National Republican., 1885-12-19

sued order No. 3s2, as follows:
"1he order Of the department OF Aug.
n, 1865, to the chief Of the bureau of navl-
cation, and that Of June 20, 1859, attaching
The office Of detail to that bureau, arc here
by revoked.
Gan communications to the department
from naval officers will be addressed 10 the
Secretary Of the Navy, except those strictly
pertaining to the special business OF the
bureaus Of the department
The Secretary also then commenced sign
ing, himself, all orders TO the naval officers,
and addressed to each OF the four line Off
GERS who were chiefs af the bureaus of (D
yards and docks, (2) equipment aud recruit
ing, (3l navigation, aud ~ ordnance let
ter, as follows.
oeTonEn l, 1SSi-sin You Will please act
Mt the Navy Department as one OF the four
officers 10 advise the Secretary concerning tho
detail of naval officers and the cruising orders
ofthips and squndronsd
formed In the Office OF detail, under the direct
supervision of the Secretary. They will sug.
gcst to him the appropriate officers to be or.
end will keep themselves fully advised as to
all matters connected with the personnel OF the
navy.
tail of officers of the stan corps they Will accept
the names submitted by the chiefs of the proper
bureaus, unless they dissent for reasons which
they will state.
The officers of detail may make such sub.
division Of the routine work of their duties as
SAME, but will consult Jointly before forming
any opinion upon'Qnestions OF Importance.
The proCC edings Of the officers OF detail Will
be entirely informal, and their suggestions to
the Secretary will be either oral or in brief
memorandums, which will not be preserved
after decisions are reached.
The method of ordering the detail OF
naval officers thus established met with the
lsNN N1taa ra1
easily and satisfactorily, and with no fric
tion except such as was created by the dis
satisfied chief Of the bureau OF navigation,
who evidently submitted to it only until he
should he able to overturn It. This he sue
ceeded IN doing on the 22d Of May, 1885,
when Secretary Whitney issued order No.
33T, as follows:
Much valuable time has been expended by
the individual members Of the board of detail
In the consideration Of the less important du.
ties connected with that board to the neglect
of larger and more important matters con
322 is so far modified that the detail office of
the Navy Department Will hereafter be man
aged by the chief of the bureau of navigation.
who will be held responsible for the assign
| specified below.
The informal board of four officers created
by departments letters OF Oct. l last TO advise
| the Secretary concerning the detail OF naval
officers, will continue to meet once week to
| consider the assignment OF officers to command
| souadrons, stations, and ships and such ques-
All communications from naval officers Te.
| latlng 10 assignment to duty will be addressed
| to the "Ofilce OF Detail, Navy Department"
This order of Secretary Whitney, like
| order No. 2S5 Of Secretary Hunt, cannot
| have been understood by its signer. The
reason assigned for imposing all the duties
| Of the Office Of detail upon the chief Of the
bureau Of navigation Is, that the officers Of
| detail are compelled by the work of detail
| to neglect large and important matters
connected with their bureaus. To this
| ayerment two replies may be given: (1l
| The chiefs Of the bureaus Of yards and
| docks, equipment and recruiting, aud ord
nance are not so overwhelmed with the
| work Of their bureaus rs to be unable to
| give, without any injury, all that Is
| necessary Of their valuable time to
| the Office Of detail (2l The chief
of the bureau of navigation has the
most extensive and difficult bureau Of
all, and In effect, under the vicious system
Of using him as sole officer of detail, aban-
dons entirely his lawful and proper duties.
1t is absurd for Mr. Whitney to give as q
reason for the change that three of the of
ficers Of detail cannot be spared from their
| bureaus to aid in the work of detail, and
then unlawfully to place all that work on
the fourth officer, taking him entirely from
| his Inc lnTec Culelb Ol Iuc SpeCl-
| fled bureaus who first acted with the fourth
as officers Of detail made no complaint
against serving, and they believed in the
fairness and wisdom of the system. The
present chief of the bureau of yards and
docks, however, undoubtedly aided the
chief of the bureau of navigation in pro-
curing the revocation Of order No. 322 in
return for the latter's powerful and success
full advocacy of his appointment as bureau
chief.
The result is that the adroit and aspiring
chief of the bureau Of navigation aud office
of detail is installed as virtually In command
OF the navy. Secretary Whitney, 1t is un-
derstood, does sign the naval orders, and
therefore, II he chooses, knows what they
are at or about the time when the Evening
Star is issued, instead of reading them from
that paper two hours later at his house.
But all the replies to the orders, and tall
communications from naval officers relating
to assignment to duty, will be addressed to
the Office of detail, Navy Department" The
shadow Of board Of detail exists, but the
members do not meet once week, and II
they did, yards and docks would assent to
all the proposals from navigation, and equip
ment and ordnance would understand that
they were to make no opposition. The cap
tain who does not 90 to sea alone decides
who shall go or stay, who shall have duty
and who shall have none.
1t may be useful to restate and extend the
reasons why captain In the navy, chief Of
the bureau of navigation, Office of detail,
and office of naval intelligence, should
not thus be made in effect the Secretary
Of the Navy for the purpose Of determining
all orders to naval officers.
| j. The practice is in violation OF the true
theory of military administration in our
republic, which is that the President,
through his Secretary of the Navy, a
civilian head Of department, shall exercise
the function Of naval command. 1t Is alb
solutely necessary that there should be
interposed such Secretary, but he is bound
to act himself, and not through ignorance
or Incidence or good nature, or for any
cause whatever, to surrender his functions
to any naval officer not even to the admiral,
still less to a captain. The very necessity
for one remove from the President OF the
personal exercise Of the function makes a
furher remove insufferable.
III. 1t is injurious TO the naval service to
give supreme control Of the navy to an
officer of low rank. Only In a great
emergency should an inferior officer be
allowed to give an order to a supe-
rior, II this may not be done in the case
of squadron or single ship, much less
should 1t be done with the whole navy. No
less an officer than the admiral should exer-
else such command. If any lower officers
are to render advice concerning the detail,
1t should be given informally, and without
any assumption Of authority. The deliber-
ate and public committal to one captain In
the navy Of the selection Of all officers to be
ordered on duty, and the declaration that
he alone "whl be held responsible for the
assignment TO the duty of all officers" are
a reversal of all mil itary rules, and II per-
sisted in will at last utterly demoralize the
service.
III. 1t Lis unwise administration Of the
Navy sDepar tment to select one OF eight
chiefs Of bureas who by law are equal In
power and obligation as TO the business as
signed them, and to allow that chief wholly
TO neglect the duties OF his own bureau, aud
to take control of the whole navy, the
seven other chiefs included. Mr.. Whitny's an
nouncement that the chief OF the bureau Of
NAVIGATION IIIs next 10 the SECRETARY In thu