National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1882-03-30


was passed to enable the Government to obtain the
best talent
THE FOUR PERSONS
who now claim to be assistant constructors claim
that Mr.. Seabury's appointment works Injustice to
them when, in fact except in the case OF two
cadet engineers appointed lately, there Is no such
thing assistant constructor recognized by official
act of Congress. The assistant constructors, So
called with the exception of the two cadet en-.
gineers) hold simply appointments at the will of
the Secretary OF the Navy. These gentlemen en-
deavor to make II appear that the assistant con-
structorship is closed corporation and no matter
how intelligent an officer may be or how much he
may have learned ut the Naval Academy, or how
much he may have improved himself at any school
of technology he Is not TO give the Government
the benefit of his talent.
THE AGENTS OF TIE ASSISTANT NAVAL CONSTRUCTORS
lay great stress on the section l4O3
the scientific and mechanical class Of the Naval
AGadsmy may may upon 1nS rsS,ommendaPn Of The
ant naval constructors.
This is the only recognition of the rank of assist
ant naval constructor known to the law. This
law does not, however, exclude any one else from
these positions, otherwise the present assistant
naval constructors, of civil appointment, would
have to vacate their positions to all future cadet
engineers, who, recognized by law must take pre-
cedencc of those who have been appointed with
out the authority of any law whatever. But to
show that the law does provide for al cadets edu-
Gated at the Naval Academy, and their appsint-
ments In the grade of constructor, i will quote
section 1922 OF the Revised Statutes:
The Secretary of the Navy Is authorized to make
provision by regulation Issued by himself for educat
ing at the Naval Academy as naval constructors or
steam engineers, Slted Hiitshnsn and others may
show peculiar aptitude therefor, tSc,. dc.
1T HAS REEE ATTEMPTED To SHOW
that that part Of education taught at the Naval
AcadRmy relating TO entering the construction de-
partment is n closed corporation except against
cadet engineers, while the different enactmens
seem to be expressly framed allow the Secretary
of the Navy to obtain the best talent the navy can
produce, no matter in what grade IL is found. No
matter what regulations may be quoted to show
the rights Of this close corpontIon-which quota.
tOns seem to have been inserted in the petition of
the assistant construc tors as blindeTs-et stick
to the letter Of the law; let us take the Revised
Statutes for our guide, and If they don't show that
every endeayor was made by the trainers of the
laws to find the way to provide the best scientific
material in the navy for the construction depart
ment We don't know what law Is,
THERE IS no REASON IN THE WORLD
why any assistant naval constructor who has not
passed thTOugh the Naval Academy, and who has
been ON Che Naval Register for several years aud
should consider himself treated with injustice
This Is not a matter OF appointing Mr.. Seabnry au
II II proposed to appoint him constructor at the
foot of The list and 1t Is plain TO be that The
number of constructors is increased and the
stTuCtOrs also increases. That is, ii Mr. Seaburv
were confirmed ms u constructor there would bo
there Is nOw,E
THERE u no USE IN CONDUCTING
this controversy with acrimony, and II would not
be attempted TO show the iallacies of Mr. b. r.
Hanleys communication to the Senate were it
not that we consider he has not stated his
case clearly und mlry, He has, Of course stated
IL as a lawyer would, but not as u naval officer
lie says, page 3, of his memorial:
As the appointment Of Mr.. SeRhury Il 10 III the
vacancy CAUSED by the retirement OF Naval Con'
srucur Easily, II would seem under this section to be
In direct contrayequon Of law. By reasonable imp.
cation, therefore, iG not by positive enactment ga.
cdcifS IL ne Dfuds Of nurdi constructor must be ais
JTOHi ne assistant naval constructors tHhO are HOtU bt
ne sCtrics appointed by authority QC lao dnd dnSr
eTdmtdt0n aud evidence Of nesS AS provided thereby
and by the Navy Regulations.
There Is no reasonable implication to be taken
into consideration II Is to avoid Implication thar
laws are framed If IL is necessary 10 conform TO
u law in order that Mr., seabury should obtain the
position Of constructor he can be appointed as as
tistant constructor, aud as having passed the
academic board, ana be allowed the benefit of his
eleven years superiority of rank. The law Is so
liberal In this case, when II Is carefully examined
into that Il itallOwst the President Whatit intended
TO appoint the best ability TO be found In tho navy;
and Il is generally conceded that In appointing
Mr. Seabury the President and Secretary OF tho
Navy have selected one who would do credit 70
the corps Of constructors. NAVY.