New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-01-13
THE NAVAL PERSONNEL BILL.
REPRESENTATIVE DAYTc n ANSWERS
PARK BENJAMIN's OBJECTIONS
THE ORIGIN OF THE BILL. ITS ADVOCATES. ITS
PURPOSES AND EXPECTED RESULTS

THE ORIGIN OF THE BILL. ITS ADVOCATES. ITS
PURPOSES AND EXPECTED RESULTS.
To the Editor Of The Tribune
Sir My attention has been called article
emitted What IL the Naval Personnel Bi7' con-
trfbuted TO a recent Of The Independent by
Park Benjamin In this article severe criticism Is
directed only against this bill. but against the
motives which It's writer alleges Influenced the ON
GERS Of the Navy naval officials and Legislators
through whose efforts this measure has been
drafted and introduced in Congress. As citizen
who If proud Of gallant feet and eager for It's
welfare and a member OF the Naval Committee
Of the House OF Representatives. have a strong
interest In the passage Of the Personnel bill May
ask therefore. space In your columns for orief
reply to the assertions OF Mr.. Benjamin
This bill was drafted by board OF line
and engineer officers. the chairman OF which
was Assistant Secretary (now Governor) Roosevelt,
Among the members OF this board were Rear-Ad
mrai W. T Sampson Commodore Melville. the
Engineer-in- Chief OF the Navy: Commodore Crown
inshied. Captain Robley d. Evans and Lieutenant
Commander Wainwright, all officers OF more than
National reputation who have served their coun-
try during periods ranging from thrty-four TO
forty-one years The action OF this Board met
the strong approval OF John d. Lons. secretary Of
the Navy. Recently there have appeared In print
advocates OF the bill Colonel Roosevelt. Commo-
dore Melville. Commodore Philip. OF Texas fame. an
Officer OF forty-two years standing; Francis II
"
naval personnel. and my colleague on the Naval
Committee OF the House Of Representatives. George
Edmund Foss OF Illinois
With this array OF expert witnesses II seems but
just and pertinent contrast the naval career
which on this subject. alone give weight to
Mr.. Benjamins opinions. In Hamerseys Rec
ord this service is given extending through
but 1--WE years and four months as midshpTnan
and ensign and ending thirty years ago on
January 49, 1863 Since his resignation there mas
been a revolution In the matsriel and In the duties
Of the personnel OF navies. There remains only an
obsolete organization. which II Is the purpose OF
this bill 10 sweep away OF the changes which
have with steam. steel and electricity. MT
BENJAMIN seems unaware Remembering but the
brief naval experience OF his youth generation
since he writes In the spirit Of past age.
The leading feature OF the Personnel Dill IL the
amaleamation Of the line and engineer Officers OF
the Navy and the formation OF a new and modern
line which shall perform the duties or oo'h ,he
present corps. Mr.. Benjamin begins his argument
upon this question with an attack, aooundinB IN
misstatement upon the Engineer Corps OF the
Navy Thus he gives the number OF engineer oni-
GERS ne iss that OF line officers $50 and states
that engineers form about 10 per cent OF al the
commissioned officers II IL well known, however
that the number OF engineer officers III the ser
vice during recent years has been gravely made
ouate to the work required OF that corps. Inc
Naval Register" for July. 1895 amply shows this In
It's record OF lss engineer officers and ZIG line on
GERS among total OF 263 commissioned oncers on
the active list II Will be therefore, that the
engineers but Ii. not 10 per cent OF the tota
number of oficers that there are 'ls not 400. line
officers and that the proportion OF line TO engineer
officers is 3s-not rs as Mr.. Benjamin would have
US believe.
WORK THE ENGINEERS DO NOT DO.
Again in his effort TO minimize the Importance OF
this gallant corps Mr. Benjamin follows a iaporl-
ous and absurd process Of elimination. in showing
what II does not do-the work which ne recl'es
being the duty OF other corps. which have their
HANDS full attending 10 It. He limits the Ehei
neer Corps solely to the design and actual man
agement OF the propelling machinery OF warsnips''
A little knowledge OF the United States Naval neg
uIations might have made Mr. Benjamin pause IN
his erroneous generalization Article ia Paragraph
l. states that the senior engineer shall. from time
TO time make inspections OF steam machinery
under the cognizance of other bureaus. and report
TO the captain any repairs adjustment WHICH IN
his Judgment may be needed He shall have I'M
mediate charge OF alb naval repairs, etc Inc
"other bureaus referred 10 are represented OH
shipboard by officers OF the line. who handle ,hls
machinery in action. but who are not trained !"
a knowledge OF its construction and repair Inc
aa1d or inc I-nited States naval engineer on ship
hoard covers the repair and maintenance OF all
machinery there. To this corps IL due. tnen' WIN
regard TO machinery. the fact that IN the recent
war our ships were abe TO answer every can III
A
OF propulsion
Again. Mr. Benjamin discourses on the use OF
military titles referring TO stan officers OF the
Navy and has the audacity TO nsinuase that DOT
rowed plumes worn by such men as ooiiiio
dore Melville the Engineer-in- Chief OF the Navy
o,a tho leading figure in an Arctic expedition
whose heroism was as lofty its suffering was
deep: by Lieutenant Hobson who sank the Merri-
mac in Santiago Harbor, and by Lieutenant feary'
who Is now makiIx his slow way hor'h"aIu oFel
the great ice. AS 10 this II may be said thht 'he
professional titles o, these offcers-as chef ehel-
naa- naval constructor or civil engineer-mark
their grade while the military tide desgnates their
rank An act OF Congress. approved March j. lS''
provides for the issue OF new commissions 10 stan
officers in which commissions the titles captain
commander etc) and grades tchief engineer, pay
director medical director. etcJ herein established
shall be Inserted" The parentheses here are
mine In accordance with this act the commits
sions issued 10 staff officers specify the grade OF
the officer. his relative rank and military title
THE ENGINEERS NOT ALONE
Again. Mr. Benjamin says:
For some thirty years the engineers. a. body.
have persstently claimed that their particular s
thev have stood alone and have not been Joinsd
by the civil engineers ne naval ans or the
surgeons. the psymasiers me ci, s ~. o,ber
professors Of who f form ber nf OF
The late var their demand was that they be given
absolute rank, etc
The error in this statement. that IN the &C.
rnand for positive cabsOiute) rank me Engineer
Germs has stood alone" Is so colossal as 10 re-
,oovs all doubt that II is deliberate. The line ana
STAFF strife has been so bitter and so prolonged as
70 he familiar in its general trend 20 every intei-
gent man in thi. country. In the hearings on the
personnel bill the chairman Of the House Naval
|,-,,,,ao NJ Routelle OF Maine formerly line
officer. said:
NJ axco,tsnce IN the Navy was hat that feeling |
NJ Jealousy was manifested five times by the pay.
masters and doctors. where II was manifested
once by the engineers
~,.. ,bero ue before me A circular headed |