languages. Mathematics includes algebra, trigonometry, and geometry. A man who is good in mathematics frequently finds it very difficult to get along in the English and language departments.

Mr. WITHERSPOON. The power of the boy to master the course and get the full advantage of it depends on his intellectual power, his industry, and his preparation?

Capt. GIBBONS. Yes, sir.

Mr. WITHERSPOON. If a man has sufficient intellectual power and industry, and is insufficiently prepared, he will not master the course as well as if he had the preparation, would he?

Capt. GIBBONS. There are exceptions, like there are in every profession. Young men have come there with very little preparation and been graduated.

Mr. WITHERSPOON. In those cases the boys had an extra amount of brains and industry?

Capt. GIBBONS. I should think that they had the average amount of brains, at all events.

Mr. WITHERSPOON. Take two boys with the same mental power and the same industry, is it not a self-evident fact that the one who had the better preparation would master the course better than the other one?

Capt. GIBBONS. Yes, sir; he would. Sometimes we find that mental activity is combined with moral obliquity and then on account of their bad conduct they are dropped.

Mr. WITHERSPOON. In regard to this military duty which they have to perform at the academy, what part of their time is consumed in learning the military part of the education, blacksmithing, carpenter work, learning about the wireless telegraphy, the telephone system, ventilating system, and other things of that kind?

Capt. GIBBONS. About one-half of their time.

Mr. WITHERSPOON. In the ordinary college where they do not have to devote half of their time to these subjects, it is not as necessary that they should be fully prepared to comprehend the educational part of it as there is at the academy where they have to devote so inuch of their time to these special things?

Capt. GIBBONS. That is true.

Mr. WITHERSPOON. What I said about Congressmen did not refer to any member of the committee, but it referred to the group that consumed about five hours in the House one day on a bill that itself did not have anything on earth to do with it, making their complaints about the rigidity of the examination.

Mr. BUCHANAN. The reason that I asked the question I did in regard to the percentages is that I am not very familiar with the examinations taken by those who apply to the academy, but the usual examinations of the civil service for employment, in my opinion, require a great many questions to be answered that do not have anything to do with the employment. Again, I have seen cases where a man who passed a very poor paper examination for a position would develop into a very efficient man in the position he was seeking, and a man who had been schooled for the particular examination and who would pass a high examination would prove to be inefficient for the position. I have seen many cases of that among mechanics, and the thought I had was to get information, if you have any, as to the result at the academy in regrad to that. There are some, for

example, who take the examination who do not have an opportunity to develop their mental ability or their physical qualities, but as soon as they do have an opportunity they take every advantage of it, and some of the others who do not have that, have taken instruction at these preparation schools preparatory to the examination and who would not take advantage of it after they have been admitted to the academy or to the position they were seeking. I have no disposition to condemn men on that account, because I believe in efficiency and always have, but it is a question how we are going to get the most efficient ones.

The CHAIRMAN. As I understand it, all of your teaching there and training is intended to fit the men for the naval service?

Capt. GIBBONS. I think Admiral Dewey expressed that very well when he said that we are educating there a definite type of man for a definite object in life, and that both theory and practice are combined as well as we can combine them in four years; but, of course, experience comes afterwards.

The CHAIRMAN. His ability to use it?

Capt. GIBBONS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BATHRICK. Do you take any measures whatever to ascertain the courage, perseverance, and nerve of a man who enters the academy? Is it all brain work, without any consideration of a man's characteristics?

Capt. GIBBONS. No, sir; I think we try to differentiate between a man using his brain as a reservoir and as muscle. For instance, there are many men who are good in books who do not excel in other things.

Mr. BATHRICK. Do you not think there are certain characteristics of fighting men that you can not get out of the books?

Capt. GIBBONS. I do. If there is any possible way of picking out those men, of course they would be the men you want.

Mr. BATHRICK. Do you take that into consideration?

Capt. GIBBONS. We can not get at that feature easily, and you can not tell until it develops. The only standard we have is established by the experience of many years.

Mr. BATHRICK. A man who has charge of a ship should have poise, quick decision, self-control, and courage?

Capt. GIBBONS. Yes, sir; and we look for these qualities at all times, and if a midshipman shows them a note of it is made in his record. We try to give him the education there, but the great school of experience comes when he gets his commission and goes out with the fleet. He is examined for his various promotions, and he is tabbed on his courage or anything that he has done.

Mr. BATHRICK. You do not try to study a boy?

Capt. GIBBONS. We try to find out, but it is an extremely difficult thing to do. I would not say that I could assess a man's courage, because he may have lacked opportunities during the course to show that, but if he has come to the front a note is made on his record. Mr. WITHERSPOON. The bravest men do not show it until the time to fight comes.

The CHAIRMAN. Captain, we are very much obliged to you.

(Thereupon, the committee adjourned to meet to-morrow, Friday, January 16, 1914, at 10.30 o'clock a. m.)

[No. 10.]

COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS, Friday, January 16, 1914. The committee this day met, Hon. Lemuel P. Padgett (chairman) presiding.

STATEMENTS OF MAJ. GEN. WILLIAM P. BIDDLE, COMMANDANT; COL. CHARLES L. M'CAWLEY, QUARTERMASTER, IN CHARGE OF QUARTERMASTER'S DEPARTMENT; AND COL. GEORGE RICHARDS, PAYMASTER, IN CHARGE OF THE PAYMASTER'S DEPARTMENT, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS.

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen of the committee, we have with us this morning Gen. Biddle, Commandant of the Marine Corps.

General, I notice that in "Pay, Marine Corps," you have a proviso in new language, "Provided, That the increased compensation as now fixed by law for the Marine Corps for foreign shore service shall hereafter be paid to the officers and enlisted men of that corps while on sea duty, in the same manner and under the same conditions as is provided by the act approved May 13, 1908, for officers of the Navy," increasing the appropriation from $956,598 to $977,457. That is the same proviso which was submitted last year?

Gen. BIDDLE. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any reasons you desire to submit to the committee?

Gen. BIDDLE. We ask for it because the naval officers get it. We have a prepared statement covering that matter.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well; either state it or place it in the hearings. Col. RICHARDS. The reasons why marines should receive sea pay may be briefly summarized, as follows:

1. From the legal point of view:

First. Why marines do not get sea pay.-Marines do not get sea pay because, by section 1612, Revised Statutes, their pay and allowances are to be the same as now or hereafter provided for the Infantry of the Army, which is the same for both sea and shore service. Section 1612, Revised Statutes, provides:

SEC. 1612. The officers of the Marine Corps shall be entitled to receive the same pay and allowances, and the enlisted men shall be entitled to receive the same pay and bounty for reenlisting, as are or may be provided by or in pursuance of law for the officers and enlisted men of like grades in the Infantry of the Army.

Second. Why the Navy gets sea pay. The naval officers have always been provided by law with a higher rate of pay for sea service than for shore duty, on the ground of the more arduous duty and the greater expense involved in separately maintaining themselves at sea and their families ashore. The Navy's enlisted men have, for similar reasons, always enjoyed a higher rate of pay than men of corresponding grades in the Army and Marine Corps. The present law applying

to officers of the Navy is the act of May 13, 1908 (35 Stat., p. 128), which provides as follows:

All officers on sea duty and all officers on shore duty beyond the continental limits of the United States shall, while so serving, receive 10 per cent additional of their salaries and increase as above provided, and such increase shall commence from the date of reporting for duty on board ship or the date of sailing from the United States for shore duty beyond the seas or to join a ship in foreign waters.

This act further provides for an increase of 10 per cent in the pay of all enlisted men of the Navy, in terms as follows:

The pay of all active and retired enlisted men of the Navy is hereby increased 10 per cent.

The corresponding law, framed solely to meet the conditions in the Army, is the act of June 30, 1902 (32 Štat., 512), and the act of May 11, 1908 (35 Stat., 110), which provide:

Provided, That hereafter the pay proper of all commissioned officers and enlisted men serving beyond the limits of the States comprising the Union and the Territories of the United States contiguous thereto shall be increased 10 per cent for officers and 20 per cent for enlisted men over and above the rates of pay proper as fixed by law for time of peace, and the time of such service shall be counted from the date of departure from said States to the date of return thereto. (Act of June 30, 1902, 32 Stat., 512.)

That increase of pay for service beyond the limits of the States comprising the Union and the Territories of the United States contiguous thereto shall be as now provided by law. (Act of May 11, 1908, 35 Stat., 110.)

Now, those are the laws which provide for foreign shore-duty pay for the Army.

Third. Navy pay fixed on sea basis, marines, pay on shore basis.From these laws it is apparent that the pay of the Navy is fixed on a sea basis, while the pay of the Marine Crops, which corresponds to that of the Infantry of the Army, is fixed on a shore basis.

Fourth. How the law overlooked sea service of marines.-The Congress, in revising the pay of the services in 1908 (acts of May 11 and 13, 1908), as above cited, dealt solely with the conditions of service as applied to the Army and Navy, without any special reference to the diversified conditions of service in the Marine Corps; thus, not taking into account that small portion of the corps who always serve at sea. 2. From the equitable point of view:

First. Same pay for same rank and length of service under similar conditions only equitable basis for all the military services.-Congress, by the acts of May 11 and 13, 1908, above cited, endeavored, as far as practicable, to place all officers of the Army and Navy of the same rank and length of service on the same footing as to pay and allowances. This was done in so far as the conditions of the two services would permit; but officers of the Navy, whose principal duty was to serve at sea, were given, in addition to the 10 per cent for foreign-service pay allowed Army officers, a similar increase for all sea duty. This was considered equitable and just as applied to the Army and Navy, though, as above stated, the sea-going marines were overlooked.

Second. The duties of marines at sea as arduous as that of sailors.The marine at sea is required to perform practically all the arduous duties that a sailor performs; from scrubbing the decks and coaling ship to manning the guns, etc.

Third. The enlisted marines' pay is 25 to 45 per cent less than that of sailors. The pay of enlisted men of corresponding grades in the Navy exceeds that of similar grades in the Marine Corps by from 25 to 45

per cent. In view of the fact that marines must, as above stated, perform all of the duties of sailors, this does not appear just and equitable.

Fourth. Sea pay of marines still less by 10 to 15 per cent than sailors. The pay of the enlisted men of the Marine Corps, if increased for sea service, as requested, would still be from 10 to 15 per cent less than that of sailors of corresponding grades.

Fifth. Same pay sea and ashore.-The marine officers and men receive the same pay at sea as they receive ashore. The pay of officers of corresponding rank and length of service in the Navy and Marine Corps is the same for shore services, but the naval officer receives 10 per cent more than the marine officer for sea service. This can not be justified on any equitable grounds.

Sixth. Special status not desired. So far as the law fixing the base pay of marines the same as that of the Infantry of the Army is concerned, no change of this fundamental principle, so as to give marines a special status, is desired. It is considered just and proper that they continue to receive the same pay as the Infantry of the Army, so long as the conditions of service are the same as that of the Infantry; but for that portion of the corps required to serve at sea, where the conditions of service in no wise resemble those of the Infantry of the Army, but are more particularly allied to that of the more arduous service of the better paid sailor, it is believed just and right that this reasonable percentage of increase should not be denied to marines for sea service.

Seventh. This palpable discrimination against marines was evidently not intended by the Congress that framed the acts of May 11 and 13, 1908. It was its avowed purpose to correct the inequalities of former laws regarding pay in the Army and Navy, and, with the exception of marines on sea service, this purpose was admirably accomplished. Equitable considerations, therefore, appear to demand a change of the present law to accord with what would appear to have been the original intent of Congress.

3. From the point of maintaining efficiency in the corps:

First. Officers. Few graduates of the Naval Academy seek commissions in the Marine Corps, on account of better chance of advancement and better pay in the Navy.

Second. Men. The difference in pay is the cause of discontent and of many good men leaving the Marine Corps and enlisting in the Navy.

Third. If sea pay were provided it would encourage the best men of the corps to seek sea service by removing an important obstacle to their seeking sea service with its greater hardships and restrictions. 4. From the point of expense:

First. Increase in appropriations. It would require an increase of only about 3 per cent in the total appropriations for pay Marine Corps. Second. Difference in pay of enlisted men.-It would still leave the pay of the enlisted men of the Marine Corps at sea about 10 to 15 per cent less than that of the sailor of corresponding grade.

Third. Change in the law. There is every reason for such a change in the law and no reason against it except the question of the slight expense.

Now, there is no special status desired for the Marine Corps, and the only purpose of this proposed law is to correct a discrimination