Evening star., 1942-03-02

10 Pearl Haroor, #%%3S
the American
people will not &ssa1& %'3
know them David Lawrence.
either. And this means that the
same system of incompetent opera
tion of the Navy Department which
made Peatl Harbor possible will be
continued
The outside world may not realize
It, but a controversy of the deepest
significance has been raging for
some time among Navy officers of
high rank concerning the right kind
of an organization for the Navy
Department in wartime. The out
side world may suppose that since
Pearl Harbor the faulty organiza-
ton has been corrected. But the
truth is some of the highest among
our naval experts think the present
organization. involving as it does
system of dual control within the
Navy, is cumbersome and ineffective
ana ShOuld be changed.
Admiral Taussig, who, like Billy
Mitchell, was punished for a patri-
otto attempt to serve his country by
constructive criticism of the exist
ing tradition" wrote an article in
January, 1910, which was published
In Naval Institute Proceedings an
alyzing the weaknesses Of the Navy
organization. 1t was made part of
the public records of the Senate
Naval Affairs Committee on April
%. 1910. 1t not only pointed out the
errors in the setup, but gave con-
crete recommendations for improve
ment.
The principal contention Of Ad-
miral Taussig was that the chief
of naval operations cannot give or
.ders to the other bureau chiefs in
the Navy Department. He cannot
even assign officers to the feet
without the consent of one of his
subordinates- of the Bureau
OF Navigation.
Dissemination Charged.
Now President Roosevelt has SUI
perimpesed or. an already confusing
system of bureau chief control an
other high-ranking officer-the COM
rIander in chief Of the United States
Fleet-who has no statutory author
ity to give orders to the CHIEF OF
naval operations, but probably does.
Commenting on the present state
of affairs, a naval officer, whose
name must necessarily be withheld,
observed only last week in a letter
to a friend:
Right as Admiral Taussig was on
the Far Eastern issue, he was much
more correct in trying to impress
workable organization on the Navy.
Due. to the superimposing of the
Commander in Chief of the United
States Fleet over the Chief OF Naval
Operations. everything is in terri
bic state of disorganization. Oftlcers
spend more time trying to find out
which office to appease in order to
get letters approved than in prepar-
ing the letters themselves.
In spite of the self-evident truth,
30 ably shown by Admiral Tausslg
that the Navy organization would
not function in war, can see no real
Improvement in this dual system OF
control. When an organization
doesn't work, the remedy seems to
be to superimpose something else.
OF course with the proper spirit OF
co-operation most any organization
can be made to work some way or
other, but I am still wondering
about our present setup."
The foregoing type Of criticism
comes indirectly but nevertheless Is
authentic. Yet nothing of this kind
can officially see the light of day
when court martial is postponed
Indefinitely and when congressional
Naval Affairs Committees are in
fiuenced by the administration to
squelch any public inquiry.
1t does seem lnexplicable that the
Senate or House Naval Affairs Com
mittees do not feel their RESPONSE
biiity to the American people ~suff1-
ciently to insist on knowing at least
the form of organization that exists
In the Navy Department and sub
jecting 1t TO the scrutiny of retired
officers who are free to speak.
For the truth is that while Ad-
,niral Kimmeland Gen Short did not
take all the precautions they should,
It is also true that the Navy and
War Department officers in Wash
ington failed to do certain things
which, il the courts martial are