The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-03-19
, Greensboro, Ala, March 15, 1903. titor The Advartieau. - -~'

greensboro. Ala, March 15, 1903. | Eoitor The Advertiser:
 Tn The Advertiser of February 1S under the title The Hobson Case' appears a letter from MT. Lucien Julien Walker. | Wnicn, your headlines state absolyes Mir Lihheao. tLa The letter states, referring to l tne matter of my retirement, He was l not retired in the ordinary way because two dlnerent medical boards of the navy Iound that he was not physically ouaii- n', nvI TOT retirement, that his eyes were | qG<te good enough for the delicate and Nmcuit work of a naval constructor He 1 was not retired by act of Congress for the reason, in part, of the findings of the theaical board, but mainly for the reason 1 that special act in his behalf would l establish a precedent extremely danger 1 ous to the well being of the navy. in that any other young officer could, with just l as good excuse, ask to he retired while 1 cered." "i" This statement of the case is at var,- ance With the recorded facts. yet it has been spread broadcast over the state oS Alabama and the country at large It is now time that the facts should be known ana am sure that you will in fairness give this open letter the same promi- neated,,l ,n pupiicaton that you have re- peatedly given the misstatements
 One medical board only has examined . my eyes and this board found them in- uied as l represented. The board con | sisted of Surgeons F. J. B. Cordairo Oil | met at Covite, Manila, on June 4. l9n0 made an optbalmic examination. and re- ported unanimously that my malady was .ie5aat; resllius It's probably future duration l hoennite and its origin service in the tropics. As a result of this report I was l mVaiided to the hospital at Yokahoma, Japan. and thence ordered to the United states. The occulist. Dr. Stafford who was consulted in connection with the med ical board, confirmed it's finding and said | tnere was grave danger of blindness The sole basis as far as I can see for tne unwarranted statements of Mr. Walk CT IS the action of the Retiring Board l Detore Which appeared in January 1902 | me two surgeons on this board of five 1 members did noe ma ke an opthalmic ex- aHlnauon for the reason that I told the board upon appearing before it that my vision was good and l could do duty for the tune, the danger lying in the future should take up the trying work of the noIls!ruction ,,, corps. The board informed me; m erect. that they had no power or | Jurisdiction over matters of the future 1 ana that they could not only after I had gone back to work and become incapaci- .ateo TOT duty. With retinal trouble such lhcapaclty would be equivalent to blind | ness.
 My only chance of recovery lay in l avoiding such work as that of the con ssructon st corps. l applied, therefore, to | the only source of relief for this peculiar case, Congress. MT. Walker makes my | application out in the light of a request Tor Congressional favor over the disap- 1 ProVai or the regular naval authorities. AS matter of fact all the various au- | thorlties approved and favorably en- | oorsed the application, the Chief Con | structor, the Secretary of the Navy. and the Sommander-in-C Chief, the President
 Who transmitted the request to Congress | in special message of enlargement. | Senator Gallinger introduced the required
 Dill in the Senate and MT. Moody of Ore
 gon, introduced it in the House of Rep | A
 gan to help me and take charge of the
 bill in the Senate. He consented and
 gave 1t cordial support and it was favor
 ably reported upon by the Senate Naval
 committee and placed upon the Senate
 Calendar for passage. 1 applied to Mir.
 Bankhead for the same service in the
 House of Representatives. He refused,
 opposed the measure, and 1t was defeated
 In committee by his Democratic col | leagues.
 This last avenue of relief being thus
 closed. and my eyesight and future use
 1ulness being at stake I was forced to resign. Such are the facts as officially
 recorded, which can be found set forth
 at length in the Congressional Record of
 January 8, page 6l3.
 A copy of my resignation summing up , the case is herewith enclosed the full
 text of which would request you to ! publish either separately or as a part of this communication.
 Thus I find myself entirely severed from the navy after about eighteen years 7 Fservice, in which fierce conditions were
 encountered in Cuba. China and the Phil ippfnoes, that caused permanent inury l to my eyes. which are giving me almost
 continual trouble, preventing me except
 at risk of ultimate blindness, from per , | forming the work of my profession etth-
 CT in the navy or In civil life. In this un-
 happy plight I am cut off from the ust relief which l had a right to expect from my country and am cut off through the
 action of my own Representative, whose
 help had a right to claim, as a constit-
 uent A great injustice has been done me
 and I charge the responsibility directly
 and absolutely to J. H. Bankhead who,
 in the apprehension of a political danger,
 grossly neglected the duty of his high Noffice.
 + MT. Bankhead cannot escape this re.
 sponsibility behind the evasions that have appeared from his supposedly irrespon.
 sible mouthpiece, his private secretary.
 your correspondent. The bill instead of
 being against the judgment of the regular
 naval authorities, as Is alleged, was pro-
 nounced just and approved by them all.
 Instead of constituting an alleged dan
 gerous precedent the case stands unique;
 there never has been similar case be-
 fore, and in all probability there never
 will be a similar case again, where a
 naval constructor goes off to war ser.
 vice and in this service and that imme-
 diately following, incurs eye troubles that
 cut off the practice of his profession.
 In this matter of precedent, in taking
 a position antagOnlStlc to recorded facts
 and directly opposite to that of the naval
 authorities and of Senator Morgan, Mir
 Bankhead seems never to have taken into
 account the injury that would be done the
 naval service by the precedent of deny
 ing an officer the just relief of retirement
 for inuries incurred in the .line of duty.
 There Is no escape in the assertion that
 Mr.. Bankhead did not personally ap- | proach any member of the Naval Com | mittee. Such a method would be the
 very last one to be expected from poli- tician planning to achieve a result and then to escape the responsibility.
 Nor can refuge be found in the alleged passive position. The neglect of duty would be complete even in passiveness
 Neither Is there escape in claiming that Mir. Bankhead was not requested to in | troduce the bill. nor in his being absent | from Washington when the final action | of the Committee was taken. These in- | cidents have no real bearing upon the case and advancing them as advancing | the other evasions and using the mouth l piece of his secretary shows clearly un- | scrupulous scheming, shows the con sciousness of guilt and the lack of cour- | age to confess or face the facts.
 | Yours very truly.
 R. P. Hobson. Army and Navy Club