Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1852-1859, 1855-10-20


July 2lSt, 1916.
The Hon. Secretary of the Navy, in communi
cation to me-, dated Juiy IL, 1876, directed me To-
repair to Washington, SO enable the department
TO avail itself of The advice OF officers OF expe-
rience.
On the assembling of the convention of officers
on the DIST inst, he addressed communication to
us Individually ard collectively, requiring us to
express your (ourl opinion, whether III your (Our
judgment, promotions III the navy should be made
with exclusive reference to seniority &c.
On considering the form aud Language OF these
communications, it was evident 10 That the Sec
retury Of the Navy required our individual opinion
in regard to the matters submitted to us in his com
munication Of the 2ISt instant. Fully impressed
with this conviction, suggested 10 this cOnven
ton that each officer present should lie required %
give his individual opinion on all matters then be
fore it, which proposition this convention did not
accede to- but proceeded to constitute itself board
or tribunal, wherein the voices of the minority
should be stuffed, aud the vote of the majority OF
the officers assembled should decide all questions
that were TO be Hcled upon byl
IGanything were wanting to render this proceed
ing Oh the part OF the Board more Objectionable,
it may be found in the fact that the efforts that
were made to defeat it were not IN some cases CON
SdeIed, and in no case were they placed on the
cord; and nowhere is there to be found an in
dicatiun Of the opinion or vote OF single member
on the subject.
I hat this course was not in conformity with the
views OF wishes of the Hon. Secretary of the Ma
Wy, is made manifest by reference 10 his SmbSe
quen' Communication on other matters submit
ted for our opinions, wherein am addressed Slngiy
as the presiding officer Of the Board, and in Ian
guage which required me to express our joint
opinion expressly as Board.
Had the Hon. Secretary SO required our joint
opinions on the matter first submitted TO us, he
would have expressed himself equally explicit
His requirements then, as communicated TO us in
his letter OF the 2lst inst, not having ben COM
piled with, feel it my duty to meet them, SO tar
as it shall lie in my power, and after the manner
which TO me shall seem most proper.
No hoard &C officers, however pure, is compe-
tent to pass upon the professional and moral quail
icaticns of any officer, whether for promotion or
for any other purpose, unless under all the solemn
obligations OF oath to DO JuShce---a close aud
steady investigation into whatever dement's may
be alleged, aided ty all the lights Il testimony in
his behalf as well ms against him, and patient
hearing of whatever he nay have 10 advance III
eXtenuaton OF defence.
Our naval organization is such that II is hardly
possible that the officers composing boart could
have much personal knowledge of the qualihca-
tons disquafcations OF those whose claims for
promotion are to be conSideled. To illustrate this
remark | will state that, OF the fifteen officers
whose names have been passed upon by this
Board, have no PERSONAL knowledge OF the quail
fcationS Of more tLan two Of them. although
have numbered more than forty-eight years OF
service, twenty-three of which huve been passed
at sea. Most Of them were unknown to ME even
by namd; and as the remainder Ct the officers
composing this Board average a service oil but
eighteen and half wears, 1t is highly pr bable that
! majority Of the Board never had an opportunity
Of forming IN opinion OF them from personal
ledge in any one case. Yet notwithstanding.
this, this Board, by joint ant secret ballot, has
recommended the promotion OF certain officers, to
the injury of others. and that certain other officers
I -. l.
together.
The adoption of the joint and secret ballot has
gone far to render the proceeding Of this Board
jnStly obnoxious. 1t has ASSUMED for itself the de-
teStahe attributes of Tie Star Chamber. Not rec
ognizrd by any law, nor under the protection Of
any Iaw-without even the oblis alton of an oath
to do Justice to the officer whose claims ii has
passed, or to the servce-without any evidence
Of lheir merits or diSqualifcatDnS, or without
assigning any reasons for its oplniouS either lu-
divduallv or collectively-it has given condem-
natory judgement on the regulations Of m. Il long
in the service OF the country, Zone of whom is now
abroad serving with diSlnction,) emphatically in.
timatng that they shall not be promoted, and thus
virtually diSgGacing them forever in public est
nation.
There is nothing so precious TO officer rs his
reputation. When arraiGntd for alleged Offences
before court martial he earnestly, and at great
c. 81, seeks his vindcaton. He donfrontS his ac-
cuSerS he objects 10 his judges, he offers his Wit
meSSeS, his explanations Of defence, AMI the truth
is Sitted. The judges are under cath TO decide
cordns to law, the evidence and their conscenceS;
and after fair and impartial trial, the punishment,
| if any, falls upon lin sanctioned by law. And
yet such punishment by court martial rarely
SurpasS in severity and in lis effects the judgement
pronounced by this BOard-a Board sitting in Sc
cret conclave-their victim abroad, and unLeaIl in
his defence; without charges against him, without
evidence of any kind, acting OIL suspicion or hear
say; without personal knowledge OF hisNuaIiica-
tons, and many OF its members, perhaps, influence
| ed by personal pTeiudceS aud enmltieS. Before
such tribunal no one would be safe. a Clique,
OF even single member of q board, might bring
irreparabIe injury upon the prospects OF any officer
| in the service. Such proceedings so contrary TO
all received notions Of prnpriety and public justice
and so opposed to the principles OF our governor,
|, for one, could never contenance or be party
to. No other course was, Therefore, left to me, in
the various ballots for the seett iOR Of officers Tor
promotion, than TO mark on every ballot de-
cline TO vote.
In further illuStra ion of this hasty and obnoxi.
Gus mode Of dispatchlng officers and dspoSimg of
their regulations, | will here state that, in one
case papers were presented from the files of the
Department calculated to create prejudice against
the officer whose fate was to be passed upon-pa.
pers having no claim to The character of evidence
IN any court Of honor or juStlce-nnl yet at the
same time, other papers OF testimonials and charac
Ter highly favorable 10 the individual, and deSig-
mated as such in the synopsis accompanying the
case, were never presented 10 the Board.
Yet so DESTROYS do find mysefto comply, so
far as it is within my competence, with the reqni
sntion Of the Hou. Secretary OF the Navy, that 1
feel it my duty to state explicitly my opinion up
on the CHEF inquiry Propounded, on the decision
OF which rests his acknowledgements. These
also, conceive, fully responded to in the opinion
have now the honor to give.
The Hon. Secretary's main proposition, upon
which depend all others embodied IN his letter OF
the 21st OF July, 1916, sin the following wC1ds;
''You will express your opinion whether, in
your judgment, promotion in the Navy should be
made with reference TO senlority.''
In obedience TO the injunction contained in
this paragraph, give it as my opinion that pro-
motion should always be made with exclusive ref.
erence to seniority, except where great gaIlantry
before enemy shall enttle the officer to the ex.
allied distinction of preference over his peers, OF
where immediate guilt OF incompetence shall be
declared to exist by tribunal legally and express
y constituted 10 determine the question.
Charles STEWART, Presiding Officer.
Washington City, D. C., July %, 1916.