Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

RECOMMENDATIONS, CERTAIN RELATIVE TO THE BILL (H. R. 14039) TO REGULATE THE DISTRIBUTION AND PROMOTION OF COMMISSIONED OFFICERS OF THE LINE OF THE NAVY, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES (BRITTEN BILL)

NAVY DEPARTMENT,

Washington, June 9, 1928.

The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I have the honor to inclose herewith, for the information of the Committee on Naval Affairs, a copy of a letter from Lieut. S. S. Isquith, United States Navy, making certain recommendations relative to the bill (H. R. 14039) to regulate the distribution and promotion of commissioned officers of the line of the Navy, and for other purposes. Sincerely yours,

EDWARD P. WARNER, Acting Secretary of the Navy.

UNITED STATES NAVY YARD,

New York, N. Y., May 23, 1928.

From: Lieut. S. S. Isquith, United States Navy.

To: The Secretary of the Navy.

Via: Official channels.

Subject: New Britten bill; recommendation for revision to include some form of voluntary retirement for certain commissioned officers of the United States Navy.

References: (a) Par. 94, U. S. Navy Reg. 1920.

(b) Army-Navy Register of May 12, 1928.

1. In accordance with provisions of reference (a) it is respectfully requested that the following be brought to the attention of the Naval Affairs Committees of both the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives:

That the new Britten bill (as quoted on page 446 of reference (b) be revised to carry out part of its original intent, namely, to include some form of unlimited voluntary retirement for officers and especially for officers who have graduated from the United States Naval Academy, and who have had at least 10 years of actual commissioned service. These officers to be either retired at an equitable compensation or transferred into a special Reserve Corps at a retainer pay of 21⁄2 per cent of their base pay for each year of service.

2. It is believed that the original Britten bill (H. R. 366) was introduced in 1924 with the express intention of such or a similar form of retirement. The following is quoted from an article entitled "Naval Efficiency," which appeared on page 437 of reference (b):

It is interesting to recall that the original bill, which was dated as far back as 1924, was frankly headed "for promoting efficiency in the line of the Navy."

[blocks in formation]

In its subesquent form its purpose was more tactfully stated as "to regulate the distribution and promotion of commissioned officers of the line of the Navy, and for other purposes."

Its apparent purpose then was to promote efficiency by allowing those officers who so desired to be transferred to a special reserve corps in order that the so-called HUMP would be reduced and promotion would thereby be stimulated.

3. It is believed that such a voluntary retirement or transfer will be beneficial

(A) To those officers who may wish, either because of the pay inequities or other reasons, to retire before present law will allow them to do so, since it would give them some equitable relief for the prime years of their life spent in faithful service.

(B) To those officers who remain in the service, since it would reduce this so-called HUMP and stimulate promotion.

(C) To the Government, since for a small retainer pay, it would keep available for any national emergency a set of highly technically trained and experienced officers.

4. It is further recommended that a fair census of opinion be obtained from all officers who may be directly affected by this proposed bill.

S. S. ISQUITH.

TO PROVIDE FOR THE PAYMENT OF A DISCHARGE GRATUITY TO ENLISTED MEN OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS

NAVY DEPARTMENT,

Washington, June 9, 1928.

The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Replying further to the committee's letter of March 31, 1928, transmitting the bill (H. R. 12532) to provide for the payment of a discharge gratuity to enlisted men of the Navy and Marine Corps, and requesting the views and recommendations of the Navy Department thereon, I have the honor to advise you as follows:

[ocr errors]

The purpose of this bill is to check the rising cost for the upkeep of "transferred" reservists, and after 20 years from date of passage to add no more men to this class.

The bill provides in section 1 for an optional cash payment to personnel now in the naval service in lieu of Fleet Reserve annual pay on transfer to that reserve and in section 2 for the abrogation, with respect to men entering the Navy subsequent to the enactment of the bill, of the right to transfer to the Fleet Naval Reserve and to annual pay therein, substituting therefor honorable discharge with one year's pay and additions after 20 years' service.

The financial return from the optional cash payment provided in section 1 is so much less than from the annual pay now allowed that it is believed few if any men would exercise the option. Hence little saving would result to the Government from this section.

With regard to section 2, the purpose of the existing Fleet Reserve law is double-(1) to provide a reserve for the Navy in emergency and (2) to encourage reenlistment. This section prevents the accomplishment of the first object by prohibiting further transfers, and to a large extent fails to accomplish the second by reducing the benefits gained by long service. Although it is not effective, in its saving to the Government of reserve pay, for 20 years, it will be effective in failing to encourage reenlistment in four years, when the first men to reenlist after its enactment complete their enlistment.

The saving to the Government by section 2 is problematical, since an increased cost, due to the expected lowering of the reenlistment rate, of recruiting, enlistment outfits, etc., may be expected from 4 to 20 years after its enactment, while the actual saving due to cessation of reserve pay will not begin until 20 years. In addition, the efficiency of the Navy will be lowered by the loss of the experienced men who do not reenlist.

The Navy Department is aware of the large and increasing cost of the fleet reserve, a cost which this bill is an earnest effort to reduce, and is making a most thorough study of the possibilities of modification of the present law to reduce this cost without injury to the efficiency of the naval service. In view of the brief experience with the present (9)

2197-28-No. 4

law and the necessity of accumulating data and knowledge as to reenlistments and transfers over a long period, it is feared that no adequate and complete measure can be devised during this current

year.

In view of the foregoing, the Navy Department recommends against the enactment of the bill (H. R. 12532).

The bill (H. R. 12532) was referred to the Bureau of the Budget with the above information. Under date of May 25, 1928, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget advised the Navy Department that this proposed legislation is not in conflict with the financial program of the President.

Sincerely yours,

EDWARD P. WARNER,

Acting Secretary of the Navy.

A BILL To provide for the payment of a discharge gratuity to enlisted men of the Navy and Marine Corps Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, effective immediately upon an appropriation becoming available therefor, the Secretary of the Navy thereafter shall extend to enlisted men of the Navy and Marine Corps in those services on the date of the approval of this act who become eligible, under existing law, for transfer to the Fleet Naval Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve, respectively, after sixteen and twenty years' naval service, the option, if they do not elect to reenlist or to extend their enlistments, of being so transferred or to being given an honorable discharge and a cash gratuity equivalent to one year's pay of the grade in which serving plus the yearly sum of all permanent additions to which entitled by law at the time of becoming eligible for transfer, which latter alternative is hereby authorized.

SEC. 2. On and after the date of the approval of this act persons enlisting in the Navy and Marine Corps shall not be eligible for transfer to the Fleet Naval Reserve and the Fleet Marine Corps Reserve, respectively. In lieu thereof, upon the completion of twenty years' service as now defined by law, regulation, and/or decision of competent authority with respect to service eligibility for transfer to the Fleet Naval Reserve or the Fleet Marine Corps Reserve, such persons who do not reenlist or extend their enlistments shall be given an honorable discharge, if entitled thereto, and be paid a cash gratuity equivalent to one year's pay of the grade in which serving plus the yearly sum of all permanent additions to which entitled by law at the time of completing twenty years' service.

о

AUTHORIZING THE APPOINTMENT OF VIRGIL E. WHITAKER AS A FIRST LIEUTENANT IN THE VOLUNTEER MARINE CORPS RESERVE

[blocks in formation]

The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Replying further to the committee's letter of May 16, 1928, transmitting the bill (H. R. 13820) authorizing the appointment of Virgil E. Whitaker as a first lieutenant in the Volunteer Marine Corps Reserve, and requesting the views and recommendations of the Navy Department thereon, I have the honor to advise you as follows:

The purpose of this bill is to authorize the President to appoint Virgil E. Whitaker, formerly of the Field Artillery Central Officers' Training School, Camp Taylor, Ky., a first lieutenant in the Volunteer Marine Corps Reserve.

Appointments in the Marine Corps Reserve are made in the grade of second lieutenant from candidates between 20 and 28 years of age, who establish before a board their moral, physical, and educational fitness, their capacity for leadership, and who have had some prior military experience. Mr. Whitaker's age and qualifications are unknown. If he could meet the requirements he could be appointed a second lieutenant in the Volunteer Marine Corps Reserves without legislation. His appointment as a first lieutenant, however, would not be desirable in any event, nor would it be fair to others who have met the requirements and are now holding appointment as second lieutenants.

As to cost, members of the Volunteer Marine Corps Reserve are not required by law to train or to perform other active duty and no cost would necessarily be incurred by reason of this legislation. It is, however, the policy to train members of the reserve 15 days a year, the minimum cost of which training in the case of a first lieutenant would be $112.33 plus mileage from his home to the training camp and return.

The bill (H. R. 13820) 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 June 5, 1928, the Director of the Bureau of the Budget advised the Navy Department that this proposed unfavorable recommen adtion is not in conflict with the financial program of the President.

In view of the foregoing, the Navy Department recommends against the enactment of the bill (H. R. 13820).

Sincerely yours,

EDWARD P. WARNER, Acting Secretary of the Navy.

[blocks in formation]
« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »