Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1892-06-23
COL. LUDLow's CASE.

COL. LUDLow's CASE.
Why He Was Relieved-Telegr.ms He Sent
to the Light House Board.
The light house board has made the following
statement In regard to the relief of Lieutensnt
Colonel VIM. Ludlow, engineer corps, Q. s. A.,
and Commander o. F. Hyerman, Q. s. n, en-
g1neer and inspector, respectively, of the
eleventh light house district In January, 1889,
a preliminary project costing csc, 900 Was sub
mitted for the purpose Of Lighting the st. Marys
river below the sauit. The project, as stated
in the report which accompanied It, was simply
preliminary. In March, 1890, q revised project
was submitted by the engineer Of the eleventh
light house district calling for thirty-eight
lights. This was approved by the light house
DO ard ct a meeting in April Of the same year,
anc the following winter Congress was asked to
make an appropriation Of ESQ goo for the es,
bin, approved March s, 1891, contained an item
Of $50 900 for establishing ''some thirty
Hghts" In May Of 1892 letter was received
from the engineer Of the eleventh Light house
district giving the location Of forty-hve lights,
which was far In excess Of what the board had
approved or Of what Congress had authorized.
Attention was called TO this point, and the en-
ginesr Of the eleventh light house district was
notified tina. forty-fve lights had never been
authorized. About the end Of May Of the
present year the district officers telegrsphed
that forty-Hye lights were necessary SO as to
suit the project Of 1880 TO the actual condi-
lions. The light house board replied that the
number and location Of the lights must con-
form to the board instructions Of April, 1890.
The district officers then answered that the
project Of 1890 was only approximate and that
the additional lights were necessary for the
navigation of the st. Mary's river as 1t exists at
the present time.
On June the light house board telegraphed:
Board absolutely refuses to put more than
thirty-eight lights in St. Mary's river. Confer
with inspector, agree upon. locate and establish
thirty-eight lights, each of which may be
lighted so soon as set up. Where channels have
changed location Of lights may be changed
after agreement with inspector, to be placed 40
that the thirty-eight lights may meet as nearly
as possible the requirements Of navigation, adj
approved by the board March 20, 1890, of which
You were notified April s, 1890 After the
thirty-eight lights are placed forward joint re-
port giving locations thereof and full data of
notice to mariners. Any structures not in
cluded in the thirty eight lights agreed upon by
the engineer Snd inspector In accordance with
these instructions must be removed before
leaving the river" On the 9Th Of June the
board telegraphed insisting that its telegram of
June be strictly carried out that the approved
project of 1890 was the one to be followed and
that the lights shown thereon were to be placed
by both district officers acting together; that
the discretion granted did not extend 10
dropping light at one point and substituting
one at some other point, but only such slight
variations Of position as might be necessary to
meet needs Of commerce, but not to change
from one site to another wholly different The
engineer replied that the additional lights were
absolutely necessary and that no additional
funds would be needed to establish them, but
the board did not consider itself warranted in
increasing the number of lights over what had
been approved.
The engineer then telegraphed that
"safety Of navigation calls for adequate provis-
ion or none," to which the reply was made:
Your telegram Of June 10 Is uncalled for.
Obey your instructions" On June Is the dis
trict officers sent long dispatch still urging
the location Of forty-fve lights, apparently
without any regard to the instructions of the
board to establish thirty-eight or Of its refusal
to place more than thirty-eight. Consequently
q special meeting Of the board was called on
June IA to consider the matter. at which meet
ing all OF the correspondence was read and dis
cussed, and 1t was finally resolved unanimously
that the Secretary Of the Treasury be requested
to ask for the relief Of the district officers and
that others be assigned in their places, and the
Secretary of the Treasury complied with this
request.
On June 10, the day after the board had re-
bOlNeO tIfat the OStrlCI OmcerS De renewed,
telegram was received from them as follows:
Telegram of 18th received. Section 1858
Of Revised Statutes forbids literal compliance
with the boards instructions The.
Little Mud Lake range prescribed by the
board would amount to the exhibition of false
lights"
Paragraph 1858 referred to reads as follows:
every person who holds out
or shows any fnlse light or extinguishes any
true light, with intent to bring any vessel sail
ing upon the sea into danger or distress or
shipwreck, shall be punished by a fine Of not
more than s5, 600 and imprisoned at hard labor
not more than ten years."
Previous correspondence between the light
house board and Maj. Ludlow shows clearly
that certain margin of action in the location
Of range lights on the st. Mary's river was left
to the district officers Of the eleventh light
house district, and that a literal compliance
was not intended by the board.
The intimation contained in the telegram was
to the effect that the light house board, by the
location Of certain range lights the Little
Mud Lake range in the st. Mary's river, was
guilty Of an intent to lead vessels astray and
into shipwreck. This language was considered
as entirely uncalled for and offensive by the
light house board.
On the strength Of this last telegram the
Secretary of the Treasury made a second re-
quest that the officers should be relieved with
out delay, even II it were necessary to assign
others temporarily to their duties until perma-
nent details could be made, and the request
was Immediately granted BY the Secretary Of
War and the Secretary Of the Navy.