Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-03-22
CAUSE FOR CRITICISM
PENDING BILL ABoLISHING THE
LIEUTENANT GENERALoY.
Uncertainty as to Whether It Ap-
plies to Officers on the Retired List
Senate May Amend.

Inc Dill which recently passed the House.
and which is now pending In the Senate,
providing for the abolition OF the office Of
lieutenant general of the army, is the sub
ject of considerable criticism In military
circles. The bill provides that when, after
October II, 1906, the Office of lieutenant
general shall become vacant, it shall not
thereafter be filled, but said office shall
cease and determine" The date fixed by
the bill was to enable the President to ap-
point Major General Corbin to the rank Of
lieutenant general on the retirement of
Lieutenant General Bates, April Is next
and then to appoint General Macarthur to
the rank of lieutenant general on the re-
tirement of General Corbin, September Is
next Although that is supposed to be the
approved plan of the President at this
time. 1t might easily be changed. and the
promotions given. to other officers Major
General Wood. for instance. If Generals
Corhin and Macarthur are appointed
system Of rapid retirements would be nee
essary to raise General Wood and other Of
ficers to the rank before October IL next
May Affect Retired Officers.
Military lawyers criticise the language Of
the bill and go SO far as to assert that II
literally executed 1t will not only abolish
the Office of lieutenant general on the ac-
tive list The date named. but also the
Office of lieutenant general on the retired
list. II is claimed that such action would
be the legal End logicaf effect of the pro-
vision that the office of lieutenant general
shall cease and determine" on October l.,
1906. There are no exceptions in the bill
as applied to either the active or retired
list. If that construction Of the provisions
Of the bill is correct all the officers who
hold the Office OF lieutenant general re-
tired on the date named would be relegated
to private life with the loss Of further re-
tired pay. The same fate would befail the
officer who then happened to hold the
office of lieutenant general on the active
list.
The retired officers affected are Gems.
Miles, Young and Chaffee, now retired and
Gems. Bates and Corbin, who are to be re-
tired in the rank of lieutenant general be-
fore October IL. If 1t is decided, however,
that the legislation does not apply to OFF,
GERS on the retired list all the officers
named would be protected and Gen. Mac
Arthur and others could be promoted lieu
tenant generals and Immediately retired
There seems to be no doubt, however. that
the bill abolishes the office of lieutenant
general on the active list on the October
date named.
Remedial Legislation Possible.
In that view of the case 1t is not likely
to be considered very desirable pace un-
less the incumbent can arrange for retire.
ment before the fatal date. Otherwise the
list entirely. For instance, Major General
Macarthur would have to reIinquish his
present commission to accept the lieutenant
generalcy, and IL he held the latter rank
when 1t was abolished there would be no
place to put him.
1t is generally understood that the au-
thors Of the legislation simply intended
that no one should be appointed to the
rank of lieutenant general after October
IL, and fixed that date solely in order that
the honor might be conferred upon Gems.
Corbin and Macarthur. Is Is not believed
that it was intended that Gen. Macarthur
should be appointed and then legislated out
of office or that it should apply to the
lieutenant generals the retired list.
These considerations have been brought
to the attention of certain senators with
view to remedial action, and there is
good reason to believe that the bill will
be amended in the Senate and relieved of
Its present ambiguity, at least to the ex-
tent of exemptng; the retired lieutenant
generals from its terms.