and would restore Staff Corps officers to a parity with their line running mates and this parity would continue if the Staff Corps maintains in the future a percentage of selection no less rigorous than that of the line.

The cost to the Government involved is at the rate of $1,614 per annum.

The proposed draft of bill was referred to the Bureau of the Budget with the above information. Under date of May 24, 1928, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget advised the Navy Department that the proposed legislation is not in conflict with the financial program of the President.

In view of the foregoing, the Navy Department contemplates recommending that the proposed legislation be enacted.

Sincerely yours,

CURTIS D. WILBUR,
Secretary of the Navy.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the purpose of this bill, Admiral? Admiral CAMPBELL. Commander Wilkinson will speak about it. Commander WILKINSON. This bill is to rectify an angle of the equalization bill that did not equalize.

Mr. VINSON. And the department now admits that?

Commander WILKINSON. Yes, sir; but it was not the fault of the department. The equalization act provided for a certain number of rear admirals in each staff corps, and a certain number of captains and commanders, to be determined as a percentage of the number of officers of the line of equal date of entry into the service. At the last moment the equalization act was modified in the Senate, as I understand, to reduce the number of admirals in the staff corps. Naturally, reducing the number of admirals left the officers who would have otherwise become admirals in the rank of captain. These captains were left in that rank, which prevented the normal flow into the grade of commander and captain, which would have operated from the act as originally drafted. As a result in the Construction Corps there are a number of officers banked up, and even at a very drastic rate of selection, much greater than that of, the line, which is 75 per cent or 80 per cent for captain, they will not receive promotion until from three to seven years behind their colleagues of the line. The equalization act provided for a so-called squaring-away board, which board rectified almost everything completely, but, on account of this change, a small angle was left and it results in what we might call the freezing out of 11 officers.

The CHAIRMAN. Was the change in the equalization act made in the Senate or in this room?

Commander WILKINSON. I am not very familiar with that point, but I thought it was made in the Senate by a subcommittee of which Senator Pepper was chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. I think it was made right here in this room.

Mr. VINSON. Did we not all understand that one of the merits of the equalization bill was to slow down promotions in the Construc

tion Corps? That corps then had about 150 constructors engaged in constructing 7, 8, or 10 vessels, and it had only 70 constructors to handle the program laid down by the act of August 29, 1916. The equalization bill was designated to effect a slowing-up of promotions in the Construction Corps so that other officers could catch up with it. That is why members of the Construction Corps were opposed to the equalization bill They said at the time that it would not work. It was an equalization bill but it did not equalize. Now, the department is here to rectify or undo that which it said the bill would not do. Commander WILKINSON. At that time the commanders of the Construction Corps were very much ahead of like officers of the line and other Staff Corps. They were from five to seven years ahead of their colleagues in the line. The captains were about even. However, promotion to commander in the Construction Corps is not affected by this bill.

Mr. VINSON. And similar conditions existed in the Medical Corps? Commander WILKINSON. It exists there now in a less aggravated degree.

Mr. VINSON. In the Medical Corps an officer who has been passed over by a selection board goes out, does he not?

Commander WILKINSON. That is not in this bill. That is in another bill. That is in the staff elimination bill. H. R. 15530 would rectify a minor angle of the equalization bill.

Mr. VINSON. The very purpose of H. R. 15530 is to directly nullify the slowing-up process the committee sought to bring about in the Construction Corps on recommendation of the department?

Commander WILKINSON. If the committee sought to slow up the promotions in the Construction Corps beyond the other corps, and throw the officers in the Construction Corps behind the officers in other corps, then this is against the intent of the committee. The Construction Corps now lags behind.

The CHAIRMAN. I will put it in a different way-you are now attaching the Construction Corps to all the other Staff Corps. Commander WILKINSON. Letting them catch up.

The CHAIRMAN. However, when the equalization bill was before the committee, the Construction Corps, being graduates of the Naval Academy, was opposed by officers of the line, who claimed that the Construction Corps fellows were really line officers, being graduates of the Naval Academy, and they were becoming commanders and captains at lower ages than line officers because of the rapid flow of promotion. That argument was used against the Construction Corps by officers of the line, and to get through the equalization bill. Now you are putting the members of the Construction Corps in with the other corps to bring them up again.

Mr. VINSON. Commander Dubose and other prominent officers of the Construction Corps opposed the equalization bill and officers of the line used the rapid promotion of officers of the Construction Corps as an argument, as the chairman has stated, in favor of the equalization bill.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, the Staff Corps are working around and taking unto themselves the Construction Corps.

Mr. VINSON. We devoted about four years to a study of the equalization bill. The Navy Department earnestly assured the committee that it would correct everything. Within three or four

years from now we may say that the Navy Department was not correct in its conclusions, but let us not amend the famous equalization bill now even though it is alleged that it did not equalize.

Commander WILKINSON. This is a minor matter so far as the Navy at large is concerned, but it is serious to the officers affected. The CHAIRMAN. Who are the officers in the Construction Corps affected? Give us their ages in comparison with the captains of the line.

Mr. HOUSTON. The No. 1 man of the class of 1897 is still a captain, whereas some of his classmates who were below him in the class are now admirals.

The CHAIRMAN. This is not going to make an admiral of him.
Mr. HOUSTON. Perhaps not.

Mr. VINSON. As I remember, it was cited that Captain Du Bose, of the Construction Corps, became a captain many years before his classmates in the line became captains. That was spoken of by officers of the line in support of the enactment of the equalization bill. It was alleged that the officers of the Construction Corps were generally getting far ahead of their contemporaries in the line.

Commander WILKINSON. First is Commander Howard, of the class of 1904. His classmates have been captains three years.

The CHAIRMAN. When did he become a commander?

Commander WILKINSON. January 1, 1921, which, I think, is almost identical with the rank of his classmates. The next member of the Construction Corps is Commander Hilliard, class of 1904. He is in the same situation with respect to his classmates, some months behind, in fact.

The CHAIRMAN. When did he become a commander?

Commander WILKINSON. In December, 1921.

The CHAIRMAN. When did Captain Land become a commander and a captain?

Commander WILKINSON. He became a captain in January, 1923. He is of the class of 1902 and his classmates became captains in 1924. In other words, he became a captain one year ahead of his classmates. Next are Commanders Border, Gawne, and Court.

The CHAIRMAN. How many captains have we in the Construction Corps, on a percentage basis, in comparison with captains of the line?

Commander WILKINSON. They have approximately 9 per cent captains in the Construction Corps, and at one time they had been allowed by law 12 per cent.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the line allowed now?

Commander WILKINSON. Four per cent; but these 9 are dwindling by attrition and they will become 4.

The CHAIRMAN. Because of attrition?

Commander WILKINSON. Yes, sir. And there is the further reason. for the larger number of captains, namely, captains of the Construction Corps are not forced out at the top. They remain on the list. The CHAIRMAN. The bill now before us would provide four more captains for the Construction Corps?

Commander WILKINSON. That is true. Commander Court, the fifth man on the list will not make his promotion until about 1932 or 1933; he is of the class of 1905, and his classmates have been. captains two years. He will be six years behind his classmates.

Mr. VINSON. How many rear admirals would you make for the Construction Corps by the pending bill, H. R. 15530?

Commander WILKINSON. None.

Mr. VINSON. Then how would you relieve the congestion?

Commander WILKINSON. By retirements, unless some other method of elimination, as in the line, is evolved.

Mr. VINSON. What are you going to do with Commander Du Bose at the head of the list?

Commander WILKINSON. He will remain there until selected or retires at the statutory age of 64 years.

Mr. VINSON. As one member of the committee, I do not think we should tamper now with the equalization bill.

The CHAIRMAN. If there is no objection, we will lay it on the table.

(Thereupon at 11.45 o'clock a. m., Thursday, January 10, 1929. the committee proceeded to other business.)

HEARING ON (H. R. 11483) A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 1493 OF THE REVISED STATUTES AS AMENDED

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS,
Thursday, January 10, 1929.

The committee this day met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. Fred A. Britten, chairman, presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. We have with us this morning Rear Admiral Edward H. Campbell, United States Navy, Judge Advocate General of the Navy, and Maj. E. A. Osterman, United States Marine Corp3. Admiral Campbell, which is the next bill for consideration?

Admiral CAMPBELL. H. R. 11483, to amend section 1493 of the Revised Statutes.

(The bill in question and a report thereon by the Navy Department read as follows:)

A BILL To amend section 1493 of the Revised Statutes as amended

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 1493 of the Revised Statutes of the United States as amended by the act of August 29, 1916, entitled "An act making appropriations for the naval service for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1917, and for other purposes (Thirty-nine Statutes at Large, page 611), is hereby further amended by repealing that part of said act of August 29, 1916, providing that the provisions of section 1493 of the Revised Statutes of the United States shall apply to the Marine Corps, and by adding to said section 1493 a new paragraph reading as follows:

"No officer shall be promoted to a higher grade or rank on the active list of the Marine Corps, except in the case provided in section 1494 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, until he has been examined by a marine examining board and pronounced physically qualified to perform all his duties at sea and in the field.'

TO AMEND SECTION 1493 OF THE REVISED STATUTES AS AMENDED (H. R. 11483)

NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, February 23, 1928.

The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: There is inclosed herewith a copy of a letter, together with a copy of a proposed bill to amend section 1493 of the Revised Statutes as amended, this day forwarded to the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

MY DEAR MR. SPEAKER: I have the honor to transmit herewith a draft of a proposed bill to amend section 1493 of the Revised Statutes as amended.

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to repeal so much of the act of August 29, 1916 (39 Stat. 611; U. S. C., title 34, sec. 665), as provides that "The