Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

list. We once took something from them. Formerly they were the only ones on the eligible list that had this opportunity.

The CHAIRMAN. Formerly your manipulation of officers in the staff corps was all wrong.

General LEJEUNE. Yes; but we have changed it. We are changing it still further now.

The CHAIRMAN. You say nobody is eligible to become a bureau chief unless he is in a bureau now when this act starts. Continuing

and that in case the name of no such officer is borne on the eligible list for appointment as head of a staff department the appointment as head of said department shall be made from officers of the rank of colonel in the Marine Corps.

Let us see whether you make it mandatory to select somebody on the list now, when the act passes. Who is in that department? Who is in that particular department? Did you do that? General LEJEUNE. No; it is left to the discretion of the board of nine general officers.

The CHAIRMAN. Is he on the board?

General LEJEUNE. No; these are junior officers that you are talking about now.

The CHAIRMAN. But an officer may succeed himself.

General LEJEUNE. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. So that he may be on the board.

General LEJEUNE. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. That is the question I asked a little while ago and somebody said no.

General LEJEUNE. The board does not consider him.

He is eligible

but the appointment rests with the Secretary of the Navy. The CHAIRMAN. Next is line 14, which reads:

Provided further, That the appointment of any officer as head of a staff department shall terminate upon the date of his acceptance of a permanent commission as brigadier general of the line.

He can not be a permanent brigadier general of the line and also be a staff chief?

General LEJEUNE. That is right.

Mr. VINSON. Where the words "promotion lists" are used they apply to the line and where the words "eligible lists" are used they apply to the staff. Is it designated in the bill so that there is no doubt about it?

General LEJEUNE. I said a little while ago, there are one or two places in the bill where it will have to be made more definite. There are two places in the bill where "eligible lists" is used unmodified. Please consider the addition on page 6, line 25, after the word "lists" the words "for appointment as heads of the staff departments." Again, on page 10, line 9, after the word "eligible lists" the words "for appointment as heads of the staff departments.' That will

make it definite.

The CHAIRMAN. That will be done. The corrected bill will have those changes in it.

SEC. 8. That all acts, and parts of acts, in so far as they conflict with the provisions of this act, are hereby repealed.

We all understand that section.

We have read the bill through. There are one or two changes I would like to suggest, and I want you, General Lejeune and General

Fuller, to realize that any changes or modifications in this bill that I am suggesting are made in the interest of the Marine Corps first, and, second, they are dictated by what I think may transpire on the floor of the House. There is no use jeopardizing the passage of this bill by including in it something that is not so vitally important to the Marine Corps. However, if it is vital we will gladly fight it out on the floor. If it is not of vital importance, let us not start a scrap that will necessitate roll calls and endless debate. The House is in good humor right now. It has been handling the Post Office and the Treasury Department appropriation bills. They passed the House without an amendment. Moreover, there was very little debate. If the House is still in that mood next week we will have little trouble with this and other important legislation that is now in the hands of the committee.

The Secretary of the Navy has indicated a preference list and on that list he puts first the battleships Oklahoma and Nevada for an increased authorization. Then he lists the battleship California: then the submarines V-5 and V-6.

Where is the provision for a major general for the staff corps, General?

General LEJEUNE. Page 2, line 15.

The CHAIRMAN. Page 2, line 15:

Provided, That the heads of the staff departments shall be general officers while holding said office, one with the rank, pay, and allowances of a major general, and two with the rank, pay, and allowances of a brigadier general, and shall be in addition to the number of general officers of the line herein authorized Does that cover the situation?

General LEJEUNE. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. I think that ought to be take out.

General LEJEUNE. I do not think so. If you take that out entirely we will lose the brigadier generals we have now.

Mr. VINSON. Your thought, Mr. Chairman, is not to have any more major generals than we have to-day?

The CHAIRMAN. My thought is to take out the additional major general you have provided for. How would we do it?

General LEJEUNE. If the entire proviso is stricken out, doubtless the Comptroller General will rule that there is no authority in law for the general officers in the staff corps.

The CHAIRMAN. I suggest we cut out, "one with the rank, pay, and allowances of a major general."

General LEJEUNE. That would hold us to the same number we have now.

Mr. VINSON. In other words the three brigadier generals would remain?

General LEJEUNE. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Will there be any further amendment necessary in the bill?

General LEJEUNE. No.

Mr. VINSON. We create two major generals of the line that we have not got now.

General LEJEUNE. Two.

Mr. VINSON. Then we can say we are creating two major generals of the line but no major general in the staff corps?

General LEJEUNE. That is right.

Mr. DARROW. What effect will that have on the staff?

The CHAIRMAN. If General Lejeune and his staff have nothing further to tell us and there are no further questions, let us proceed to other business.

(Thereupon at 12.45 o'clock p. m., Saturday, December 8, 1928, the committee proceeded to the consideration of other business.)

О

A HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF (H. R. 14660) A BILL "TO AUTHORIZE ALTERATIONS AND REPAIRS TO THE U. S. S. 'CALIFORNIA'''

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS,
Saturday, December 8, 1928.

The committee this day met at 12.45 o'clock p. m., Hon. Fred A. Britten, chairman, presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The first bill for consideration is H. R. 14660, which is to authorize alterations and repairs to the battleship California. The bill in question reads as follows:

A BILL To authorize alterations and repairs to the United States ship California

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That alterations and repairs are hereby authorized to the United States ship California at a total cost not to exceed $350,000 in addition to the sum of $300,000 authorized to be expended under existing law. The alterations herein authorized shall be subject to the limitations prescribed in the treaty limiting naval armament ratified August 17, 1923.

STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL JOHN D. BEURET, CONSTRUCTION CORPS, U. S. NAVY, CHIEF OF THE BUREAU OF CONSTRUCTION AND REPAIR

The CHAIRMAN. What makes this request necessary, Admiral? Admiral BEURET. There is a limitation of $300,000 that may be expended in the overhaul of a single capital ship. That is the total expenditure from all the different appropriations. There is in course of construction at the present time the 5-inch A. A. guns for the California. We have 5-inch A. A. guns already on the West Virginia, Colorado, Maryland, and Tennessee, and wish to put them on the California next. The guns are on hand and we could do as we did in the case of the Tennessee, that is, proceed with the installation as part of a normal overhaul by cutting as much as possible the repairs to be undertaken. However, the Navy Department desires to install protected flag battle stations on the California and the Pennsylvania. The California is the flagship of the Battle Fleet and the Pennsylvania is the relief ship for that duty. The work on the Pennsylvania is provided for in the bill recently passed by the House. It is one of the items contemplated in the modernization and the department wishes to do the same work on the California as early as possible. It does not wish to defer the installation of the antiaircraft battery and we could not do both at the same time unless we expended more than the statutory limit. That is the reason for requesting this special authority for alterations and repairs to the California.

[blocks in formation]
« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »