The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1888-11-08
long-established ruling of this Office should be

long established ruling of this Office should be
re-adopted.
The part of the statute, section 1922 Re-
vised Statutes, material TO the cause, is as fol-
lows:
at shall be the duty of the commanding
officer to send toan Atlantic or Pacific
port of the United States 3 all petty
officers and persons of inferior ratings desiring
to go there at the expiration of their terms
of enlistments, or as soon thereafter as
may be- unless, in his opinion, the detention of
such persons for a longer period should be
essential to the public interest, in which case
he may detain them, or any of them, until the
vessel to which they belong shall return TO such
Atlantic or Pacific port. All persons
who shall be so detained beyond their terms of
enlistments shall receive an addi-
tion of onc-fourth of their former pay"
The Supreme Court held, in Wilkes V. Dins-
man, III Howard, 49, that an enlisted man in
the navy, who re-enlisted for the balance of a
cruise, was subject to all the penalties and liza
bilities under his re-enlistment that attached
under his first enlistment. If that be true as
to a re-enlistment for the balance of cruise,
there seems no reason for not applying the
same rule to seamen who are detained beyond
their enlistment and until they may reach a
port of the United States where they may be
discharged. 1t makes no difference whether
they are re-enlisted or are detained, they have
to do the same work and are subject to ex-
acty the same penalties and liabilities as
though they were serving under their orig
nal enlistment; for section 1923 provides that,
"All persons sent home or detained by q
commanding officer, according to the pro-
visions of the preceding section, shall be
subject in all respects to the laws and regula-
tions for the government of the navy until
their return to an Atlantic port and their regu-
lar discharge" If they be subject to those
penalties and liabilities, they should receive
the corresponding benefits in the shape of such
emoluments as the statutes provide for the adj
ditional service during the time that they are
so detained.
To my mind there is no distinction between
detention in port or at sea. The seaman en-
lists for three years, with the understanding
that if he be on foreign station he will be
sent home at the expiration of his term of en-
Ilstment, or as soon thereafter as may be, unless
his commanding officer thinks best to detain
him. The seaman has no volition in the mat
ter; the commanding officer is clothed with
the discretionary power of saying whether or
not it be essential to the public interests that
the person be detained, and if that discretion
be exercised in favor of the seaman, he should
receive the benefits thereof
The distinction made in the ruling of this
office, in 1884, seems fictitious. The account
ing officers cannot go into all the minute de-
motives governing the actions of it's command
ing officer. The enlisted man whose term ex-
pires one day after his ship leaves port in
Australia would seem to deserve as much con-
siderati0n as the man whose term expired the
day before sailing The opinion of the COM
handing officer that the PERSONS detention was
essential to the public interests, means that he
believed that the best interests OF the Govern
ment were subserved by the ships sailing on a
certain day, even though the terms of enlist
ment of some or all of the crew should expire
before the port of enlistment was reached.
The movements and care Of the ship, handled
by proper complement of men. are the i'm
portant questions to which the detention of the
men is plainly subordinated,
Hereafter the old rule of the Office as ap!
piled before the change made in 1884 will be
followed in settling pay officers accounts.
SIGOURNEY BUTLER,
Signed Oct. u, 1888. Comptroller.