Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

Admiral BEURET. I will do that, but I can not give you any assurance other than my own opinion. It is not a fact that has occurred, being something in the future.

The CHAIRMAN. I think it has occurred, because almost all this money you have indicated will be spent in addition to your original estimate on the turret guns.

Admiral BEURET. Yes.

Mr. VINSON. Speaking with reference to the V-4, we spent all the money and the work had to be stopped, as I remember? Admiral BEURET. That is not correct.

Mr. VINSON. You practically spent all the money on the V-4? Admiral BEURET. We did not come here after we had spent all the money.

Mr. VINSON. But you awarded contracts and they took up all the money. The ship was not finished. Why could we not do the same thing with these two ships? Let us spend, say, $13,150,000 as best we can then we can see what we have got to do additional and know what it will cost.

Admiral BEURET. Congress will not be in session and the ships would be out of service for six or eight months under such an arrangement.

Mr. VINSON. I rather think that Congress will be in session all right.

Admiral BEURET. It is impracticable to do that. We can not do that without wasting money.

Mr. VINSON. These two ships are being repaired at the navy yard, Norfolk, and the navy yard, Philadelphia?

Admiral BEURET. The Oklahoma is being repaired at Philadelphia and the Nevada at Norfolk.

Mr. VINSON. Has the department submitted the hours of labor in any branch of the service to be reduced from eight to seven hours recently?

Admiral BEURET. I do not handle that matter. The Assistant Secretary of the Navy handles that. He was here only a moment

ago.

Mr. VINSON. Very well; let the matter rest.

The CHAIRMAN. Let us adjourn at this time to meet to-morrow morning at 10.30.

(Thereupon, at 12.30 o'clock p. m., the committee adjourned to meet to-morrow morning, December 7, 1928, at 10.30 o'clock.)

[ocr errors]

A HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON H. R. 13685, A BILL "TO REGULATE THE DISTRIBUTION AND PROMOTION OF COMMISSIONED OFFICERS OF THE MARINE CORPS, AND FOR

OTHER PURPOSES"

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS,
Friday, November 30, 1928.

The committee this day met, Hon. Fred A. Britten (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, this meeting, the first meeting of the committee for the coming session of Congress, was called for the express purpose of considering H. R. 13685, a bill introduced by Mr. Darrow, to regulate the distribution and promotion of commissioned officers of the Marine Corps, and for other purposes. It is evident. that a quorum is present, and I do not suppose there will be any objection to proceeding with the consideration of the bill.

We have with us this morning General Lejeune, the commandant of the Marine Corps. How do you desire to proceed, General?

STATEMENTS OF MAJ. GEN. JOHN A. LEJEUNE, COMMANDANT, MARINE CORPS; BRIG. GEN. BEN H. FULLER, MEMBER OF THE MARINE CORPS PERSONNEL BOARD; MAJ. R. S. KEYSER, MEMBER OF MARINE CORPS PERSONNEL BOARD; AND CAPT. E. F. C. COLLIER, RECORDER, MARINE CORPS PERSONNEL BOARD

General LEJEUNE. Mr. Chairman, with the permission of the committee I would like first to make a brief general statement about the bill and then let General Fuller, who is the senior member of the personnel board, also make a brief general statement. We have here Major Keyser and Captain Collier of the board, and I think it would be better for them to answer questions in reference to the details of the bill.

The CHAIRMAN. You prefer to proceed without interruption with Your statement, and then be followed by General Fuller with a general statement without interruption?

General LEJEUNE. Yes, sir

When the Marine Corps was reorganized in 1921, following the World War, and the active list of commissioned officers permanently adjusted, no provision was made at that time to assure a reasonable progression through the various grades and to avoid the stagnation that was inevitable unless positive measures to correct it were taken. As a result the condition became more apparent as the years passed by, and I became convinced about two and a half years ago that a (109)

2197-28-No. 27-1

correction of this condition was an urgent necessity, as, unless rectified, the situation would each year grow steadily worse. This conviction was strengthened by letters I received and discussions I held with a number of our most efficient officers. This menacing situation I found to be inherent in the system of promotion in effect in the Marine Corps at the present time, and in order to correct it, it would be necessary to make a radical change in the system.

After consultation with a number of our officers I decided to convene a board of officers to make a study of the whole personnel situation so far as it pertained to officers, and to submit recommendations thereon. A board of seven officers and a recorder, instead of a small board, was decided upon so that all groups or grades of officers might have representation upon it. Brig. Gen. Ben H. Fuller was selected as the senior member of the board. He has had over 43 years naval service. Col. H. C. Reisinger, assistant paymaster, represented the permanent staff officers; Col. D. C. McDougal, the line colonels; Lieut. Col. R. C. Creecy, the line lieutenant colonels and the staff as well, as he is at present serving on a detail in the adjutant and inspector's departments; Maj. R. S. Keyser, the line majors; Maj. E. H. Brainerd, aviation; Capt. Charles Ubel, the group of former warrant and noncommissioned officers who received their commissions during the World War; and Capt. E. F. C. Collier, the recorder, represented the officers appointed from civil life during the war.

The board was convened in September, 1926, made a careful and detailed study and analysis of the personnel situation, and submitted a proposed bill and a discussion thereof in February, 1927. Copies of the bill and of the discussion were sent to every officer in the Marine Corps with the request that they make a careful study of the provisions of the bill and of its explanation and submit to the board direct such criticisms and suggestions as they might desire to make. A number of communications were received from the officers of the corps in regard to the proposed bill, all of which were studied when received by the individual members of the board. In September, 1927, the board was reconvened for the purpose of revising the bill and its report, giving due weight to the opinions and suggestions obtained from the service at large. As a result, it submitted a revised bill, containing a number of changes, all in the direction of improve

ments.

This bill, together with the report of the board, was submitted by me to the Secretary of the Navy in November, 1927, with my approval. It was approved by the Secretary after a study of it has been made by the Judge Advocate General's office and was transmitted to the Bureau of the Budget the latter part of the same month. A number of conferences were held by me and by representatives of the Personnel Board with representatives of the Bureau of the Budget, and the whole matter was very carefully explained and discussed at great length. These conferences were joint conferences and were participated in by representatives of the Navy Department also in connection with the Navy personnel bill.

An agreement could not be reached with the Bureau of the Budget concerning certain features of the proposed bills, and finally, in May, 1928, modified bills were submitted by the Secretary of the Navy to the Budget from which the sections in disagreement had been eliminated. The modified bills received the approval of the Bureau of

the Budget, were stated to be in accord with the fiscal policy of the administration, and were transmitted to the House Committee on Naval Affairs in May, 1928,

As a result of my study of the personnel situation in the summer of 1926, I became thoroughly convinced that the only sound solution of the difficult question was the adoption of a system of promotion by selection, combined with the separation from the active list of officers not recommended for promotion. I reached this conclusion reluctantly, but I am certain that if the problem is to be solved, it must be solved in this way.

An examination of the Navy and Marine Corps lists as they stand to-day shows that in every grade our officers are several years behind their contemporary officers in the Navy so far as promotion is concerned.

The junior officers of the several grades of the Navy and Marine Corps were graduated from the Naval Academy or commissioned in the Marine Corps as of the following dates: A captain, United States Navy, 1905; a colonel, United States Marine Corps, 1900; a commander, United States Navy, 1910; a lieutenant colonel, United States Marine Corps, 1904; a lieutenant commander, United States Navy, 1917; a major, United States Marine Corps, 1914; a lieutenant, United States Navy, 1922; a captain, United States Marine Corps, 1917; a lieutenant (junior grade), United States Navy, 1925; and a first lieutenant, United States Marine Corps, 1922.

So that our officers promoted at the present time are from three to six years behind corresponding officers in the Navy.

Unless a remedy be found, this discrepancy will increase as each year goes by owing to the different systems of promotion in effect. in the two services. The Navy has promotion by selection, with elimination in the grades of captain, commander and lieutenant commander. The Marine Corps still has the old system of promotion by seniority, without elimination, in all grades except that of colonel. This disparity with the Navy, however, is not in itself the most menacing feature of the personnel situation in the Marine Corps. That feature is the condition within the corps which must inevitably result under existing laws. During the last six years the following. average rates of advancement in the several grades have taken place each year: Lieutenant colonels, 4 files; majors, 6 files; captains, 12 files; and first lieutenants, 24 files.

The CHAIRMAN. What do you mean by files?

General LEJEUNE. Advances on the list. For instance, if a lieutenant colonel, his average rate of advancement has been four files a year, or four numbers a year.

If these rates continue, it means that the junior officers of the several grades will be promoted to the next higher grades only after the following length of service in their present grades: Lieutenant colonel, 11 years; majors, 20 years; captains, 26 years; and first lieutenants, 12 years."

It is probable that these rates will be somewhat expedited owing to the increased age of our officers, but at best we can not hope for anything other than the hopeless stagnation of promotion, so that by the year 1950 all officers of the rank of captain and above will be over 50 years of age.

[ocr errors]
« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »