Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1901-08-12
EVANS CENSURED.
Sharply Reprimanded by Act.
ing Secretary Hackett
For Offensive References to Ex-Sec.
Chandler in His Book.
Admiral Evans Will Probably Not Ask Tor ccuit
Of Inquiry.

/ Washington. Aug. 1l.-Rear Admiral
Robley ID. Evans has been severely
reprini1nded by the navy department.
through Acting Secretary Hackett. for
| criticising in his book. "A Sailors
| Log" an official action of former Sec
rctary of the Navy William e. Chand-
| Ter.
| Following is the departments com
munication to Admiral Evans:
! Navy Department.
| Washington, ID. c., Aug. .. 1901.
| Rear Admiral Robley -. Evans-Sir;
| The Hon. William f. Chandler. prcsi-
| dent of the Spanish treaty claims com
| mission, lately a senator of the United
States and formerly secretary of the
navy. has complained to the depart
| ment as you are aware, of certain
structures upon himself in your book.
| entitled "A Sailors Log" The strict
| ures in question are in the nature 81
| aspersions upon the official conduct oi
| the then 1SSD secretary OF the navy.
| i The text OF your book ii Is not neces-
sary here TO recite. Nor is II necdful
| to ask OF you an explanation why you
| felt yourself justified in publishing
what YOU have. 1t is obvious to any
| reader that you speak extensively OF
Secretary Chambers action, that YOU
| impugn his motives, ana otherwise ira
duce him in respect To orders given
| YOU by the secretary in the discharge
| of duties of his office.
You are Informed that this deliberate
publication OF yours has justly in
Cured the dsplea3ure Of the depart
ment For an officer thus 10 attack a
| former head of the navy department.
because Of orders given to him ny that
| official. is to abandon the courtesy
| that should always characterize an
| officer of the navy. II tolerated. II
would unquvstionably prove SubNerSiNr
| Of discipline II would tend to bring
| the office itself into disrepute. The act
| il the more reprehensible. IN this IN
stance. because OF your long expert
ence in the service.
1t has become my duty. therefore. 4"
censure YOU for this breach Of the Oh
legation imposed upon you as com
missioned officer of the United states
navy. which | accordingly do.
4 copy OF this letter Will h" fur
nishcd to the Hon. William +. 'hand-
Ter. Rcspcc fully
F. w UAckETT.
Acting Secretary.
Former Secretary Chandler was noti-
fed OF the action OF the department IN
the following:
Navy Department.
Washington H. e.. Aug. .. 1901.
Tho Hon. William Il. chandler Wa
r.. LOO. y. H-Sir. Referring To recent
,or-aepondrn,e upon the subject Of al
lrrrl structures made 10y Rear Nj
miral Hohlcy \. Evans upon ~" con
duet ana motives Of the secretary ~
the navy in 1854. published In his book
entitled IA Sailors Log. ! have n"
honor Ia inform you that the depart
n.cnt regards this action IF Admrai
Evans Is deserving of r"prouf, Accord
ingiy the department has crnSurrd
that officer as will appear from cory
Of a letter to him Of this date. herewith
inclOS"d
I have the honor t. lie. yours re-
spcctfully.
r. w HACk EFT.
Acting Secretary.
Several weeks ago Mr.. chandler adj
'SS''i Il ''l'f'' ~ W. "a u - bifNi 80
which hc called the attention to oh
icctionahlc phrases contained in tn"
hook. and expressed tn" opinion that
il was contrary to TN" regulations ana
to nropre;y for an officer to rehukC q
CORNER head ~ tie department Cor hi
conduct during office. While no Sug
G,stiou MAS made that II might hc
proper to r"hukc Admiral Evans FOR
his language. there was an intimatinn
that such action on the part Of the adj
miral should not be tolerated by the
department.
Recently attention has again been al
tractcd to tho controversy hN a second
letter sent to the department by Mr..
Chandler.
In this communication senator chnnd
Ter asked that he be furnished with y
'opy OF the order issued nv Secretary Fol
ger relieving Commander Evans from tn,
lighthouse service. In reply t. an maui \
the secretary of the treasury irfnrme'
he navy department THAI the order wa
| on file in tho treasury. bit ira; n cory ~
would he issued only on oflic n rodlcSt
This request tn" secretary Of the navy
rs not dee mod it r"cessar 10 make.
Throughout the affair Secretary Long
las r"fraincd from making any comment
" indicating any purpose 10 take act oi;
which might lead to court of inquiry
!, r some other course in the natur" Of
"cprimand MI. Hackett's action is be
licvCd to have been suggested with tn
, sole view of furnishing Adm raj r.v IN.
| for what clearly seems IL ave hccn n
tcmnera,e use OF language on his part.
Whether Fighting Bob viii now ask
! for a court of inquiry to dcfernninc his
right to Criticisc a former head of the ma
w department remains to be developed
although it IS believed there would b,
nothing to gain by such action. Opinions
differ as TO whether there has been any
violation of the naval regulations.