or had no existence at all, or for some other reason were improperly placed upon the enrollment.
The consequence is that the Government is the loser by an excessive or defective enrollment in this, that it does not get the men wanted or expected from any draft from it. A table annexed, marked C, shows the results of the draft in several of the States and districts and exemplifies the truth of these suggestions.
The Commission, after a full investigation, and in view of all the facts elicited, are unanimously of the opinion that the enrollment in the State of New York is imperfect and erroneous, excessive in some districts and possibly too smallcertainly excessive in the cities of New York and Brooklyn, and especially as compared with other States, and cannot be relied upon as a just and equitable basis for the assignment of the quota of the State of New York, or among the several districts thereof. Justice to the enrolling officers and agents requires that it should be distinctly stated that their fidelity or integrity is by no means impeached by any inaccuracies that may exist in the enrollment. They were the necessary result of the execution of the law under the circumstances, and with the means at the command of the officers, and it is not perceived how they could be avoided.
Second. The second subject of inquiry was whether, and if so, by what means and in what manner, the enrollment could be corrected, so as to make it a just and proper basis for the assignment of quotas. A new enrollment was of course out of the question, and could one have been made it is not perceived how the difficulties before encountered could have been overcome or the mistakes and errors of the first enrollment amended. The resort to the poll lists was an attempt by an experiences officer, familiar with the enrollment from the first, to correct the enrollment in his district. The same causes of error and imperfection still exist and are at wndoubtedly produce the same results. The difficulty in the first enrollment was