The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1909-02-21
= ~ = y r = r.
Army and
Navy News
~ y Ss1svs

on duty III the bureau of navigation,
Navy Department, prepared table.
Col. Richards table showed that the
| expenditures would be increased if the
marines were transferred to shore
duty; those of Commander Shoemaker
made a saving by the transfer to the
extent of about sos, 600.
subsequently the House committee.
desiring an expert who could not pos
sibly be charged with bias, selected
Pay Director Cowie of the navy. who
after great deal of labor submitted
report to the committee. The Cowie
table showed clearly that if the Pres
| ident s order We're carried out and
sailors were substituted for marines on
| board navy vessels there would be an
| increase in the annual expenses of the
government of about $4,000.
Col. Denny, quartermaster of the
Marine Corps, when before the com
mittee, testified that there would be
an increase in the expenditure of his
| department, if the officers and enlisted
men of the corps We're comfortably
quartered on shore, of about S., 000, 900.
Thus. according to Pay Director Cowie,
/ the lnCISdSS LII TIE duuudi tApCuStS
would be about 100000 if the Pres
ident $ order was put into operation.
Cost of Transports.
These estimates of increases in ex-
| penditures do not include the cost of
transports which might be necessary
if the program of the Navy Depart
ment is undertaken-th is to say, if
| L
bases TO distant scenes of action in
such special vessels
The navy now has three ships which
at times are available for this service,
! namely, the Prairie and Panther on
| the Atlantic coast and the Buffalo on
| the Pacific coast These vessels are
| not modern ships, however. Many Of
ficers contend it will be necessary to
| obtain an appropriation from Congress
| to construct new vessels.
Each of such vessels will probably
cost $2,000,000. If three are required
| the total cost would be $6,000,000.
Members of Congress who are in
sympathy with the Marine Corps side
of the controversy resent, with con
siderable emphasis, the recent action
of the chief of the bureau of naviga-
ton in procuring from Rear Admiral
Swinburne, commanding the Pacific
feet, and Rear Admiral Sperry, com,
manding the Atlantic fleet. and certain
officers serving under them, expressions
of opinion favorable to the President S
order. Members of the House com
mittee especially are resentful.
Orinion Not wan+ad
1t seems that at a recent hearing
before the committee the question was
raised as to the ACCESSIBILITY of the
committee S cabling these officers and
requesting their opinions. After some
discussion the conclusion was reached
that this would not be a fair proce-
dure; first, because the officers could
not be cross examined to ascertain the
reasoning for their opinion, and, sec
ondly, that it would be exceedingly EN-
barrassing to such officers if they ex-
pressed an opinion not favorable to the
Presidents order.
This conclusion of the committee was
reached after it had been shown in the
examination of a number of witnesses
that while they regarded the Pres
Idthl > OIu0l q WISE anu proper one
they had not one single reason for en-
tertaining such views. Members of the
committee claimed that if this was the
rule in such cases it would probably
be the same rule with officers serving
afoat
The further fact was developed that
in some private letters officers from
the two fleets referred to stated that
they regarded the President s order
and the effect on the naval service as
most northumberland, in other words
for efficiency. Members of the com
mlttee, therefore, reasoned that their
position in the matter was sound, and
because of this they have since resent
ed the act of the Navy Department in
procuring the opinions of the officers
at sea.
One fact of which a member of the
committee spoke today was that, while
the committee was dieussing the advis-
ability of procuring these opinions
from sea-going officers and concluded
not TO do so, two officers of the navy.
Commander Fullam and Commander
Sims. were present. They assumed that
one or both these officers subsequently
recommended that. Notwithstanding the
action of the committee on the subject.
it was good policy to obtain these
opinions.
Abolition Would Be Certain.
One member of the committee voiced
the sentiment on one occasion in the
following words: &.
"Congress win never consent to the
country having two armies. the regular
establishment and smaller body. even
though the latter body is on duty at
navy yards and occasionally put afoat
on transports. Better than that. abolish
the Marine Corps, save five or six mil
lions of dollars year. and utilize de-
tachments of the army when such de-
tachments are needed for transport
service and subsequently as a landing
force. -
A number of senators have said. in
effect. the same as this representative.
Senator Hale s views on the question
are well known. He regards the Marine