New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-01-11
XXXIVTH CONG K Ee,.e s,
"A SSUR
FIRST SESSION.
SENATE. .wAsHISGroS, Jan 10.

SENATE. WAsHINGr0S, Jan III.
Several memorials from naval officers, complaining
ofpjustce to them by the Naval Retiring Doaru' were
Mr.. BRODHEAD concurred with the Secretary OF
the NAVY that remedy may be offered in cases where
errors of judgment have deprived the country OF tne
seryices of meritoious officers. He trusted the Com
mi,tee on Naval Affairs would give the subject the
consideration its Importance meuted.
Mr. MASON said the services of competent and gal
Law, offcers Of Virginia had been dispensed with by
a. NV BOARD The innocent had been COMPOUNDED
with the guilty. The Board looks like Court which
condemns first, and hears aiterward; lie supposed
tbere had been misintepretation OF the law and was
d;nosed TO think that if the Committee on Naval Al
car; we're 10 undertake to make inquiries into the cor
o,ess or ncorectness of the sentences of the Board
in particular thay would find 1t difficult task TO
restore the meIitrcous without leaving them uhuer
fine cloud Of original CONVICTION
nv HALE presented the memorial of George A.
stevens late Master in the Navy, praying Tor re-
dress He moved to refer the memorial TO the Judci-
o,y Committee. He contended that the law under
mined all the great principles for the preservation OF
nropety aud personal rights, and Is er post deto in its
aneraton. He severely criticised the action of the
hoard saving they seemed to act on the principle that
the less time officers have been IN the navy the better
tbev are and the higher grade they attain the more
mt they become He considered the action under
that bill as utterly abhOrent to every principle of JUS
tice Mr. H. at the close of bis remarks, said that he
would shortly introduce bill to repeal the law under
which the Navy Board was created
Mr.. BRODHEAD believed that if Injustice had
been done to officers in the Navy the responsibility
rests on Congress and not on the Navy Board. In
most cases the Board fully sustain itself, and he
thought that the Board ought to have hearing IN the
investigation.
Mr.. BENJAMIN said that if wrong has been done,
II is chareeabe in great measure on Congress. He
thought the Secretary of the Navy made mistake in
recommending to the President the adoption in toto of
the action of the Board. The remedy lies with the
Executive, who has the appointing poper. Consss
sional legislation would be inappropriate and neih-
10, harm thap pos,i
Mr.. JONES TENN thought the. first step 10 be
taken was to procure the report of the Board and oil
the testimony In such cases wncn purpose ne art
tofore offered resolution calling on the Secretary of
the Navy for the documents. Acting in the dark, he
much feared the Senate aling into errors similar
to those they disposed to condem. The statute
is good one but il has been wickedly perverted
from its true purpose contrary to law and justice. If
the Board acted without testimony its members are
doubly damned. He condemned the secret conclave
as worse than the Spanish Inquisition Without note
or warning, the st intimaton that officers had their
heads were off, ana they dishOnOred and disgraced.
Mr.. MALLORY defended the action of the Navy
Board and the conduct of the President and Secretary
of the Navy saying that the act TO promote efficiency
in the Navy was liberal toward those who were
affected by it, operation Provision, however, should
be made in cases of hardship.
Mr.. TOUCEY thought it premature for the Senate
either to condemn approve the action of the Navy
Board. He doubted not its members acted hon
orably and whatey er injustice may have been done
their Intentions to promote the best interests of
tho public service.
The subject was passed over informally, and the
Senate adjourned to Monday.