Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-02-11
Rejected Unanimously.

The subcommittee, headed by Repre-
sentative Roberts of Massachusetts. un-
animously decided today to report both
these measures adversely. Mr.. Roberts
is confident that the full committee on
naval affairs will take the same unani-
nous view of the matter as his subcom-
mittee- 1t Is freely predicted, however,
that fight may be forced on the floor
of the House by friends of Mr.. Peary.
$50, as we were able to see'' said
Chairman Roberts of the subcommittee,
Immediately after the meeting there
was nothing in the records of Mr.. Peary,
so far as his service to the navy or the
country was concerned, which made him
worthy to receive from Congress an an
nual salary OF $1,000 a year for the bal
ance of his natural life
TT Is absurd TO propose that a civilian
for that is just what Mr.. Peary is
should be made senior admiral of the
line when he is not even naval con-
structor. but civil engineer in the navy.
While laudable feat. Mr.. Peary reach
ed the north pole. not in the performance
of any duty. imposed upon him, but, az
the Secretary of the Navy says, by car
rying out self-imposed task.
Absence From Duty.
During his service as civil engineer
in the navy. beginning in 1881, Mr..
Peary has been absent ON leave a total
of thirteen years and one month. and
during the last three years he has receiv-
ed the full ray Of the rank of commander
in the navy, which Is more than the gov
ernment has ever done for any other ex-
plorer in a financial way
IF the friends of Mr.. Peary wish the
government TO recognize his service, 1
think it would be proper to ask Congress
10 vote him gold medal. Under this
legislation. which is now proposed he
would get more pay than Rear Admiral
RobIey d. Evans and other admirals OF
The line.
Mr.. Peary endured hardships and
prlVation to reach the POLE but SO did
others Why not make Mat Henson a
captain In the navy as a reward for his
service? l think the proposed legisla-
tion has been i'll advised, and the SUBJ
committee voted accordingly
Views of Secretary Meyer.
In the above interview Mr. Roberts re-
ferred TO a letter to the naval committee
from Secretary of the Navy Meyer, op-
posing the proposition to make Mr.. Peary
al rear doilifdi IN lnat letter Secretary
Myer comments in part as follows:
1t would appear that the bill in uues-
ton il framed for the purpose of reward
ing Civil Engineer Peary for having
reached the north pole. and while his
having successfully accomplished this
self-imposed task is most commendabIe
and reflects great credit not only upon
him, but also upon the entire nation, his
various exploring expeditions are not to
be regarded as having been conducted for
a strictly military or naval purpose and
for this reason ii seems inappropriate to
confer upon him title for which his pre-
vious education, training and service have
not fitted him.
Changes in the Bill Suggested.
1T is therefore recommended that in
the title of the bill and in the fourth line
thereof. the word commander be changed
to civil engineer the latter being Mr.
Tearys correct official designation: and
further. instead of appointing him a rear
admiral and placing him upon the retired
list as such. that he be retired as a civil
engineer with the rank of rear admiral,
and with the highest retired pay Of that
grade under existing law.
The subcommittee which reported ad-
Nersely today on the proposition to honor
Mr.. Peary is composed of Representa-
tiNes Butler. Roberts Bates, Englebright,
Griggs and Macon. Representative Daw-
son. the other member, was absent.
Members of the committee expressed
:1ntagonism to any idea of .pensioning''
Mr. Peary with increased pay, although
they thought Congress might favor the
IDEA OF giving him gold medal.