such board the technical features of an amendment to the act of Congress, approved February 28, 1925, and commonly known as the Naval Reserve act. (c) That the Naval Reserve, as at present constituted, be continued as a separate and distinct component of the Navy, under direct and sole control of the Navy Department. Its organization continuing to have such elasticity as will permit its development through cadres, or through complete rosters of commissioned and enlisted personnel. 22. In conclusion, the committee desires to indicate its willingness to discuss any or all suggestions contained herein, with any representatives the Secretary of the Navy may wish to designate, with a view to preliminary conversations respecting the basic outline of the plan. FRANKLIN W. WARD, Major General, The Adjutant General of New York. Brigadier General, The Adjutant General of Illinois. ELLARD A. WALSH, Brigadier General, The Adjutant General of Minnesota. RALPH W. IMMELL, Brigadier General, The Adjutant General of Wisconsin. WILLIAM P. LADD, Brigadier General, The Adjutant General of Connecticut. ARRANGEMENTS CONSIDERED DESIRABLE FOR BETTER COORDINATION OF STATE NAVAL MILITIAS WITH THE UNITED STATES NAVY 1. Change name of Naval Militias in the States to Naval Reserve if practicable and desirable from standpoint of the States and the Navy Department. The underlying purpose would be to have a Naval Reserve in each of the States having substantial maritime interests and desiring such Reserve, which together would comprise a class of the United States Naval Reserve. If more desirable, the title for these State forces might be Naval Volunteers, based on the National Naval Volunteers of 1916, which could also constitute a separate class of the United States Navy. 2 State naval force to be completely federalized. Provision to be made in oaths of office, enlistment oaths, etc., for an agreement to serve both the State and the Nation. This would do away with the present cumbersome method of separate oaths on account of the State and the Nation. 3. Each State's Naval Militia force, in total, to be recognized as a unit of the United States Naval Reserve; that is, as a brigade, regiment, or whatever might be appropriate. Organization table to be established providing allowances of grades and ratings in these forces commensurate with their size. For example, a regiment should probably be commanded by a captain, and a brigade by a rear admiral, a battalion by a lieutenant commander, commander or captain, depending on its size. Divisions to be permitted rank no higher than lieutenant, except for special conditions to be established for gradually correcting top-heavy conditions of some divisions now having from one to three lieutenant-commanders each. 4. Promotion of officers, both Federal and State, to be by selection. Under this plan, when a vacancy develops it would be filled by selection of the immediate commanding officers concerned, subject to candidate's qualifying physically and professionally before a joint Federal and State examining board. If a vacancy for a division commanding officer occurs in the grade of lieutenant, an officer would be selected to fill same instead of promoting the next in line as obtains in the Regular Army and Navy. Selection is necessary in the voluntary State forces to insure placing officers in various posts that are locally known to possess not only the required physical and professional qualifications, but also have the necessary time at their disposal and sufficient local prestige to effectively perform the duty of commanding officer. 5. State military property to be available for Federal uses by the organizations to which such properties may be allocated. If, for instance, there is to be a Federal mobilization, State armory should be available without any special arrangements, and similarly, if there is to be any State military operations in the aid of civil authorities, Federal property may be utilized in connection therewith, also with any special authority. 6. A Naval Reserve Bureau to be established in the Navy Department, the chief thereof to be selected by the President from officers recommended therefor by the governors of States supporting Naval Militia-Naval Reserve, and such chief to serve for a period of 4 years and while so serving to have the rank of rear admiral. This officer, of course, will be under the orders of the President and the Secretary of the Navy, but he will be assumed to have sufficient experience in Naval Militia-Naval Reserve service to more effectively coordinate the State forces with the Federal forces than is now practical where the Navy Department does not have the assistance of State officers. 7. Maintenance by Federal appropriations of a Naval Militia-Naval Reserve officer on permanent active duty in each Naval Militia-Naval Reserve State, in whose office controlling records, both Federal and State, will be maintained, and States to make appropriation for equitable participation in the expense of maintaining such office. This will insure a more informed local administration than is possible with the record-keeping as now obtains in commandants' offices remote from units concerned, but will not interfere with tactical control of units as now exercised by the commandants. 8. Federal appropriations for the State Naval Militia-Naval Reserve to be apportioned among the State forces in proportion to enrolled strength. (There is at present a slight, though growing, tendency toward allocating these appropriations somewhat inversely to the amounts appropriated by the States.) 9. All State Naval Militia-Naval Reserve forces to be accorded equality and uniformity of treatment in the matter of recognition and support. 10. It is most desirable that there should be a separate budget in Congress for the annual appropriation for the Federalized Naval Militia. Mr. DELANEY. Now, I think that concludes the hearings. We met by appointment by Chairman Vinson. We organized on January 14 and started our hearings on January 16, and we have met every week-day except Saturdays. I think we have elicited information bearing on this proposed law from every available source. I want to express my gratitude to the members of this subcommittee for their very faithful attendance at these meetings, and just as soon as the minutes are printed we shall make a careful study of the testimony adduced at these hearings and present to the Congress a bill for its consideration. (Whereupon, at 1:20 p. m., the hearing in the above-entitled matter was concluded.) TO AMEND SECTION 10 OF THE ACT ENTITLED "AN ACT TO REGULATE THE DISTRIBUTION, PROMOTION, RETIREMENT, AND DISCHARGE OF COMMISSIONED OFFICERS OF THE MARINE CORPS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES", APPROVED MAY 29, 1934 (48 STAT. 811) (H. R. 10126). Mr. VINSON OF GEORGIA NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, February 7, 1936. The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The bill (H. R. 10126) to amend section 10 of the act entitled "An act to regulate the distribution, promotion, retirement, and discharge of commissioned officers of the Marine Corps, and for other purposes", approved May 29, 1934 (48 Stat. 811), was referred to the Navy Department by your committee with a request for report and recommendation. The purpose of the bill is to amend section 10 of the Marine Corps Personnel Act of May 29, 1934, so that (a) First lieutenants, captains, majors, lieutenant colonels, and colonels must have 4 years' service in the grade in which then serving to become eligible for consideration by selection boards. (b) These officers, except those detailed to staff duty, have imposed upon them the additional requirement that 2 of the 4 years' service shall be with troops. (c) Officers of the Marine Corps are prohibited from serving at Marine Corps Headquarters, Washington, D. C., more than 4 out of any 8 consecutive years. Amendment (a) would have the effect of preventing all officers subject to selection below the grade of brigadier general from becoming eligible for selection prior to January 1, 1938, except for those officers who have already failed of selection and four officers in the grade of colonel who have not as yet been reached; would have the retroactive effect of rendering ineligible for promotion those officers now on a promotion list until the completion of 4 years' service in grade, 2 years of which must be with troops; would bring to a standstill all promotion in the grades mentioned until May 29, 1938; and would have the effect of confining, for the next 2 years, all selections below the rank of colonel to officers who have already failed of selection. In addition, the following situation is envisioned: Under existing law promotions must be made in order of seniority from promotion lists, and those officers on any given promotion list take precedence over those on subsequent lists. As vacancies occur they will necessarily have to be held open until officers now on the promotion list can meet the service-in-grade requirement. Meanwhile, officers who have failed of selection may be selected, but they cannot be promoted until those officers ahead of them have qualified, both as to the service-in-grade requirement and the service-with-troops requirement. The result (2247) 23697-36-No. 472 would be no promotion in the Marine Corps, except for second lieutenants promoted after 3 years' service, for a period of about 2 years. The enactment of this proposed amendment would thus completely defeat the principal object of the act of May 29, 1934. In addition, the proposed amendment on strict interpretation is at variance with the law covering selection requirements for lieutenants (junior grade) in the Navy, which is by law 3 years. Furthermore, officers in the grades of from lieutenant to captain in the Navy, both inclusive, may, for promotion and eligibility purposes, count time on a promotion list as service in the next higher grade. At the present time the Marine Corps is passing through a brief transitory stage of comparatively rapid promotion brought about by readjustment of grades after long years of stagnation. A careful study of the situation has shown that in a few years it will automatically adjust itself without any change in existing legislation. Proposed amendment (b) will in many instances, especially in the higher grades, be prejudicial to the best interests of the service, as it will in some instances delay and block promotions for a period of 2 years and will frequently interrupt and interfere with orderly assignments to duty. It will also involve many unnecessary changes in stations with resultant increased cost to the Government for mileage and transportation. The reasons for this have been explained in connection with proposed amendment (a). Proposed amendment (c) is unnecessary, in the opinion of the Navy Department, for the reason that it enunciates a policy which with a few exceptions deemed necessary is now being carried out. At the present time there is only one line officer who has served more than 4 years at headquarters during his present tour, and he is expected to retire shortly; and there are only five staff officers, two of whom are heads of staff departments, who have exceeded this period. There are only two line officers and three staff officers now on duty at headquarters who have had less than a 4-year interim between their present and previous tours of duty there. Also, it constitutes a hard and fast rule from which no departure may be made no matter how unusual the qualifications of an officer meeting all the other requireThe difficulties of administration under such a rule would be keenly felt in the appointment of not only the heads of staff departments but also the Major General Commandant, and the proposed change would seriously disrupt the staff system. The Navy Department sees no advantage in having identical selection requirements for line and staff officers of the Marine Corps and believes that the adaptation of the act of May 29, 1934, permitting Navy laws to govern, with certain exceptions, the Marine Corps, is the best solution. The additional cost of this proposed legislation is estimated at $115,000 per annum of which $75,000 would represent mileage and travel expenses of officers and $40,000 transportation of their dependents. The bill (H. R. 10126) is not in accord with the financial program of the President. The Navy Department recommends against the enactment of the bill H. R. 10126. Sincerely yours, H. L. ROOSEVELT, Acting. TO AUTHORIZE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO DISPOSE OF CERTAIN PUBLIC VESSELS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES (H. R. 10979). MR. VINSON OF GEORGIA NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, February 3, 1936. The SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. SPEAKER: There is transmitted herewith a draft of a proposed bill to authorize the President of the United States to dispose of certain public vessels, and for other purposes. Existing treaties on naval limitations contain certain rules for the disposal of tonnage in excess of treaty limits, but do not, in themselves give authority to the Secretary of the Navy to make such disposal, in which he is limited to certain methods by the provisions of the act of August 5, 1882 (22 Stat. 296, U. S. C., title 34, sec. 491), and the act of March 3, 1883 (22 Stat. 599, U. S. C., title 34, sec. 492). The purpose of the proposed legislation is to authorize disposal by methods specified in the treaty signed at London on April 22, 1930, and to authorize the President, in accordance with and subject to the requirements of the treaty, to select the ships and prescribe the manner of disposal. Ships so disposed of shall represent excess tonnage in any category. The cost to the Government, if any, cannot be estimated because it is not known at this time what disposal will be made of these ships. The proposed legislation is considered by the Navy Department to be essential to the efficiency of the Navy. It is in accord with the financial and policy programs of the President. The Navy Department recommends the enactment of the proposed legislation. Sincerely yours, H. L. ROOSEVELT, Acting. |