[No. 19.] GEORGE R. GRAY. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Referring further to bill H. R. 14211, "To correct the naval record of George R. Gray," it appears from the statements in Gray's letter of the 11th instant that he may be the George Gray who enlisted in the United States Marine Corps June 15, 1861, to serve four years, and who deserted from the Marine Corps on January 27, 1862, while serving on board the U. S. S. Rhode Island. If so, the bill as it stands is objectionable because, as a matter of fact, the beneficiary thereunder was not discharged on August 11, 1862, and there appear to be no grounds which would warrant the removal of the charge of desertion. The enactment and approval of the measure in its present form would require an alteration of historical records which should be kept inviolate, and the consequent issuance of a discharge which the intended beneficiary did not actually receive. If the object of the bill under consideration is to give to Mr. Gray a pensionable status, it could be done without any alteration of the records and without the issue of a discharge contrary to the true facts, by the enactment of the bill modified to read as follows: That in the administration of the pension laws, George Gray, who enlisted in the United States Marine Corps on the fifteenth day of June, eighteen hundred and sixty-one, and who served at the United States marine barracks, Washington, District of Columbia; at the United States marine barracks, Brooklyn, New York; and on board the United States ship Rhode Island, shall hereafter be held and considered to have been honorably discharged from the United States Marine Corps on the twenty-seventh day of January, eighteen hundred and sixty-two: Provided, That, other than as above set forth, no pay, bounty, or other emolument shall accrue prior to or by reason of the passage of this act. Likewise, the title of the bill should be amended to read "For the relief of George Gray." In view of the above, it is believed that the case presents no such especially meritorious features as would justify the granting of the relief sought, and as Gray deserted from the Marine Corps when he had yet over three years to serve under his enlistment therein and at a period during the Civil War when his services were especially in demand, the department is of the opinion that this bill does not merit approval, even in the modified form above set forth, and recommends, therefore, that favorable consideration be not given the bill H. R. 14211. Faithfully, yours, The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, G. v. L. MEYER. House of Representatives. 85873-13- -49 [No. 20.] CIVILIAN PROFESSORS AT THE NAVAL ACADEMY. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, Washington, January 22, 1913. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Referring to your letter transmitting, on behalf of the Committee on Naval Affairs of the House of Representatives, a bill (H. R. 19061) "to authorize the appointment of two extra numbers on the retired list in the corps of professor of mathematics in the Navy," I have the honor to inform you that the Bureau of Navigation of this department, which has general supervision over the personnel of the Navy and special supervision of Naval Academy affairs, has reported upon this bill as follows: This bill, if enacted into law, would operate to make Profs. N. M. Terry and W. W. Johnson professors of mathematics in the Navy, and immediately retire them, each having reached the age of 65 years and served as instructor or professor at the Naval Academy for more than 35 years. The bureau is of the opinion that general legislation covering the cases of all professors with long service at the Naval Academy would be preferable to special legislation covering only two specific cases. Another bill (H. R. 27575), approved by this bureau's indorsement of the 14th instant, would accomplish all that is proposed in the within bill and cover all deserving future cases. In view of the above, the department's disapproval of this bill (H. R. 19061) is recommended. The department concurs in the recommendation of the Bureau of Navigation. Faithfully, yours, The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, G. v. L. MEYER. House of Representatives. (767) [No. 21.] HARRIET HAMILTON PRATT. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Referring to your letter transmitting a bill (H. R. 14540) "For the relief of Harriet Hamilton Pratt, I have the honor to inform you that this bill was referred to the Bureau of Navigation of this department, which has general supervision over the personnel of the Navy, and that the bureau has reported thereon as follows: The late Commander Alfred A. Pratt, United States Navy, retired, was transferred to the retired list on June 30, 1911, under section 9 of the Navy personel act approved March 3, 1899. The actual date of his retirement by law was June 30, 1911, not July 3, as stated in the attached bill. July 3, 1911, was the date when the President signed his approval of the retirement. He died on July 4, 1911, the official death report giving peritonitis as the immediate cause of death, incurred in line of duty, incident to long service. Commander Pratt was admitted to treatment at the naval hospital, Mare Island, Cal., on August 12, 1910; discharged to sick leave on November 8, 1910, and readmitted to treatment at the same hospital on April 7, 1911, where he remained until his death. The proceedings of the board which recommended the retirement of Commander Pratt were approved by the President on the day before his death, and the bureau is informed that he died unconscious of the fact that he had been retired. He was in a dying condition for several days, and his death one day earlier-before the President's approval had given effect to his retirement-would have put a different aspect on the case. Under the act of May 13, 1908, in effect at the time, had he been an officer on the active list his widow would have been entitled to receive six months' pay of his rank, she being his legally designated beneficiary. No question of fact is raised, however, and the widow clearly has no claim under the law then existing. In enacting such special legislation as that here proposed there is danger of establishing a precedent; but the circumstances in this case are so extraordinary, making a technically correct application of the law work a hardship so foreign to its compassionate intent that favorable action in this case could not justly be construed as a precedent on which to base other requests for similar benefit in less unusual cases. In its present wording the law would raise a doubt as to the amount to be paid. Amendments are suggested as follows: In the second line of the second preamble clause, after the words “retired list," insert "by approval of the President dated"; at the end of the bill, change period to comma, and add "at his rate of pay before transfer to the retired list." So amended, the bureau recommends the department's favorable consideration of this bill (H. R. 14540) for the reason stated. The department concurs in the recommendations of the Bureau. of Navigation. Faithfully, yours, The CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, G. v. L. MEYER. House of Representatives. |