The Worthington advance., 1898-09-22
SA PSON I'D WE'LL.
Administration Is Satisfied with
the Admiral's Work.
n Member Of the Cabinet Talks Free.
" Of the Santiago Campaign
5-Unjust system Of Naval
z Rewards.
Especial washington Letter.

Strange it is that our government
cannot do justice to worthy officers of
the navy without doing injustice to
other officers, equally worthy, who
have had no opportunity to achieve
distinction and renown:
Under existing laws and regulations
our naval officers cannot be promoted
in rank for heroic services without in
jury to other officers who have done
no wrong, but who have faithfully per-
formed their duties in every respect.
The naval officers hold their relative
ranks by seniority of commission. For
example, Jones, Brown and Smith are
captains in the navy, each of them
commanding battleship. Suppose
Jones was commissioned captain Jan
uary 1, Brown was commissioned cap
tain January 2, and Smith. was COM
missioned captain January 3. 81
Thus, on the naval list, they stand
as number first, second and third in
the list of captains. They are all of
equal rank; but Jones having been
commissioned first stands number one.
Consequently, when there occurs va
cancy in the ranks of commodore, Capt.
Jones will be made a commodore. Then
Brown will stand number one on the
list of captains, and will be the next
man to receive advancement to the
rank of commodore, if he lives long
enough. OF course, there are many
captains, lieutenant-command lieu
tenants, ensigns, etc.
Now, suppose Capt. Rice, who may
stand number four on the list of cap
tains, commands a ship in battle and
wins a great victory. The only way
the navy department can reward him
is by advancing him one number, or
more, on the list of captains in the
navy. Suppose the navy department
honors him by advancing him four
numbers on the list of captains. That
would place him above Jones, who does
no wrong, and has had no opportunity
to win victory. Then, when a COM
modore is to be appointed, it will be
Rice instead of Jones who gets the ad-
vancement.
This is palpably unfair, and our
government should certainly find some
method by which it may be just to our
naval heroes, by comforting upon them
well merited honors, without dealing
injustice to other equally brave and
patriotic men. Every naval officer
who has been advanced in numbers on
the naval list gains his new honors at
the expense of his associates, and it
operates with great injustice to many.
A pointed instance of this injustice
that is visited upon some of our naval
heroes in order to give proper honors
to others is exhibited in the case of
the captains of Admiral Dewey's fleet.
By the advancement of the officers of
Admiral SIMPSONS fleet that destroyed
Cervera's- squadron two of Admiral
Dewey's captains find themselves two
numbers lower on the naval list than
they were before, and two others are
each reduced one number on the list.
Another illustration of unjust effects
of naval promotions by numbers was
given in the case of Capt. Clark, whose
cruise of the Oregon from San Fran
cisco to Key West was altogether the
most memorial BILE of naval history, and
yet he went into action at Santiago
and performed prodigies in heroic re-
suits in the naval battle when he was
two numbers lower than when he sailed
from San Francisco. He has since been
advanced, but his advance of six mum
bers leaves him a net advancement of
only four.
No one can complain of the honors
conferred upon the officers of Admiral
'Sampson's fleet, excepting only the
questionable advancement of Admiral
Sampson himself. All the others fair
~ won the distinction that has been
awarded them, but it must be remem-
bered that these advancements strike
with fearful injustice upon all the
other officers of the navy, most of whom