Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-01-16
TO RESTORE M|DO|ES
The President .sbn the Side Of
C1Ilsmssnoy.
BILL IN The HOUSE
FAVORABLE REPORT By THE
NAVAL AFFAIRS Committee.
Declared That the Punishment Already
Has Been Adequate - Young Men
Dismissed for Mild Hazing.

Considerable interest centers in the final
disposition OF the bill introduced last Feb
ruary by Representative Lacey of Iowa,
reported with amendment last April, and
now on the House calendar, providing for
the reinstatement In the naval service OF
Midshipmen John H. Lofland of Iowa, Earl
w. Chaffee of Wisconsin and Joseph d.
Little of Ohio, who were dismissed from
the Naval Academy November 9, 1908, for
hazing, and whose reinstatement in the
naval service was recently recommended
in a message from the President to Con-
gress. The peculiar interest of the case
lies in the fact that the hazing ofrenses
committed by the three young men in ques-
ton were not severe, but that under the
law of Congress their dismissal was obliga-
tory, no discretion being vested in the SUI
perintendent of the Naval Academy or in
the Secretary of the Navy.
The Committee Report.
After consideration of, the bill the House
committee on naval affairs, to which the
: bill was referred, Immediately after intro
duction, made a favorable report on April
49, In that report the committee said:
1.-The circumstances surrounding the dis
missal of these three midshipmen are re-
cited in the department letter printed here
with. The hearing upon the bill was had
before the whole committee, which, after
careful consideration, was unanimously Of
opinion that the facts presented case
which might with prOpriety be submitted
to the discretion of the President. The
committee thinks that under all circum-
stances no detrilnent will be done the serv-
ice by the passage of the proposed meas
ure. Attention is called to the following
significant language of the Secretary of the
Navy in the department letter hereinbefore
referred to. The Secretary says:
From this statement of the case it will
be seen that If discretion in the infiiction of
punishment had been vested either in the
court-martial or the department a lighter
punishment that dismissal from the service
might have been inflicted, but this cannot
be said with certainty. in view of the great
Importance which has been attached to the
total eradication of the practice Of hazing.
There was, however, under the law, no dis
erection as to punishment
1.-The proposed bill does not revoke the
sentence which was Igonounced upon these
young men. 1t does not restore them to the
Naval Academy. 1t simply empowers the
President If he thinks best, to appoint
these young men to the naval service below
ali the members of their former class, sub
ject to such eXanlina tons and requirements
as may be prescribed by the Secretary Of
the Navy. These young men have already
suffered heavily for their offense by being
dismissed from the academy. If the Pres
ident should appoint them to the service
according to the terms of the prop osed bill
they would enter the service having been
punished by the loss of their degree from
the academy and loss of rank of more
than forty numbers, which, as the Secre-
tary says. would constitute a continuing
punishment throughout their future serv-