New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-12-24
Muzzling the General Board.

ore of the members Of the Naval Con-
sulting Board, Mr.. Henry A. Wise Wood,
has lust resigned and has accompanied
lis resignation with a protest against the
manner in which Secretary Daniels IS
n.uzzling the General Board Of the navy
There is every justification for this
protest.
Last winter Mr.. Daniels induced con-
ference committee in Congress TO slaugh-
ter a Senate amendment TO the naval ap-
propriation bill which provided for the
creation of something like Naval Gen
eral staff. He hypocritically explained
his opposition to General staff on the
ground that he could not approve the
establishment of such a substitute body
without woundmg the feelings of the mem
hers of the General Board. This solicit
tudc was suspicious, since in his annual
report Of December, 1914, the Secretary
did rot hesitate 20 turn down the General
Boards recommendations all along the
line. If he had been franker he would
have said that he preferred General
board TO a General Staff. because the for
rer has no status under the law and Is
c.,'v a department agency, whose advice
a.. can suppress whenever he pleases, while
a General staff. created by law, would be
entitled to express its opinions to Congress
and have these opinions go to Congress
and the public uncdited.
llr played the General Board
.rNp' gk this year. He gave out
hi vwr geport for publication two weeks
On sa.ance cf the boards report. He
referred I'm his report to a five-year build
me programme prepared by the board,
which. he said was substantially the same
IS his own five-year building programme
BE thus sought to spread the idea that
the board agreed with him, except IN
f,w minor details. Yet the Boards re-
port shows that this agreement was OBJ
tanned only because the Secretary had
carefully limited the board to reporting
2 programme involving exactly the same
expenditure as he had already determined
to allow for the period covered.
The board was not permitted to frame
a programme of its own, based on its view
Of the navys needs Contrast this forcible
suppression of expert opinion with the
freedom Of judgment permitted under the
conditions which obtain in the War De-
partment! Secretary Garrison did not
say to the War College branch of the Gen
eral staff: II believe that mobile army
of 10000 in continental United States is
all the country needs; write me report
on army reorganization based on that
maximum"
On the contrary, he allowed the War
College to submit a statement showing
that a minimum mobile army of $4,000
II continental United States was needed
10 protect the country from invasion, In
case first class military power should
succeed in breaking through our naval
defences.
On July 80 last the General Board of
the navy, in response to an oral order
from the Secretary, laid down this policy
for the development Of the navy: The
navy of the United States should ulti-
rately be equal TO the most powerful
maintained by any other nation of the
world. Ii should be gradually increased
tG this point by such a rate of develop
rent year by year as may be permitted
nv the facilities Of the country, but the
limit above defined should be attained not
later than 1925"
At the same time the General Board
submitted a building programme-tor
1857 only-which in its opinion would
be adequate 70 the requirements of the
nation, if continued in subsequent years
ON a similar scale" Where is that report
Undoubtedly pigeonholed with other COM
9,unications, marked "confdentiap' and
treated as if written solely for the Sec
Ietary's eye.
IL the General Board believes that mill
tsry conditions resulting from the Euro
pean war require the United States 10
build navy as powerful as that Of any
other nation, and has prepared building
DIbZf dfiliUt lOi AolV- . DdSth VII Shos
belief, the country is entitled TO have q
iook 1T the programme. IL has seen
ci,ou Oh Of Secretary Daniels in Office To
isirust his capacity to pass upon serious
froblems Of military policy. Why is he
unwilling TO allow the same freedom in
the discussion Of the needs Of the navy
that Secretary Garrison allows in the dis
cussion of the needs Of the army?
he has not been able to suppress al
the clashes Of opinion which he has hac
with the General Board. II does not agree
with him in his overestimate Of the value
o. the submarine as factor in naval war
fare. 1t also exposes sharply his mis-
Judgment in keeping the fleet under
manned. He has asked for an increase
Of only 1900 enlisted men, bringing the