The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1915-02-21

The congressional situation, so far
as it relates TO service projects, again
is invoking discussion as to the merits
of piece-meaI, as compared with gem
"lHl legislation. Opinion OF service
people is divided. of course, as II al
WAYS is Oh pretty much everything
pertaining TO the military-nayal es-
adjustment in matter and in form.
There are those who still insist that
general legislation, represented by
some comprehensive measure of relief,
furnishes the only way out of the
difficulty and is contribution to as
sured effective results. Others equal
ly are certain the only method by
which Legislation may be enacted must
continue to be in the fraSmentary
form.
There is however. no doubt in any
quarter that the most desirable, be-
cause the ideal, method would be by
legislation in its entirety; but if the
army, navy and Marine Corps wait for
the whole loaf, it is likely to keep on
waiting Indefinitely. If it can be re-
allied that there is virtue in fractions,
srovided they are consistently core
lated, great deal will have been ac-
complished. The history of military
naval legislation, for the most part
and with few striking exceptions, is
iltogether on the side of piece-meal
legislation, obnoxious as it may be.
one of the prime difficulties which
continually confronts Congress in
service legislation is the failure to
acquire from departmental sources a
comprehensive scheme which may be
safely and indisputably adopted as
basis for Congressional action. There
has been much said in behalf of an
army reorganization plan, which the
general staff of the War Department
was described as having formulated
more than two years ago and was
then about ready to submit the draft
Of important legislation to the mill
larry committee.
Opposition Is Inevitable.
1t is probable this plan did not meet
with the unanimous support of the eX-
ports. and it is safe TO predict that when
II is transmitted to Congress it will be
found to have many antagonists 1t
has advocates among the members of
Tn" commissioned personnel The same |
is 1ru" of the naval personnel bills which |
have originated in committee or in the !
Navy department. The most carefully |.
drawn measures, coming from boards of
officers which have given much time TO |
tho study Of conditions have proven I'M
satisfactory and have been the object of |
service attack. !
This situation has made it easy for |
congress. especially for the members of |
lI'' IIous" and Senate Military commit |
l",.S. to take the familiar attitude Of /
waiting until the service sentiment should !
uSS"mhI" itself solidly behind a plan of |
relief and increase. There is. moreover. !,
nothing easier of accomplishment than
tn" defeat of a mea sure by failing to act,
and objections. properly or unjustly APP
Piled. coming from service sources are
potent factors in influencing committee
members to withhold their support of
% ojcct or assume an indifference toward
II Oh the pretext that its provisions are
open to suspicion. This situation invari-
ably has attached itself to general plans,
specially those which seek to achieve
much without an increase of cost. as in
the case of the latest naval personnel
Till now before the House Naval Com
mittce
The best chance of realizing anythins
in the. way of army Legislation rests with
the, initial action at the Capitol, instead
ri in the War Department. and probably
The same. although for less obvious rea-
sons. may he said regarding naval per-
sonnet legislation. according TO those ac-
,,uaintcd with the situation.