The Savannah morning news., 1902-06-22

the navy is upon the sea; there will
be it's conflicts and there it will make
its history. There has been more or
less disposition on the part of naval
officers in the past to seek snug berths
on the shore, but this is not to be
blamed upon the naval officer so much
as one might think. Back in 1882 we
had only 80 vessels worthy to be called
ships of the navy. and the largest one
of these was the Tennessee, of about 81
900 tons, one-third of the size of our
largest battleship of to-day. 1t did
not take very many men to man our
navy then, and we had about as many
officers at the time as we have now
But as Congress has pursued the policy
of building up the navy, these vessels
have necessarily gone to sea. If the Of
ficers remained ashore those days it
was because they had no ships to Of
ficer, and consequently it cannot be
said that it was entirely their fault. 1t
was largely the fault of the American
Congress, either in not reducing the
number of officers or in failing to pro-
vide more ships. The condition to-
day is better than it ever was before,
and as. we continue the policy of build
ing up the navy this whole question
will settle itself.
/ thoroughly believe in sea duty for
naval officers, and not long ago, when a
cadet at the Naval Academy wrote me
to the effect that he was about to get
married, and would very much like to
have shore duty near the future partner
of his love, l made reply:
NaVaI MatFimOuy
Dear Sir: I have read your letter
with a good deal of interest. l was
very glad to meet Miss Blank, and am
pleased to know that you are engaged
to such fine young lady. But l have
some views in reference to matrimony
on the part of man in your position,
which / trust you will not consider
harsh, as l view it entirely from the
standpoint of the government.
Il confess that l greatly regret that
any of our naval cadets, upon their
graduation from the Academy, before
they have received their commissions,
should think of getting married. In
foreign navies matrimony is absolute
ly discouraged on the part of young
officers, and in my Judgment it would
be better for the naval service If our
government did the same. 1t is the bus
mess of the naval officer to go to sea,
and he should not permit any domestic
ties to hold him to the shore. That is
his profession. and in my judgment,
the most sensible thing for you to do
would be to take your duty like a
man, whatever that duty is, and post
pone matrimony for a few years, at
least. You are both too young, and you
will know your minds great deal bet
or after you have returned from your
first cruise This is my advice to you,
and it would be the same that 1 would
give my own son if l had one in a
similar position"
OF course, it is a difficult matter to
say how much an officer ought to be
at sea. 1t is hard to lay down an ex-
act rule, but there ought to be some
general rule. Many officers think
that it is a hardship for them to be
away from their families for more than
three years at a time, but they must
realize, as probably many of them do,
that their business and profession is
upon the sea. They have chosen that
life, and it is expected of them that
they should spend a greater part of
their time on shipboard, familiarizing
themselves in every way with the prop
er handling of the engine of war, train
ing the men, firing the guns, and main
tanning the highest possible standard
in the personnel, so as to be ready
for the supreme moment when war
shall come. Immediately upon their
graduation at the Naval Academy the
young officers should be given sea
duty and be kept on sea practically
all the time. AS they approach the
higher grades, they might be relieved
from time to time, to fill some. of the
important naval positions in connec-
ton with our naval boards and bu-
reaus at different yards and stations,
but this should be only temporary.
l have sometimes felt that a rule
which has been adopted to some extent
in foreign navies fixing a minimum
amount of sea duty in each grade
that is to say, that unless an officer in
the grade of lieutenant spent three
quarters of his time while in that
eligible to promotion to the next high
er grade-would be wholesome to our
service.
Too Many Retired Officers.
Then there is another thing which
might be reInedied. We have a great
many men on the retired list drawing
three quarters pay. Many of them
have served a great many years in the
navy, and have earned an honorable
retirement but there are some of
younger age who are willing and
others who, if not willing are able to
do important shore duty. Many OF
these men could serve on important
boards, such as the lighthouse board
ana general boards of the Navy De-
partment. Some two years ago we
passed A law giving the Secretary of
the Navy the authority to order men
TO active duty from the retired list
whenever i'm his judgment and discre-
ton IL was of advantage to do 50, and
to give them full pay while doing ac-
tive duty. I am Of the opinion that the
officers in the navy retire at too early
an age They retire at siXty-two years.
In the army the age Of retirement Is
sixty-four years. There Is no reason
that / can see why the age OF retire
ment should not be the same In one
service as in the other. Many men re-
tire from the navy at sixty-two in. full
vigor OF life, capable Of performing
further service 10 their country.
There is another question which has
arisen In connection with this subject,
and that Is. How shall we properly
train our officers and mem Is N bet
ter 10 train them on the sea or on
land The same question has arisen
in the English navy. and Lord HrasFey.
upon this "a these words
THE growth 81 establishments on
shore requires most careful watching
on the part ~ the admiralty. ~ the
men vim take our ships 80 sra are in
adYanle ~ the men - any possible
enemy a. ~ bfcauHs the ship