The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-01-19

Editorial Opinions OF the LeadinG Journals
Upon Current Topics Compiled Every
Day for the Evening telegraph.
sTAFF AND LINE. AGAIN. rElrT

D0y tOF INC HNtHtuH ACNfNEBuhe
STAFF AND LINE AGAIN YttVI
From the ~ Y Times. .s.- .
As the time for the decision of the staff and
line dispute in the navy approaches, the con-
test increases in bitterness This report Of
the Naval Board assembled to consider the
subject will shortly be laid before Congress-
and meanwhile, no stone is left unturned by
either party to help its cause The public has
lately been drawn in under the rival banners;
for, in answerto the request of the surgeons
to their brethren through the country to petit
tion Congressfor an increase Of staff rank,
the line officers have spread counter-memo-
rial among the merchants Of New York.
To any just representation Of the merits of
the case, there can be no objection; on the
contrary, Congress needs to hear both sides,
before deciding between them. But "fair
play is a jewell" and it is hardly fair play to
accuse the surgeons Of ssaiming at command"
because they seek q restoration of their
former rank, and of encouraging 'sinsubordi-
nation" by demanding that rank shall be
respected. c
So far as appears from anything on the
record, the staff have never been guilty of
usurping command, merely because they held
o high relative rank. Assimilated rank is no
novelty in our navy. Twenty-Five years ago
the surgeons were made to rank with Ieuten-
ants during the first twelve years of service,
and after that with commanders--a law still
in force. But in time il came to be felt that
higher grade was due to these officers, consi-
dering the share they had with the line officers
In the duties and perils of sea service. This
view prevailed especially during the late war:
and, seven years ago, Secretary Welles or
dered that surgeons, pursers, and chief en-
gineers should rank with captains, instead Of
commanders, after fifteen years service-an
advance of one grade--and with commanders
instead of ieutenants after five years service,
being an advance of two grades. Unlike the
order of Secretary Bancroft, eighteen years
previous, this never became law, and was
revoked last year by Secretary Borie. Hence
the present conflict between staff and line
1t is clear from this brief statement, how
ever, that, in the first place, the staff move
mont is not one designed to encroach on the
line, but to obtain restoration of what the
staf had enjoyed for nearly six years, and up
to last year. 1t is not an innovation that
they ask, but renewal of former privileges.
And it is precisely for this reason that desig-
mating the movement an 'insubordination" is
absurd. 1t is very true that, in the heated
controversy, and pending the final decision
10y Congress upon Secretary Borie's revoca-
tion of his predecessors order, some of the
surgeons have acted with more zeal than
discretion. Some of them have disobeyed
OhuoAo uuu6I I'LL IMPRESSION LQaG Cney were
doing right to make "test questions" of cer-
tain points of command. We have already
expressed our views regarding this method
OF procedure, and shown how in certain
cases it was wrong. But these individual
exceptions have nothing to do with the great
and general movement, which is perfectly
just and proper. If surgeons have no right to
ask for more rank, what rights have they
Secretary Borie himself, in the case of the
COrIrt- raf4ia1 Of Eraan cold Io hal Ia
of the correctness of the Surgeons motive,
though he censured hisact. And in any case
1t is absurd to connect the idea of ''insubordi-
nation, past, present, or prospective, with
this very natural aim of the surgeons.
In the next place. as to the charge of
seeking to command, the facts we have
briefly recorded refute the idea. In the six
years from 1868 to 1869, did any ambitious
doctor or paymaster seek to run away with
his ship? The cases in which these officers
outranked the officers commanding ships
must have been very exceptional, we admit,
as they would be hereafter. But whenever
they did occur, were the perils feared by line
officers realized? On the contrary, there
was no appreciable difference between the
power of command enjoyed by line officers
then and now The question then is, can it
fairly be represented that what the surgeons
ana paymasters and engineers are aiming at,
is the command of the ships to which they
may be attached? Or can it even be repre-
sented fairly that this would be the practical
result of an increase of rank, when such an
increase has subsisted for years without
injury? -sssa. ss.1 EfA ,h3liFl aa31
All that we seek in this matter is fair
representation for both Sides We are aware
OF the vexation which has been caused to line
officers by some of the preposterous demands
made in past years by staff officers. A little
while ago distinguished Chief Engineer was
commonly believed to be pushing hard for
the rank of Rear Admiral" the havoc he
had made (though. it was all in weakening
our own navy like gun whose kick is worse
than it's fire) emitting him, in his own opin-
ion, to that grade at least. Paymasters, who
had done useful but not brilliant service de-
sired Congress to authorize them to be called
only Commander Captain, or Commodore.
The matter was pushed very far and Secretary
Borie's order was reaction the other way
But there is no question that proper mean
is attainable. 1t is question of what service,
and how many years thereof, shall entitle the
Surgeon, Paymaster and Engineer to such
and such assimilated rank; and we have the
whole list of grades, from Lieutenant to Adj
Miral, to figure upon. What we maintain is,
bhat fair and just compromise, made by
competent authority, is conceivable. 1t is
not question in which either side needs to
barry its doctrine to its farthest extreme.
CESAR OR NOTHING.
From the NJ Y. Tribune.