Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1907-01-29
'THE QUESTION OF TITLES.
The Line And Staff of The United States
NAVY Commander B. A. FiSke
On The Subject.


commanding the L. :. :. Nevada,
at the Naval Academy. has written
the following letter which should for
ever settle this vexed question:
ITO the Editor of The Army and
Navy Journal.
THE stan officers OF the Navy
wish the same titles in their respec-
tive corps as the line officers have
in their corps. They give as their
reasons:
81. The fact that officers holding
corresponding positions in our sister
service. the Army, have such titles.
-. The facts that titles like As
sistant Surgeon give false impress
sion among people outside the Navy
as TO the position OF the holders of the
title and that such titles rs Pay Di-
rector and Medical Inspector are
foolish.
-. The fact that their present titles
tend to belittle them among the peo-
pie they meet in civil life; and that
il is harmful to them and To the Navy
in general, TO have any of its officers
belittled.
They disclaim any wish TO pretend
to belong to any corps except their
faction with their present titles, so
far as the Navy itself is concerned !;
feeling that their titles are correctly
understood by the people in the Navy.
MANY line officers oppose their
being given Ethe titles they desiIe.
Unless | am misinformed, these line
officers do not state as their reason any
belief that the practical efficiency of
4 -. .f,s..I "a
only reas on / have heard is the oft
repeated state ment that the title is
the only thing most line officers ever
get, and that they ought not TO be
compelled to share their titles with
other people.
"Now it is an admitted principle
that every man will do his work
better, if he is contented, than il he
is not contented; so that il is better
to give every Tan what he wants, SO
far as ii can be done, and provided
that il can be done without working
harm TO some thing or some person.
Therefore, it would be better to give
staff officers the titles they wish, un-
less it would do harm to some thing
or some person.
As no claim has been made that
the giving of those titles would do
harm 10 any thing, not even to the
practical efficiency of the Navy, all
reasonable opposition can be based on
ly on the theory that it would do harm
to some psrsons--the only possible
persons being the line officers.
Now would it do them any harm?
If so, what harm? The only possible
harm would be by robhing the line
officers of some fraction of the honor
which their titles may be supposed
to confer on them.
But their titles do not confer any
honor on them whatever. Titles do
not confer honor; titles cannot confer
honor. Honor is too sacred a thing
to be comfortable by title. Honor is
not comfortable even by position, ex-
cept in so far as the position gives
its holder an opportunity TO do hon
orable service and receive proper
credit for it.
This being true, no man who pos
sesses n title, given him from any
cause, can possibly be harmed if some
other man be given the same title
from some other cause. The President
of the United States is not harmed, by
sharing the title of President with
thousands of presidents .of small
affairs; Elihu Root is not harmed by
sharing the title of Secretary with
thousands of secretaries; captain of
the line of the Navy is not harmed by
sharing the title of captain with
thousands of tugboat captains, police
captains and captains of militia; and
if all the medical directors, medical
inspectors, pay directors and pay in
spectors were given the title of cap
tain, the only result would be that,
instead of sharing his title with, say
10000 captains in the United States,
he would share it with 10, 060 captains.
The fact that no harm is done to
any man by titles being given TO
other men, may be proved by the
two instances following:
II. Secretary Stanton made great
many brevet brigadier generals, in
order, it has been said, TO belittle
General sherman, by making the
title of general common. But the
scheme did not succeed, and Sher-
mans glory was not dimmed.
2. There was once an officer blessed
with a handsome person, an erect ear
riage, an unusually rich voice and q
certain popularity of the chest, which
combined to give him the appearance
of a pomposity, entirely foreign tc
his nature. which was essentially y
modest. His subordinates nick-named
him God yet his brother officers
wera not in the least wounded by his
being given this title, though it was