New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-08-29
METHODS OF NAVAL PROMOTION.

Much dissatisfaction has been expressed, both
within and without the Navy, At the socalled
"leap frog" method followed in parcelling out
promotions for distinguished service during the
war with Spain. The complaints which have
been made involve, of course. no criticism OF the
Departments judgment in the selection OF par
ticuar officers for advancement; for certainly
no one will impugn the liberal and Impartial
spirit in which the Government has sought to
show its appreciation OF conspicuous conduct
In battle or extraordinary heroism." 1t IS the
system of naval law under which promotions
for gallantry must lie made which Is assailed
as the real cause OF so many chagrins and
heartburnings; ana there are many facts which
seem 10 sustain the indictment brought against
the present scheme Of advancement, that in IT'S
operation IL is marked by caprice, inequality
and hardship.
The chief vice of the existing system IS that
IL is one not of absolute but OF relative re-
wards. 1t provides for the promotion OF Otti-
GERS gazetted for exceptional merit by the prac-
teal retardatlon in rank and pay Of their less
fortunate associates. Advancement on the list
in any grade may be neutralzed. moreover, by
subsequent promotions from below. so that for
the same display Of professional skill and per
sonal bravery one officer may eventually re-
ceive only half the increase in rank achieved
by a no more deserving companion The case
Of Captain Dyer. of the cruiser Baltimore, Is
cited as one in point. This officer. with the
rest OF the captains who fought under Dewey
at Manila. was not long ago advanced seven
numbers by direction OF the President But by
reason Of later promotion given to the captains
Of the Santiago feet he has been jumped no
less than three times. and has now only four
additional numbers left to his credit.
Besides introducing an element Of inequality
and pure caprice into the problem OF rewarding
deserving officers the present system encOur-
ages an injurious stagnatlon In certain higher
grades. For If, as IN the case Of Rear Admlrals
Sampson and Schley, advancement carries n
gaZetted officer to rank in which there Is al
ready full legal complement, no further pro-
motions by seniority can be made until retire
ments reduce the complement of that grade 10
the legal limit. We cannot sympathize with
the extreme view, expressed in certain quar-
tiers, that an unhampered promotion TO that
rank and pay to which he might attain by the
natural operations Of seniority Is the due Of
every naval officer. The laws of competition
and selection cannot be wholly set aside in any
field OF human activity, and opportunity and
good fortune will always operate in the Navy
and out of il TO disarrange any fixed scheme of
measured advancement But that the hap
hazard methods of promotion which Congress
has imposed on the Navy Department do entail
hardships and inequalities must be admitted
by those who have studied the effects Of the
changes in rank ordered since the war began.
Jealous and efficient officers. who have served
AT the head of department bureaus or on sta
tions where no display OF courage in action was
possible. and who by natural progress would
have reached the highest grades in the Navy,
now find themselves cut off from such promo
ton by the changes In rank occasioned by the
war. and their chagrin is obvious and pardon
able
1t has been suggested that fa.rer distribu-