Evening journal., 1916-05-30
Defends ENDS MEN OF
UNCLE SAM 5 NAVY
Congressman Miller Replies
to Criticisms of "Small
Navy" Group
DENIES PREJUDICE
ON OFFICERS PART

Special TO THE EVENING JOURNAL.
WASHINGTON, d. c., May 30. -
During the FIRST days debate on the
Naval Appropriation bill in the House
Of Representatives on Saturday, Rep
resentative Galloway. OF Texas and
Representative Hensley, of Missouri,
two OF the so-called "small navy
group. in the course OF the debate
made an attack upon American naval
officers as a-class. Mr.. Callaway
stated that The recommendation and
advice OF naval officers was prelu-
iiced and biased. as they were urging
an increase in order 10 further their
own interests Upon being questioned
rs TO the lack of submarines in the
navy, Mr. Hensley went so far as to
state that this class OF vessels was
not favored by the officers because
they were unable to entertain and
give parties on submarines.
Representative Thomas W. Miller,
OF Delaware. having been allotted time
10 speak on the bill by Representa-
tive Roberts, OF Massachusetts, who
was in charge Of the bill, on the Re
publican side. replied to the attacks
Of Representatives Galloway and
Hcnsley and put i'm a defense for the
American naval officers and the en-
listed men, There was some humOr in
the debate and Mr.. Miller was ap-
plauded for his efforts. He said in the
course OF the debate.
"Mr. Chairman. | rise TO say few
words with respect 70 the American
naval officer, inasmuch as several
things have been said about him IN
this chamber this afternoon. which
think need an answer. They need nc
defense. Their work and service
sneak out better than | am able tC
do. They are not so considered. judg
ing by the applause which met Tho
remarks of certain gentlemen on tho
Democatic side At the inception o.
the Government our forefathers de
creed that the Army and the Navy
should be kept out of politics. Thai
was a very wise move. But they die
not fix ii so that politics could be KEEP
out OF the Army and Navy. ] agree
in part with what the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Galloway said. that II you
remove politics from this Army ano
Navy question the country might gel
what it wants in the right kind Of
preparedness. agree in part viii
what the gentleman from Missouri
(Mr Hensley) along the same
line. But .genth Of the House.
do not agree with what I think was
an unwarranted assault by them OF
the integrity OF the American nava
officer, and incidentally on the mel
that serve under him. My friend iron
Texas (Mr. Galloway intimated tha
a was due TO the desire and greed o
these officers for more business; ina
they desired more ships which wouli
give us real line of defense. II
have not stated Il verbatim. / think
have given his idea He has no NOR
basis to accuse them OF ulterior mo
tives i'm doing their duty and advising
the country what we need in Ship
than we have to accuse the gentleman
who made the statement with ulterlo
motives o. making what I consider
as far as he was concerned. a sincere
statement on the floor Of the House
mistaken and erroneous as II may be
Il heard the gentleman from Mis-
souri, CMr Hensley) remark in discus
sing the question as 10 why more sub
marines had not been built that it wa
due to the fact that the American ma
val officers did not like to have
class OF vessel upon which reception
OF a social nature could not be held
I do not like to bring it up when h
is absent from the floor. but / hav
waited patiently for my time. and
think the members of the House vii
agree with me that that was the in
ference that he desired to be draw
from what he said. Now. the frs
American submarine OF the A elias
was authorized in 1900"
Mr.. CALLAWAY. "Wil the gentle
man yield?'
Mr. MILLER. OF Delaware. 81 d