The Washington herald., 1909-02-02
The Trouble with the Navy.

Governmental competency appears In a
strange light when we consider the facts
concerning our naval administration.
These have been matter OF more ar less
public discussion for more than dozen
years; they have been considered IN
technical papers hy naval officers they
have been the subject Of recommends-
lions in the reports OF Secretaries OF the
Navy and in Presidential messages; but
only within the past two or three years
has anything worth speaking Of IN the
way OF reform been accomplished, Mr..
Roosevelt has Witnessed great improve
ment IN the navy from the standpoint Of
military efficiency. and Mr. Newberry,
first as Assistant Secretary and then as
head Of the Navy Department. has wres-
tied valiantIy with the tough problem of
internal organization
But the trouble with the navy Is not
wholly departmental WastefuI and un-
systematic as Is the bureau system, II
might possibly be made workable by such
an official as Mr.. Newberry, Yet the
system itself is not only sustained by
Congress. but that body adds to the
waste and ineficiency OF bureaucracy
waste and ineficiency entirely Of its own
making. This aspect Of the naval prob
lem has been fully and accurately
presented during past debates on the
naval appropriation bill, notably by Rep
resentstives George L. LilIey and Albert
?. Dawson. on April L last. both OF
when offered plans for dealing with the
Navy Department situation. Il is in
teresting 10 recall. in view OF 5Ir- LiIley's
population by the House. that his plan.
that OF a commission Of inquiry. has been
adopted by the President without await
ng Congressional action.
Recently the facts narrated by these
NO men. together with others Of Ike
nature. have been published in a striking
way by George Kibbe Turner sn McCIure's
Magazine Ar Turner'S article gives q
picture OF appalling waste in naval ex-
Penditure, due partly 70 bureaucratic
methods. but largely 10 political manipu-
istion Of naval funds for the benefit OF
particular sections and communities. He
shows that eight out Of ten members Of
he Senate Naval Committee in the last
congress came from States where there
IRE navy yards. which were tenderly
AIRED for in the naval appropriation bill
This year nine out of the eleven members
II the same committee have naval estab-
tishments or some sort in their States
Nr- Turner says that Speaker Cannon
as observed the policy Of not appointing
10 the Naval Affairs Committee Of the
House members who had navy yards in
their districts. but there are half a
Iozen men OF the present committee from
states having navy yards. Mr.. Turner
adds sn incident 10 show the control Of
few men over naval appropriations. He
els how the conference committee which
determines differences between the two
Houses has been made Up OF six men. "a
majority OF whom have yards or stations
in their districts all Of which ought TO
he abandoned"
The result Of packing the Senate and
conference committee with members
personally interested in particular naval
projects has been in the highest degree
preiudiciaI to the naval establishment. Il
has led 10 the creation and maintenance
Of useless shore stations. most Of which
are inaccessible 20 battle ships. and az ali
II which repair work costs manifold more
than it should. Ten million dollars has
been spent on the Portsmouth yard. which
competent navy officers believe should be
abandoned because OF inaccessfbilltv.
Thirteen million dollars has been
dumped into the Mare Island yard. in
cluding the cost of fine dry dock 70
which no battle ship can approach. In
the South are a number OF naval sta
tons where the cost Of repair work is
twenty-five times its actual value. These
are but few Of the items Of waste.
Mr.. Turner declares that
The main trouble With the present United STATE.
navy is that too much Of il has sot On tie lana
ferred from the SEA 70 the shore: snd the chief
determining factors in It's Management arr q
political systeH and subordinate bsreauc-srr
which ind their main and nearest personsl motive
IN the abnormal dereopnsnt Of series Of national
plants for the manufacture o5 naval stores. The
this has happened is that there has been 20
agency With zny responsibility Or power N or
naval organization % represent the one thin- II
exists for-its military purpose It's ds-elouusz.
,ousequently- could not escape beconing political
lnd bureaucratic.
Mr.. Turner estimates that our naval es-
Enlistment Is costing $4o.OoOO00 a year
too much. That may be merely guess.
yet the official figures he gives viii con-
vince anybody that there is a tremendous
waste in our naval expenditure. and thar
Congress has done nothing TO prevent this
waste. but Is. on the contrary. the chief
source Of it. It is waste that ought to
be checked by Congressional action Of a
radical kind. To have the naval esta5-
Hshment turned into a pork barrel 70
subordinate the country's defense ard the
efficiency Of its naval equipment 10 po-
litical considerations. is a form Of patriot
ism that viii scarcely commend Itself to