Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-07-12
THE BISCoE CASE.
Ex-secretary Moody's Letter of Repri-
Ynand


The letter of reprimand, written by Mr..
Moody, as Secretary Of the Navy, to Pay
master Harry E. Biscoe, just made public,
is III part follows:
"A court of inquiry convened in February
last on board the United States flagship
Kentucky, Manila bay, P. l., by order OF
the comma nder- chief of the Asiatic fleet,
found that you were in a measure respon-
sible for certain shortages In stores In the
pay department of the U. s. s. Oregon
under your charge In that you did not re-
quire proper reports of issues and In not
keeping a more vigilant watch over the
commissary department.. and recommended
that you be reprimanded for neglect or
duty in the commissary department OF the
u. 8. s. Oregon
Upon the receipt Of this record a general
before which you were brought to trial
upon the following charges:
violation of lawful regulation Of the
secretary Of the navy, neglect of duty
and 'culpable ineff1ciency In the perform
ance of duty
The court found you guilty under all OF
these charges and sentenced you to lose
fifteen numbers in your grade. From this
action by the court, which was approved
by the commander-in-chiefy you appealed,
and as the result of a careful review of the
case, including an examination of the rec
ords of the court of inquory and the court
martial the President directs that the sem
tence be miugated by remission of the loss
of numbers, and that you be reprimanded
for neglect of duty.
1T has been urged in your behalf that
the shortage of s., 500, found to exist in the
stores under your charge, consisted chiefly
of general mess property; that only about
$500 of that amount belonged to the govern
ment;' and that for the existence of these
shortages your subordinates were response
BILE An examination of the records of
the court of inquiry and the court-martlal
shows that you did not exercise that de-
gree of personal care and supervision over
the affairs of the pay department of the
Oregon necessary to insure against losses.
On the contrary the evidence adduced re-
veals a surprising degree of laxlty ana
want Of vigilance on your part in the ad-
ministraton Of this department. No sem
tence Is found in the testimony which at
fords any excuse for not causing the direc-
lions of the mess manual to be rigtdly fol-
lowed by your subordinates. 1t is not a
sufficient defense in such case to urge that
the incompetency of subordinate has
caused a shortage and loss of government
officer in charge might have detected such
incompetency and avoided its results.
I'm carrying out the direction of the
President by RENTING the loss of numbers
imposed by the court the department
deems it to be it's duty to admonish you
interpreted as an approval of the methods
of administration which have resulted in
the findings and conclusions of the court
of inquiry and the court-martial In this
case; on the contrary 1t Is desired to en-
phasize the fact that such lax methods or
administration should be scrupulously
avoided by yourself and by all officers who
desire to maintain the high standards that
should characterize those charged With
fduciary responsibilities