Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-07-06
ADMIRAL SIMPSONS PA\
Cannot Draw That of Rear Admiral Except
Since March 4, 1899.
Acting Controller MitcheIPs Decision
and the Reasons He Gives
Therefor.

Acting Controller Mitchell of the treas
ury has rendered a decision on the pay of
Admiral Sampson from August s, 1898, to
March 4, 1899. 1t is addressed to Arthur
Burtis, pay inspector of the navy who is
now at the Port of Spain Trinidad. The
decision is al, follows::
Il have your letter of April 10, 1899, in
closing a copy of your letter to the auditor
and his reply thereto relating to the rate
of pay of Rear Admiral William 7. Samp-
son. United States navy, from August s,
1898, which you state to be the date when
he was commissioned a rear admiral, to
March 4, 1885, date when Congress ad-
journed. You stated no further facts con-
nected with his advancement, and It there
fore became necessary to refer your COM
munication to the bureau of navigation
Navy Department: for the information
recessary to enable me to answer your
question. The bureau of navigation, under
date Of May 8, 1899, reported: Rear Adni-
raj William T. Sampson was advanced
eight numbers and appointed rear admiral
in the navy for eminent and conspicuous
conduct in battle, under the provisions of
section 1906 of the Revised Statutes, from
the 10th day of August, 1888, and an ad in
term commission was issued him from that
date. This advancement the Senate failed
TO confirm prior to adjournment
No Vacancy Created.
THE advancement in numbers authorized
by section 1906, Revised Statutes, does not
create vacancy within the meaning of
the Constitution, from the time when the
President decides to recommend such ad-
vancement, nor is any vacancy created
prior to the date when the Senate concurs
in the Presidents recommendation. 1t is
not simply the filling of an office; it is an
adjudication, not by the President alone,
but by the President and Senate, upon the
question of whether the acts of heroism
constitute sufficient ground for advance
ment, and until such combined action is had
no advancement takes place, and no va
cancy exists to be filled III Opin. A. c.,
76)
I'm the case of Young vs. United States
Q9 c. Cls R., 145), an officer was advanced
pursuant to section 1906, and, the Senate
consentlng thereto, he was commissioned
In his advanced grade to rank from the
date of the acts of heroism for which he
was advanced. He was not allowed pay
from said latter date to the actual date of
his commission, nor to count such time as
service In his advanced grade as to in
crease his pay therein. There was no ad
interim appointment. To allow Admiral
Sampson the increased pay of rear ad-
m1ral during this period, it would be neces-
sary to hold that the President alone, by
an ad interim appointment, could grant an
increase OF pay for a period, which, ac-
cording to this decision, could not be Gone
by tha President with the concurrence of
the Senate, where commission issued af-
ter the action Of the Senate. The President
and Senate together constitute a forum 10
pass upon questions of advancement in
numbers under this section of the Revised
Statutes. as indicated by the Attorney Cen
eral in his opinion above cited.
I am of opinion. therefore, and SO decide
that as the Senate did not consent to the
advancement Of Rear Admiral Sampson, no
authority exists for paying MIN as rear
admiral from the date when he was COM
missioned such for eminent and con-
spicuous conduct in battle, to the adjourn
ment of the session of the Senate at which
such advancement was proposed"