AUTHORIZING REPLACEMENT OF THE CAUSEWAY OVER NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, Feb. 23, 1929. The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Replying further to the committee's letter of February 7, 1929, transmitting the bill (H. R. 16840) authorizing the replacement of the causeway over Mare Island Strait, Calif., and requesting the views and recommendations of the Navy Department thereon, I have the honor to inform you as follows: The purpose of this bill is to authorize and direct the Secretary of the Navy to replace the causeway over Mare Island Strait, between the navy yard, Mare Island, and Vallejo, Calif., to cost, when completed, not to exceed $750,000. The present causeway over the Mare Island Strait, between. the navy yard and Vallejo, is the only means of communication between the Mare Island Navy Yard and the mainland except by water. The causeway is a temporary timber structure. The piles have been badly eaten by Teredos, and is rapidly approaching a stage where it will be actually dangerous to use it. The replacement of this temporary causeway is considered a most urgent item. The estimate of $750,000 is believed to be accurate. The bill H. R. 16840, if enacted into law, will result in an additional cost to the Government of not to exceed $750,000. The bill H. R. 16840 was referred to the Bureau of the Budget with the above information as to cost and a statement that the Navy Department contemplated making a favorable recommendation. thereon. Under date of February 19, 1929, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget advised the Navy Department that this proposed favorable recommendation is not in conflict with the financial program of the President. In view of the foregoing, the Navy Department recommends that the bill H. R. 16840, be enacted. Sincerely yours, CURTIS D. WILBUR, A BILL Authorizing replacement of the causeway over Mare Island Strait, Calif. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of the Navy be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to replace the causeway over Mare Island Strait, between the navy yard, Mare Island, and Vallejo, California, to cost, when completed, not to exceed $750,000. TO CORRECT THE NAVAL RECORD OF JAMES M. HUDSON (H. R. 16102) NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, February 23, 1929. The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, House of Representatires, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Replying further to the committee's letter of January 19, 1929, transmitting the bill (H. R. 16102) to correct the naval record of James M. Hudson, and requesting the views and recommendations of the Navy Department thereon, I have the honor to inform you as follows: The purpose of this bill is to provide that in the administration of any laws conferring rights, privileges, and benefits upon honorably discharged enlisted men James M. Hudson, who was a member of the United States Navy, shall hereafter be held and considered to have been honorably discharged from the naval service as a member of that organization. The records of the Navy Department show that the above-named man was born on September 18, 1880. He enlisted in the Navy on May 28, 1896, to serve until July 4, 1902. On July 8, 1897, Hudson absented himself from the U. S. S. Vermont and the naval service and remained so absent until he surrendered on board the U. S. S. Richmond on April 25, 1898. He was permitted to sign an agreement to serve for the period of his unauthorized absence instead of being tried by general court-martial for his offense. On October 9, 1899, he absented himself from the U. S. S. Chicago and is still carried on the rolls and records of the Navy Department in the status of a deserter at large. The Navy Department is unaware of any good reason for considering Hudson as having been honorably discharged from the naval service, and without such reason does not believe that any special action toward his case should be taken. Further, any legislation such as this bill, restoring the rights, privileges and benefits of an honorably discharged man to a man in a deserter's status is a partial revocation of the penalties incurred by the desertion, and by the accumulation of cases in which such remission is accomplished by acts of Congress tends to weaken the force of the penalties consequent upon desertion. The bill (H. R. 16102), if enacted into law, will result in no additional cost to the Navy; however, it is probable that a pension charge will be involved now or in the future The bill (H. R. 16102) was referred to the Bureau of the Budget with the above information as to cost and a statement that the Navy Department contemplated making an unfavorable recommendation thereon. Under date of February 13, 1929, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget advised the Navy Department that the recommendation against the enactment of the proposed legislation is in accordance with the financial program of the President. In view of the foregoing, the Navy Department recommends against the enactment of the bill H. R. 16102. Sincerely yours, CURTIS D. WILBUR, A BILL To correct the naval record of James M. Hudson Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That in the administration of any laws conferring rights, privileges, and benefits upon honorably discharged enlisted men James M. Hudson, who was a member of the United States Navy, shall hereafter be held and considered to have been honorably discharged from the naval service of the United States as a member of that organization: Provided, That no bounty, back pay, pension, or allowance shall be held to have accrued prior to the passage of this act. () FOR THE RELIEF OF THE DEPENDENTS OF MAX GRADY SULLIVAN (H. R. 16616) NAVY DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, February 23, 1929. The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Replying further to the committee's letter of January 28, 1929, transmitting the bill (H. R. 16616), for the relief of the dependents of Max Grady Sullivan, deceased, and requesting the views of the Navy Department thereon, I have the honor to inform you as follows: The purpose of this bill is to provide that in the administration of laws conferring rights, privileges, and benefits on honorably discharged members of the Marine Corps and their dependents, Max Grady Sullivan, deceased, shall be considered to have been honorably discharged from the Marine Corps, October 22, 1918. Max Grady Sullivan, born October 13, 1888, voluntarily enlisted in the Marine Corps, March 21, 1917, as a private for four years and served therein until November 2, 1918, when he was dishonorably discharged pursuant to sentence of a general court-martial. Sullivan served in Santo Domingo from June 3, 1917, until June 27, 1918. In February, 1918, a general court-martial found him guilty of "when on shore abusing and maltreating an inhabitant," and sentenced him to one year's confinement and dishonorable discharge, which sentence was remitted by the convening authority on condition that Sullivan conduct himself in such a manner as in the opinion of his commanding officer would warrant his further retention in the service. On May 19, 1918 Private Sullivan was drunk and disorderly in Santo Domingo City, and used profane language to a noncommissioned officer, in view of which conduct he was transferred to the United States for confinement and dishonorable discharge, in accordance with the terms of his sentence. The bill (H. R. 16616), if enacted into law, will result in no additional cost to the Navy; however, it is probable that a charge against the appropriations of the Veterans' Bureau will be involved now or in the future. The bill H. R. 16616 was referred to the Bureau of the Budget with the above information as to cost and a statement that the Navy Department contemplated making an unfavorable recommendation thereon. Under date of February 16, 1929, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget advised the Navy Department that the recommendation against the enactment of the proposed legislation is in accordance with the financial program of the President. In view of the foregoing, the Navy Department recommends against the enactment of the bill H. R. 16616. Sincerely yours, CURTIS D. WILBUR, Secretary of the Navy. |