204 Interational Organization annual average of only 28,57720 Moreover,the quality of British recruits declined dramatically in the decades before the war.In 1861,for example,the minimum acceptable height for a recruit was 5'8",but by 1914 the minimum height was only 5'3"21 Between 1890 and 1898,over one-fourth of recruits failed to meet at least one of the army's minimum physical standards.22 As Margaret Levi notes,"The modal recruit was transformed from a tall,rural fellow who met relatively high physical standards to a shorter,younger,less healthy man,or even boy,from an urban environ- ment."23 A governmental inquiry in 1904 concluded that the cause of this trend was that increasingly only those "who have failed in civilian life offer themselves as recruits."24 Rising wages in the civilian sectors of the economy meant that ever fewer well-qualified candidates stepped forward,forcing military recruiters to scrape the bottom of the barrel to maintain numbers and leading them to lament that "good trade years meant lean recruiting."25 In the decade before the war,these problems fueled growing pressures for some system of compulsory,universal military training or conscription.2 Similar problems affected the Royal Navy.Although the navy's practice of recruit- ing boys and youth for fifteen-year engagements meant that it competed only periph- erally in the labor market,rising civilian wages exerted significant pressure on the navy.27 The growing disparity between a sailor's pay and civilian wages caused a growing shortage of experienced sailors and petty officers,because few reenlisted. And because sailors were bound by long-service contracts,their inability to benefit from rising civilian wages bred considerable resentment.According to the First Sea Lord,Winston Churchill,in 1912, 20.French1982.24. 21.Skelley1977,238 22.See Skelley 1977,238;and Spiers 1980,40. 23.Lei1997.54. 24.Cited in Skelley 1977,239. 25.See French 1982,24;and Spiers 1980.55.Hobson estimates the average military wage was approxi- mately 80 percent of the average civilian wage.Hobson 1993,491.n.62. 26.Adams and Poirer 1987,1-48. 27.The Royal Navy drew its recruits from three sources.Most were boys(ages 15 3/4 to 16 3/4)or youth(ages 16 3/4 to 18).These boys and youth were trained in seamanship until their eighteenth birth- days,after which they served a fifteen-year engagement.In 1903,the navy also began admitting some adults for five years of noncontinuous service.British Admiralty 1905,410.Recruiting boys and youth enabled the navy to bind its labor force to long-service commitments before they could be bid away by higher civilian wages.As one Royal Navy document states,"They [sailors]are fully aware that,but for the fact that they were caught as boys and bound to a fifteen years'engagement before they knew anything about the service,far greater inducements must have been offered them by the State:...there is nothing between them and the improved conditions which their comrades in civil life have won but their respect for naval discipline."British Admiralty 1912.2.An untitled draft document is even blunter:"These boys are put into the Navy by their parents,and have in a great majority of cases no choice as to their profession. The parents are glad to get the boy off their hands...and the boy himself is not able to appreciate the service into which he has been entered....[It]is not until they are grown men of 3 or 4 years'service in the Navy that they begin to look around them and find out how grossly inferior their conditions are to those of their equals in civil life.They are then already bound to serve for 12 years....This however is the only branch of the recruiting service which is really prosperous."British Admiralty n.d./1912?.annual average of only 28,577.20 Moreover, the quality of British recruits declined dramatically in the decades before the war. In 1861, for example, the minimum acceptable height for a recruit was 5889, but by 1914 the minimum height was only 5839.21 Between 1890 and 1898, over one-fourth of recruits failed to meet at least one of the army’s minimum physical standards.22 As Margaret Levi notes, ‘‘The modal recruit was transformed from a tall, rural fellow who met relatively high physical standardsto a shorter, younger, less healthyman, or even boy, from an urban environ￾ment.’’ 23 A governmental inquiry in 1904 concluded that the cause of this trend was that increasingly only those ‘‘who have failed in civilian life offer themselves as recruits.’’ 24 Rising wages in the civilian sectors of the economy meant that ever fewer well-qualiŽ ed candidatesstepped forward, forcing military recruiters to scrape the bottom of the barrel to maintain numbers and leading them to lament that ‘‘good trade years meant lean recruiting.’’ 25 In the decade before the war, these problems fueled growing pressures for some system of compulsory, universal military training or conscription.26 Similar problems affected the Royal Navy.Although the navy’s practice of recruit￾ing boys and youth for Ž fteen-year engagements meant that it competed only periph￾erally in the labor market, rising civilian wages exerted signiŽ cant pressure on the navy.27 The growing disparity between a sailor’s pay and civilian wages caused a growing shortage of experienced sailors and petty officers, because few reenlisted. And because sailors were bound by long-service contracts, their inability to beneŽ t from rising civilian wages bred considerable resentment. According to the First Sea Lord, Winston Churchill, in 1912, 20. French 1982, 24. 21. Skelley 1977, 238. 22. See Skelley 1977, 238; and Spiers 1980, 40. 23. Levi 1997, 54. 24. Cited in Skelley 1977, 239. 25. See French 1982, 24; and Spiers 1980, 55. Hobson estimates the average military wage was approxi￾mately 80 percent of the average civilian wage. Hobson 1993, 491, n.62. 26. Adams and Poirer 1987, 1–48. 27. The Royal Navy drew its recruits from three sources. Most were boys (ages 15 3/4 to 16 3/4) or youth (ages 16 3/4 to 18). These boys and youth were trained in seamanship until their eighteenth birth￾days, after which they served a Ž fteen-year engagement. In 1903, the navy also began admitting some adults for Ž ve years of noncontinuousservice. British Admiralty 1905, 410. Recruiting boys and youth enabled the navy to bind its labor force to long-service commitments before they could be bid away by higher civilian wages. As oneRoyal Navy documentstates, ‘‘They [sailors] are fully aware that, but for the fact that they were caught as boys and bound to a Ž fteen years’ engagement before they knew anything about the service, far greater inducements must have been offered them by the State; . . . there is nothing between them and the improved conditions which their comrades in civil life have won but their respect for naval discipline.’’British Admiralty 1912, 2. An untitled draft document is even blunter: ‘‘These boys are put into the Navy by their parents, and have in a great majority of cases no choice as to their profession. The parents are glad to get the boy off their hands . . . and the boy himself is not able to appreciate the service into which he has been entered. . . . [It] is not until they are grown men of 3 or 4 years’service in the Navy that they begin to look around them and Ž nd out how grossly inferiortheir conditionsare to those of their equals in civil life. They are then already bound to serve for 12 years. . . . This however is the only branch of the recruiting service which is really prosperous.’’British Admiralty n.d./1912?. 204 International Organization