Evening star., 1923-12-17


3 promoted; third, that staff officers
of officers of the staff corps of the
Navy with officers of the line" which
? was approved Thursday by Secretary
( DENLY, is now ready for submission
to Congress. Sponsored by Secretary
DENLY and with the approval OF
many of his advisers, the bill has
! already created a great deal of dis
! cussion.
This bill provides, first: That staff
) officers shall have the same promo
I ton, or the same opportunity for
Z promotion, as officers of their own
: time in the line; second that quail
2 fed contemporaries in the line are
shall suffer the same hazard of non
advancement and the same penalty
/. for failure to be advanced as may
be suffered by their contemporaries
. in the line; fourth, this parity of
opportunity and penalty to be main
, tanned from the date of entry into
the service to the date of separation
Z therefrom.
In its practical application to con-
ditions as they exist at the present
time it provides that staff officers of
Z such corps wherein promotion has
been more rapid than promotion in
, the line shall mark time in their
present position and rank until their
running mates i'll the line. or line
contemporaries, have overtaken them,
when they will be thereafter pro-
moted with such running mates. 1t
Immediately grants to all staff Off
. GERS in those corps wherein promo
ton has Jagged behind the line the
same opportunity for, immediate pro,
motion as 'haS already been enjoyed
by their contemporaries or running
mates of the line.
In general, the bill places all Off
GERS of the Navy in the same promo
tion status: it abolishes all numbers
of percentages in grades or ranks in
the staff corps; it does not change
the present authorized total allow
anCe of officers in any corps; 1t re-
moves the friction and discomfort
always inherent in the Navy due to
inequality of promotion as between
the various corps. 1t has all the
advantages of the single list now in
force in the Army. with none of the
disadvantages of that list. The cost
of the bill will average $4,000 for
the next ten years. Thereafter the
cost will decrease.
Typical of thG objections raised by
the opponents of the measure is the
following:
A detailed study of the bill fails
to reveal the necessity or desirability
for such a drastic change in the pro-
motion scheme of the naval staff
corps. 1t is quite evident that the
sole reason for the presentation of
such a bill is that few members or
certain staff corps are disgruntled
and dissatisfied because promotion
for them has not been as rapid as
they might desire, whereas certain
members of other staff corps have
been more fortunate.
The departm has given the I'M
preston that the Woods bill has met
the unqualified approval of all officers
Of the Navy That such is not true
can easily be established by referring
the proposed bill to the officers of the
naval service affected Thus far.
only those officers designated to
draw up the bill and the few select
who. at present, are at the helm or
naval affairs in Washington have
been consulted, and even here there
seems to be some lack of unanimity
desirability of such legislation. 1t
would seem more fair if the younger
officers of the naval service were
allowed to express their opinions.
Similar action was taken in the case
of the late proposed amalgamation
plan, which met with such strenu-
Gus opposition that the whole scheme
was dropped. -,
condensed statement of the bill
is that staff officers will become
eligible for selection in their own
corps at the same time that their
running mates in the line become
eligible. and the same percentage OF
those eligible will be selected as are
selected in the line. Offhand. this
would seem a very just method of
determining eligibility for advance
ment in rank. But the scheme vio-
lates a most important basic prin-
ciple-or rather it absolutely ignores
the fact that in certain corps the kind
of work and the responsibility at
tached thereto requires greater