New-York tribune., 1900-05-23
ROOTS STAFF CRITICISED.
ADMIRAL O'NEIL POINTS OUT OBJEC.
TIONS TO A SEPARATE ORD
NANCE CORPS.
TBy TELEGRAPH TO TIRE TRIBUNE. ]

Washington. May 22-The chief feature of
Secretary Roots reorganization scheme which
has already passed the Senate, and which is be-
ing strongly combated in the House Committee,
SIS the project to make staff details temporary.
Able arguments being adduced to show that
the plan would be inapplicable TO the supply de-
partments. which were most severely criticised
in the recent war and the Ordnance Bureau
has presented some excellent reasons against
doubtful experiments with its corps. Among
these is a letter written by Admiral O'Neil, Chief
of Ordnance of the Navy, to General Burlington
q short time ago. The Naval Ordnance Bureau
has been regarded as a model to which the
Army should aspire. Admiral O'Neil's views
are therefore those Of an expert. In his letter
he says:
I should not advocate separate Ordnance
Corps for the Navy, to be composed of officers
performing duty shore only, because the ext
gencies Of the naval service demand many
seaeoing officers possible, and l should deem
1t inadvisabe TO create an additional corps of
officers for shore duty only, as after good
many years of hard work and in the face of
many difficulties we have, SO TO speak, bulls up
an ordnance corps among the seagoing officers
of the line, and there is great probability that
the present arrangement viii suffice; but il must
Rot be supposed that any officer of the line can
be expected to perform any and every kind Of
ordnance duty in satisfactory manner without
long period of special training. Officers differ
very much in their tastes and talents for spe-
cialties. and their opportunities for acquiring
knowledge with respect to them also differ and
no one can become proficient ordnance officer,
IN the proper sense of the term. without long
familiarity with the technical questions which
pertain almost exclusively to that speciality, for
Il certainly is a speciality.
/ do consider that the efficiency of the
Ordnance Department of the Navy is due to
the system under which il has been developed,
but rather that it has been made efficient in
spite of the difficulties which have been en-
cOuntered. II is absurd to expect to find skilled
designers from among those who have had
previous training such, and to trust to novices
IS sure TO result in amateurish work and a waste
or money and Of time to say nothing of graver
possibilities. and / should regard 1t un-
fortunate mistake to break up efficient corps
like that Of the Army Ordnance, for have been
brought into close contact with number Of its
members. and am pleased TO say that without
exception have found them to be of high
professional attainments, who must necessarily
render more efficient service in a branch that
than could be the case such duties inter
rupted by other details.
The argument is sometimes advanced that by
reason Of the system Of detail followed in the
Navy a more extended knowledge of ordnance
matters is disseminated throughout the service
which is true in measure, and while l think
IL highly important that every line officer of the
Navy should have good knowledge concerning
the mechanical details of guns. mounts, turrets
ammunition, etc, II is by means necessary
that all should understand the theory of gun
construction or the chemistry of making smoke
less powder; what they mostly want is to know
how TO and care for the finished materials
placed in their hands.