TABLE XI(A).—Table showing comparative strengths, as of July 1, 1933 1 Includes 1 officer paid by Veterans' Bureau and 219 paid by Civilian Conservation Corps. Total appropriated for 1934, 79,700. Does not include Coast Guard, 1,257 officers and cadets and 9,587 men. Includes 118 naval constructors and 59 civil engineers not classed as officers. Includes 31 retired officers on active duty. Includes 118 officers and 419 men serving in Dominion navies. Includes 435 midshipmen and cadets at sea. Ninety officers and midshipmen and 73 men of the Dominion navies are serving in the Regular Navy but are shown in the table under the Dominions. * Includes 1,379 civilian officials performing naval duties. Does not include midshipmen and cadets. 4 Includes 225 Reserves called to active duty. Does not include 253 midshipmen ashore. Includes 78 civilian officials, 9 Royal Carabinieri, 98 Reserve cadets at sea, 411 Reserve officers on active duty, and 459 warrant officers. Does not include 276 midshipmen ashore. Includes 436 Royal Carabinieri performing naval duties. 7 Estimated. 8 Civilian crews of auxiliaries not included last year. TABLE XI(B).-Number of cadets and midshipmen exclusive of those at sea -The handicap which a short period of enlistment places upon a navy should be recognized in in with this general comparison of personnel. Marine Corps. alments guarded by 261 officers and 4,761 men. Total figure above includes 152 warrant taishments are guarded by 667 Royal Marine police, 264 Metropolitan police, and 410 Civilian - dg total, 1,341, not included above. Lahments guarded by 87 civilian prison guards and by the Naval Defense Corps, number A estar lishments guarded by 9 officers and 436 men of Royal Carabinieri. TABLE XV.-Number of officers commissioned and warrant in the Navy as of July Military engineers. From latest figures, October 1932. uf Royal Carabinieri performing marine duties. Naval aviators attached to and paid by Air Ministry. Rank not known. ⚫hank not known. 1 TABLE XVI.-Naval appropriations or expenditures by principal powers 1 "Comparative Statistical Data, Navies of the World", Senate committee arint of Dec. 31, 1932, the fiscal years 1900-1 to 1929-30, inclusive. Expenditures Fund, $4 86, franc, $0.0392; lire, $0.0526; yen, $0.4985. applementary $35,531,203 (71,276,235 yen) for Manchurian affair included. Supplementary $5,857,848 “570 yen for Manchurian affair included (September). Eroty bill effective. Does not include N.R.A. funds. Not including aviation. Does not include sums carried from previous credits under "Defense." nor -* allotted to Navy from Finance, Public Health, and Public Works which in 1932 amounted to *,200,000 and in 1933 will probably amount to same. TRANSFERRED FLEET RESERVISTS Mr. AYRES. Before concluding, Admiral, there is a matter that I wish to bring to your attention looking ultimately to freeing more money for matériel uses. We have what we call transferred fleet reservists former enlisted men who have served 16 or 20 years in the regular service. We appropriated this year for their pay $10,71.819. For 1935 the figure jumps to $11,742,147. When their enlisted service and time in the reserve totals 30 years, they assume a retired status, and that is swelling the bill for enlisted men on the retired list. Since 1930 there has been an increase of more than 100 percent in the retired list cost. I am sure I do not know what the ultimate annual cost may be. Admiral Leigh had a study made of the subject 4 or 5 years ago, and it indicated a constant, substantial rise over a long period of years. When the transfer provision was enacted an entirely different situation prevailed. The Navy was not as attractive as it is today. The growth of training and welfare activities, including educational advantages, and other considerations, have brought about a situation where you virtually select your recruits. An honorably discharged enlisted man goes into civil life with his navy training as a distinct asset. It seems to me that the time has arrived when we might seriously consider the repeal of the transfer law. Aside from curbing and ultimately eliminating the large cost it is entailing, which unquestionably has a bearing upon limiting figures applied to your budget, it seems to me that this form of building a reserve is having the effect of giving you less trained reserve material. If only such number of men were encouraged to reenlist as would provide suitable material for the higher ratings, you would have a larger number annually going out, who, though they might or might not identify themselves with the regular reserve, would be available to you in the event of war and would be excellent material for a number of years after severance of their naval ties. I do not want you to express yourself now. I bring the matter up in the hope that you will give it careful study. This committee would have no jurisdiction over a modification of the law, but we are interested in seeing that you get the best Navy possible under the law with the funds that we may be able to appropriate. Admiral STANDLEY. We will be glad to give it careful thought, Mr. Chairman. Mr. AYRES. Admiral, we certainly appreciate very much the presentation you have made. Admiral STANDLEY. If there is anything else we can give you, we are at your service. We are always pleased to give you any information we can. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1933. BUREAU OF NAVIGATION STATEMENTS OF REAR ADMIRAL W. D. LEAHY, CHIEF; CAPT. J. S. MCCAIN, BUDGET OFFICER; CAPT. LEIGH NOYES, DIRECTOR OF TRAINING; COMDR. V. L. KIRKMAN, ENLISTED PERSONNEL DIVISION; COMDR. L. E. DENFELD, OFFICER PERSONNEL DIVISION; COMDR. MELVILLE S. BROWN, FLEET TRAINING OPERATIONS, AND MR. EDWARD HENKEL, CHIEF CLERK, BUREAU OF NAVIGATION ་། Mr. AYRES. We shall now proceed to the consideration of personnel matters. Admiral Leahy, Chief of the Bureau of Navigation, and his assistants are present to acquaint us more in detail with the state of the Navy as regards personnel, present and prospective. |