III.
THE SECOND ADMINISTRATION OF GIDEON WELLES, 1865-1869.
The ending of the Civil War and the beginning of Welles's second term in the department were almost coincident. In the spring of 1865 rumors that Welles would not remain in the cabinet were current in New England. He, however, continued in office during Lincoln's brief second administration and throughout the administration of Andrew Johnson, resigning on March 3, 1869. Of Lincoln's original cabinet, Secretary of State Seward was the only other member who held his post for eight years, he too serving until the end of Johnson's administration. Welles's second administration was marked chiefly by the withdrawal of the fleets from the duties of the war, the re-establishment of the foreign squadrons and the reduction of the naval materiel and personnel to a peace footing.
On June 1, 1866, Gustavus V. Fox retired from the position he had held in the department since July 31, 1861, and William Faxon, the chief clerk of the department, was promoted to the assistant secretaryship of the navy. On the retirement of Faxon at the close of Johnson's administration this office was discontinued, since Congress refused to appropriate for it. On May 26, 1866, Congress authorized the appointment of an additional Assistant Secretary of the Navy to serve for a period of six months. Fox was appointed to this new position, which was created for him and for a special purpose. On May 16 Congress had passed a resolution of greeting to the Emperor of Russia, congratulating him on his escape from assassination. President Johnson selected Fox to carry a copy of the resolution to the Russian ruler; and, in order to add some dignity and pomp to his mission, a temporary assistant secretaryship of the navy was created for him. In June, 1866, he took passage at St. Johns, Newfoundland, on the Micintonomah, the first American ironclad to cross the Atlantic, and proceeded to Cronstadt. He was welcomed with festivities and extraordinary courtesies and attentions not only at St. Petersburg, but at Moscow and other Russian cities. This successful mission made a fitting termination to his brilliant career in the Navy Department.
When Faxon vacated the position of chief clerk of the department to become Assistant Secretary of the Navy, his place was taken by Mr. Edgar T. Welles; a son of the Secretary, who had been filling a clerkship in the Secretary's office. Since leaving the department in 1869, young Welles has achieved distinction in New York City as a man of affairs. The ending of the war caused little or no reduction in the regular clerical force of the department. The number of clerks and draftsmen in 1865 was 66; in 1866, 69; and in 1869, 62. After several attempts had been made to establish permanently the office of solicitor and judge-advocate general of the navy, it was discontinued in 1870.
It is recollected that the Bureau of Navigation owed its origin largely to Rear-Admiral C. H. Davis, who designed it to be the scientific department of the navy. On April 28, 1865, the Office of Detail was placed in charge of the Bureau of Navigation. The resulting establishment was given the official title of the "Bureau of Navigation and Office of Detail." This was the first step towards the transforming of this bureau into a bureau of personnel. The incongruous union formed no part of Davis's plans. Indeed it proved fatal to them. In course of time the scientific work of the Navy Department fell to other bureaus, and the duties of an office of detail became the chief and characteristic part of the work of the Bureau of Navigation—a term that is now a misnomer. This transformation is one of the most significant steps in the evolution of our present navy system.
In 1863 Davis recommended the establishment of a hydrographic office to undertake a somewhat similar work to that per formed by Maury's Hydrographical Office. Finally, largely through his instrumentality, a law was passed in 1866 creating the "Hydrographic Office" and attaching it to the, Bureau of Navigation.' The new office was quartered with the Nautical Almanac Office, in the Tayloe Building, in Washington. This latter office had been recently removed from Cambridge, Massachusetts, to the capital. For several years the growth of the Hydrographic Office was slow.
In 1866 Secretary Welles recommended the establishment of an additional bureau in the department, which was to have charge of all the duties of the Federal government relating to the enlisted force of the navy and the seamen of the merchant service. The creation of this bureau was a part of a comprehensive plan of Welles to elevate the character and status of the man-of-wars' men by giving them the privilege of retirement from the navy with pay, an extensive education on school-ships and at the Naval Academy, and a chance of promotion to the naval line.
Both during and after the war attempts were made to establish in the Navy Department a board composed of naval line officers and vested with large advisory and directive powers; and several bills were introduced in Congress providing for a board of this character. The general and flexible grant of powers contained in these bills gave the proposed organization ample room to grow and expand. It was to occupy a position in the departmental hierarchy between the bureaus and the Secretary, of the Navy. The establishment of a board of this sort met with much opposition. Certain civilians opposed it because it would diminish the civilian and increase the naval influence in the department. The Secretary of the Navy discovered in it an attempt to rule the navy by means of a clique, such as he had destroyed when he entered the department in 1861. The friends of the bureau system saw in it an undue subordination of the naval bureaus. The staff officers feared that the proposed board would bring about the complete supremacy of the line officers in naval administration.
The first measure providing for a naval board of the general character indicated above was introduced in the House by Henry Winter Davis, of Maryland, in 1864. It authorized the establishment in the department of a "Board of Naval Administration." Nothing came of this measure. In February, 1865, Davis offered an amendment to the annual appropriation bill, providing for the organization of a "Board of Admiralty." This was to consist of the vice-admiral, one rear-admiral, one commodore, one captain, one commander and one lieutenant-commander. Its presiding officer was to be either the Secretary of the Navy or the senior officer of the board. It was to deliberate and to give advice on naval organization and legislation, the construction, equipment and armament of vessels, the navy-yards and other naval establishments, and the direction, organization and discipline of naval forces in time of war. All plans for new ships, guns and engines were to be submitted to it. The proposed board seems to have been modelled on the British Board of Admiralty.
In 1867, 1868 and 1869 the Grimes Navy Bill was before Congress. This provided for a "Board of Naval Survey," which, according to one of the later forms of the bill, was to consist of three line officers not below the rank of rear-admiral. The members of the board were to be appointed by the President for a term of four years. An officer not below the grade of commander was to act as its secretary. The Bureaus of Medicine and Surgery and Provisions and Clothing were to be abolished. The naval staff considered the Grimes Bill inimical to their interests. It passed the Senate on March 16, 1869, but it failed to become a law.
The first measures of naval retrenchment at the close of the war were taken soon after the fall of Fort Fisher in January, 1865, in anticipation of the collapse of the Confederacy. In February the commanding officers of the blockading squadrons were ordered to send north all purchased vessels out of repair and all unnecessary naval stores, and to use the greatest care iv decreasing their expenses. About May 1 orders were issued to reduce the naval squadrons in domestic waters one-half; and near the close of the month further reductions were directed to be made, until the entire force of vessels in commission should not exceed 100. Early in July the blockading squadrons were reduced to 30 ships. On July 31 the Potomac flotilla, and on August 14 the Mississippi flotilla, were discontinued. Meantime, the two Atlantic and the two Gulf squadrons had been combined. In January, 1865, the vessels of the blockading squadrons numbered 471 and carried 2455 guns, in December they numbered 29 and carried 210 guns.
During 1865 most of the vessels that had been purchased and some of those that had been built were sold. Many vessels, having been procured for special purposes, were not fit to become permanent acquisitions of the navy. By May 6, 1868, 429 vessels had been disposed of. In December of that year only 81 vessels were in commission; 125 vessels were either in ordinary or were in process of construction. Several ships which were on the stocks at the close of the war were finally launched, and others were never completed. Most of the ironclads were laid up in ordinary, chiefly at League Island, but also at Boston, New Orleans, Mound City and San Francisco. As the vessels were put out of commission, they deposited their ordnance and supplies at the several navy-yards, which were soon crowded to overflowing with naval stores of all sorts. These vast quantities of warlike materials were gradually exhausted by sale, use or decay. The ordnance was collected chiefly in the Northern navy-yards. Its most important depot was a gun-park at the New York yard, which had a capacity for 2000 cannon. The value of the ordnance and ordnance stores remaining on hand in 1868 was about $17,000,000. Large quantities of unserviceable ordnance were sold.
In the spring of 1865 the department took measures for the re-establishment of the foreign squadrons. A course of active cruising was ordered, so that the flag which had been so long withdrawn might be again exhibited in every important port where American commerce penetrated. For four years the commercial interests of the United States in foreign waters had been left without any protection, except such as a few isolated cruisers could give. The old method of hiring storehouses in foreign ports and of appointing storekeepers to take charge of them was now abandoned. These storekeepers had sometimes made their offices a means of traffic for their individual advantage. Their duties were now vested in the paymasters of the navy, and storeships took the place of storehouses. Changes were also made in the number and distribution of the naval squadrons. The Mediterranean and African squadrons were supplanted by the European squadron, whose cruising grounds included' the Mediterranean and the west coast of Africa. The Brazil squadron was renamed the South Atlantic squadron. The Pacific Ocean was divided between two squadrons. The cruising grounds of the Asiatic squadron were made to include the waters off the East African coast; and those of the former home' squadron were divided between the North Atlantic and the Gulf squadrons.
By October, 1866, the number of enlisted men in the navy had fallen to 13,600. One year later this number had been further reduced to 11,900. At the close of the war several rendezvous and recruiting stations were discontinued. In 1865 most of the volunteer officers were honorably discharged, and they returned peaceably to their homes and occupations. During the war a disposition was manifested to reward the most efficient volunteers by giving them Permanent commissions in the regular navy. This step was recommended by Secretary Welles in his annual report for 1863. The same subject came up again after the war, and it was decided that in view of their faithful and meritorious conduct the 'volunteers should be rewarded. This decision was not favorably regarded by some of the regular officers, between whom and the volunteers considerable rivalry and jealousy existed. On July 25, 1866, an act was passed providing that five lieutenant-commanders, 20 lieutenants, so masters and 75 ensigns might be appointed to the line of the navy from those volunteer officers who had served not less than two years and who had been honorably discharged or were still in the service. The act further provided that a board of naval officers should examine the candidates and select those who were most meritorious in character, ability, professional competency and honorable service. Welles at once appointed the board, with Commodore S. P. Lee as senior member. It began its delicate and arduous task at Hartford, Connecticut, on September 5, 1867, and continued to sit at intervals for more than a year. The first names that it recommended were sent by President Johnson to the Senate in December, 1867, these were followed in 1868 by other names.
Positions for the fortunate volunteers were created in the lower' ranks by increasing the total number of commissioned officers of the navy and by promoting the regular officers. The act of July 25, 1866, increased the number of rear-admirals from 9 to 10, commodores from 18 to 25, captains from 36 to 50, commanders from 72 to 90, lieutenant-commanders and lieutenants, each, from 144 to 180, and masters and ensigns, each, from 144 to 160. The regular officers were promoted to fill the additional numbers in the several grades in accordance with their merit. This act created also one additional rank, that of admiral. But a single officer was established in it. Be was Paid an annual salary of $10,000 and was permitted a secretary. Farragut was at once appointed to the new position, which was designed for him, and Porter succeeded Farragut as vice-admiral.
The above act led to the rapid advancement of many young officers, even to the rank of lieutenant-commander. The naval staff did not fare as well as the line. After the war 50 additional paymasters were authorized and the naval constructors and the first and second assistant engineers were made commissioned officers. As no increases were made in the medical and engineer corps, the surgeon and the engineers felt that justice had not been done them. By the promotion of many young men of the line, the rank of their fellow-officers of the staff was relatively decreased. Rather than bear this indignity, some of the ablest engineers resigned from the navy. Of this class, Robert H. Thurston, the late director of Sibley College, Cornell University, was a conspicuous example. There we're much strife and rivalry between the several corps for honors, preferment and increased pay.
In 1866 the number of men in the marine corps was about 3600. By October, i868, this number had been reduced to about 2706. As yet no new barracks had been erected in place of those destroyed by the Confederates at the Norfolk and Pensacola navy-yards: In 1869 the commandant of the marine corps was given the rank and pay of a brigadier-general of the army.
The experiences of the war demonstrated' that most of the navy-yards were too limited in area for the needs of the navy. In 1865 Welles said that none of them presented the requisite conveniences and facilities for fitting out in a rapid and efficient manner more than a single vessel at a time, and that with the exception of the yards at Mare Island and Norfolk not one of them had sufficient room to erect the works necessary for its present wants. He endeavored to increase the areas of the Northern yards, and small additions were made to those at Philadelphia, New York and Boston. In April, 1866, Congress appropriated $105,000 for the purchase of Seavey's island, near the Portsmouth navy-yard. This was at the rate of $1000 an acre, a much larger price than private individuals would have paid. In. 1867 a navy board prepared plans for the island's improvement. During the same year the Bureau of Ordnance acquired from the Surgeon-General of the Navy 15 acres at Chelsea, Massachusetts, for a naval magazine. The attempts to establish a navy-yard on the Mississippi, to which reference has previously been made, failed. The naval station at Mound City, Illinois, however, was continued for several years after the war.
After the cessation of hostilities, Welles continued his agitation in behalf of the acceptance of League Island as a site for a navy yard adapted to the needs of an iron navy. In '865 he obtained permission from the city of Philadelphia to lay up in ordinary in the back channel of the island several of the ironclads. Finally, on February 18, 1867, an act was passed authorizing the Secretary of the Navy to accept League Island, provided a board of officers to be appointed by the President should recommend its acceptance. A board, of which Rear-Admiral C. H. Davis was president, was constituted, and it reported unanimously in favor of receiving the gift. Difficulties now arose respecting a title, but these were finally removed, and the island, which contains 923 acres, became the property of the United States in December, 1868.
The friends of New London, who had succeeded in delaying the acceptance of League Island, were rewarded for their perseverance. In the naval appropriation bill of March 2, 1867, under the suspicious heading, "Navy Yard at Washington," was a. clause authorizing the Secretary of the Navy to accept a deed of gift, when offered by the State of Connecticut, of a tract of land near New London, with a water front of not less than one mile. This land became the property of the government on June 27, 1868. It was situated three miles north of New London, on the Connecticut River, and contained 80 acres.
Before 1861 a tendency was manifested towards the extension of the bureau system of the Navy Department at Washington to the several navy-yards. The decentralization of administration in the central office led logically to decentralization in the branch establishments. The war seems to have increased this tendency. Each bureau came to exercise more and more control over the facilities for the performance of its work in the navy-yards. On July 1, 1868, Secretary Welles extended the bureau system to the several yards. He discontinued the naval storekeepers and directed them to turn over the stores and materials in their keeping to the local representatives of the several bureaus. The new system, it was believed, would fix the responsibility for the care of the naval stores upon those most interested in their preservation. It was not, however, adapted to secure unity and correlation in the work of the yards.
Welles's experiences during the war led him to believe that the system of making naval purchases through navy agents whose total commissions were limited led to abuses, tended to corrupt the subordinate employees of the navy-yards, and discouraged and drove away honest dealers. In 1865 he discontinued the navy agents, and vested their duties in naval paymasters. The transfer of these places to naval officers caused quite a commotion among the politicians. The office of navy agent was first established in 1776.
Beginning with the fiscal year 1866, the naval expenditures fell off rapidly, but not as fast nor as much as one might have expected. When once the expenditures of a Federal bureau or department are greatly augmented, they never fall quite as far as the old level when the cause of the augmentation ceases to operate. When the war came to an end in the spring of 1865 the department had many contracts with private builders for vessels, engines, ordnance and various naval materials. Many of these had to be carried out. The construction of several ships which were upon the stocks was continued. At this time all prices were abnormally high owing to the depreciation of the currency. The net expenditures of the navy for the fiscal years from 1865 to 1869 were as follows: 1865, $123,000,000; 1866, $43,000,000; 1867, $31,000,000; 1868, $26,000,000; and 1869, $20,000,000. For a period of peace these expenditures were excessive. In 1867, however, Welles carried to the "surplus fund" $65,000,000. This was derived from the unexpended balances of naval appropriations and from the sale of vessels and other naval property.
The expenditures of the navy appeared to be extraordinarily high to the 44th, Congress, which Met in December, 1867. A considerable divergence between the naval program of this body and that of the Secretary of the Navy was soon found to exist. Welles did not propose to reduce the enlisted force to its numbers before the Civil War, but wished to keep it at about 15,000 men. He would enlarge and improve the navy-yards, adapt them to the needs of an iron navy, and equip them with machinery for the repair and manufacture of hulls and engines. He would retain the larger ships and the ironclads, and complete the vessels that were upon the stocks. On the other hand; the naval program of the 44th Congress called for a vigorous retrenchment: The navy was to be reduced, as far as possible, to its old levels. This Congress therefore fixed the number of the enlisted, men at 8500. It declined to make appropriations for the improvement of the navy-yards or for the completion of the vessels building in them. As a result of the new policy, the number of men employed in the yards was reduced between November, 1867, and July, 1868, from about, 11,000 to about 6300, almost one-half. In accordance with the wishes of Congress; Welles reduced the naval estimates of his annual report for 1867 more than $22,000,000. The abruptness with which this policy was decided upon caused severe kisses to the department. Uncompleted vessels decayed upon the stocks, the engines that had been built for them were rendered useless, and the ironclads and other naval property at the yards greatly deteriorated in value for lack of proper care. This is by no means the only instance when the navy has suffered from a want of proper co-ordination and correlation of the work of the executive and legislative departments of the Federal government.
The period 1865-1869 was a time of confusion in the naval counsels. Wide differences of opinion upon the problems of naval construction existed. Chief-Engineer Isherwood and his work were severely criticised by naval officers and other critics. One of the service journals was outspoken and persevering in its attacks on him. It is now, clear that his critics were more or less biased, and applied standards of judgment fast becoming obsolete. In some respects Isherwood and his, ships were in advance of their time. Two of his fast cruiser's, the Wampanoag and Ammonoosuc, were commenced in 1863, but were not completed until several years after the war. After the trial trip of the Wampanoag, upon which she developed a speed of 17.75 knots an hour, more than 21 years elapsed before her speed was equaled by an American naval vessel, the steel, cruiser Charleston in September; 1889: More than 11 years elapsed before her Speed was equaled by an ocean steamer, the Arizona. In 1869 the Wampanoag was condemned by a board of naval officers in a report that is now said to be a "veritable curiosity of professional literature." She never went to sea again, but was permitted to decay, at the wharves of the New York navy-yard and the New London naval station. Finally in February, 1885, she was sold for three per cent of her original cost.
The scientific work of the navy, which was so important a feature during the period 1842-1861, was, in large part suspended during the war. Many administrative duties on shore occasioned by the war, however, fell to the naval officers. The number of commissioned line officers, active and retired, employed on special duty in January, 1865, was 92. Thirty-nine engineers were employed in constructing ships and engines, and 14 were attached .to the Bureau of Steam Engineering. After the war the scientific work of the navy partially revived. The Hydrographic Office Was created, and the Naval Observatory entered upon its golden era. In 1868 shore-duty as a legitimate employment for naval officers was recognized in a general order of the department directing that a fixed period of sea-service should be followed by a similar period of shore-duty and that the two periods should alternate with each Other throughout an officer's active career. This order has been called the "first step in the decadence of the nay which followed the Civil War."
The subjects of a naval code, rules and regulations for the navy, naval uniform, and assimilated or relative rank received from time to time the attention of the Secretary of the Navy. On July 17, 1862, admonished by the needs of the war, Congress established a new naval penal code. A joint resolution of Congress of March 3, 1863, provided for the appointment of a commissioner to codify the naval laws. Mr. Charles B. Sedgwick, who was selected to fill the new office, completed his work on March 1, 1864. His code consisted of 66 pages, and was very comprehensive. It embraced regulations respecting the organization of the Navy Department, the personnel and materiel of the navy, the Naval Academy, and miscellaneous topics. It, however, failed of adoption. On October 18, 1865, Welles issued a new edition of the naval regulations, comprising 344 octavo pages. In 1862, 1864 and 1866, he issued new editions of the regulations on naval uniform. The regulations of 1866 contained 17 colored plates showing the required articles of dress.
During the administration of Secretary Welles the animosities and jealousies between the line and the staff officers respecting assimilated or relative rank flamed up with increased heat. Ill feelings had arisen under the enforcement of the orders of the department granting assimilated rank to the surgeons, paymasters and engineers. The staff accused the line of reducing these orders to their lowest terms, and of being unable to discover occasions when they were applicable. On March 13, 1863, Welles issued an order that greatly intensified the feelings between the two classes of officers. He increased the assimilated rank of the surgeons, paymasters and engineers, adapting it to the new ranks of the line established by the act of July 16, 1862. He also specified the occasions when the officers of the line and of the staff should take precedence according to their assimilated rank: "In processions on shore, on courts-martial, summary courts, courts of enquiry, boards of survey, and all other boards." This order was a thorn in the flesh of the line, and they petitioned the Secretary of the Navy to revoke it. Its enforcement undoubtedly might at times produce confusion, for a surgeon on board of a ship might outrank the captain. In 1865 Welles appointed a board, with Vice-Admiral Farragut as president, to consider the rank and pay of the staff, but it accomplished no permanent results. After the war several bills were introduced in Congress giving the staff the recognition that it desired, but they failed of passage. The line was particularly determined to procure the rescinding of Welles's famous order of March 13, 1863, and in 1869 it succeeded.
IV.
THE NAVY DEPARTMENT UNDER GRANT AND HAYES, 1869-1881.
The period 1869-1881 was a time of reaction, naval decline and wide-spread indifference to the needs of the navy. Tired of war and the instruments of war, the country turned its attention to industry and money-making and became apathetic in respect to naval affairs and the national defense. This feeling was naturally shared by Congress and the executive departments. A huge national debt and uncertain public finances admonished the Federal government to be economical in its expenditures. Fortunately, the nation remained at peace, and its unprogressive policy was by no means entirely bad, for when the expansion of the navy came in the last two decades of the nineteenth century advantage could be taken of the great progress made by the European navies in the 20 years succeeding the Civil War. Such was the rapid improvement in naval construction and armament that, had a navy been built in the seventies, it would have been in many respects obsolete in the nineties. The United States ran the risk of defeat in case of conflict, but with its usual good fortune succeeded in avoiding war. If the Virginius episode of 1873-1874 had developed into a Spanish-American war, which at one time seemed quite possible, its events would have doubtless been far different from those of the war of 1898 when the nation possessed a modern navy.
During the administrations of Grant and Hayes, party feelings ran high, and often determined the acts of Congress and the executive departments. Under Grant there were considerable politics and corruption in the civil service and extravagance in the administration of the Federal government, and the Navy Department did not escape these evils. Those who were in charge of the government were properly blamed for its administrative and legislative abuses. To some extent, however, the evils from which Grant's administration suffered were an outgrowth of the Civil War and the early rears of Reconstruction. They struck root during this time of commotion and came to baneful flower in the seventies.
For almost the whole of the period 1869-1881 the navy was administered by Secretaries George M. Robeson and Richard W. Thompson. With the exception of the first three and a half months, Robeson served throughout the whole of Grant's two terms. Thompson came in with Hayes in March, -1877, and resigned some two months before the end of his chief's administration in March, 1881. Robeson's predecessor; Adolph E. Bone, of Pennsylvania, and Thompson's successor, Nathan Goff, of West Virginia, were not in office long enough to have much influence upon the work of the department. The brief administration of Bone, extending from March 9 to June 25, 1869, is, however, noteworthy for the important part played in it by Vice- Admiral David D. Porter.
Borie was somewhat passed the meridian of life, and had no special liking or fitness for his task. He was one of the surprises of Grant's first cabinet, and owed his selection to his friendship with the President. Hugh McCulloch, who was Secretary of the Treasury under Johnson, wrote:
There was a good deal of astonishment at the nomination of Adolph E. Bork to be Secretary of the Navy. When it was understood that his name had been sent to the Senate, the inquiry everywhere was, "Who is Adolph E. Borie"? Outside of Philadelphia, where he lived, he was unknown, and there he was known only as a citizen of wealth and good social standing. It was reported that only one senator had ever heard of him until his name was read by the secretary. To himself his appointment was as great a surprise as it was to the public. The place was undesired by him. He had no aptitude for the business he was called upon to perform, and he was glad to retire from public life after an experience, if such it could be called, of three months.
On March 9, 1869, Bone took possession of the Navy Department, and in order to make the acquaintance of his chiefs and to gain some notion of the organization over which he was to preside he made the rounds of the bureaus. He was accompanied by Vice-Admiral Porter, and, according to Rear-Admiral John A. Dahlgren, when they reached the Bureau of Ordnance of which Dahlgren was chief, Porter "stepping aside told me that Grant said he should run the machine as Bone's adviser." On March 12 Bone, under the direction of Grant, issued an order to the effect that "all matters relating to the navy coming under the cognizance of the different bureaus will be submitted to Vice-Admiral Porter before being transmitted to the Secretary of the Navy." Porter was also given authority to transact the official business of 'the department. During Bone's administration Many letters issuing from the Secretary's office were signed "David D. Porter, Vice-Admiral, by order of Secretary of Navy', or "For Secretary of Navy." Still other letters, which were signed by the Secretary, were prepared by the Vice-Admiral. For most purposes Porter was the Secretary of the Navy.
With the best of intentions, the Vice-Admiral ran the navy in a somewhat arbitrary and extravagant manner. Basing his act On a decision of the Attorney-General, he cancelled Welles's order of March 13, 1863, in respect to the relative or assimilated rank of staff officers, and added much fuel to a flame that never dies out. He organized boards to inspect the navy-yards and naval vessels, and to make recommendations thereon. He greatly increased the force of artisans and laborers at the navy-yards, and began the repair of numerous vessels—a much-needed work. Many of the steamers were provided with new rigging and were equipped with full sail-power, the use of sails instead of steam being a favorite notion of Porter. He inaugurated an administration 'of 'naval reform. Not content to make his reforms gradually, he attempted to introduce within a few weeks various changes in isolated matters, which he had long had at heart. While Gideon Welles 'issued only five general orders during the last two years of his administration, his successor during his short term issued 45. Porter was the principal author of Bone's orders, which covered a wide range of subjects, and varied somewhat in their usefulness. Professor J. R. Soley says that some of them were "rather fanciful, some of them were ill-timed, and some were distinctly harmful."
Porter was not a successful administrator. His hand was too heavy for the finesse of a skilful and tactful executive. The qualities that win battles at sea are not always those which count for most in the Navy Department. The Vice-Admiral was too good a sailor to make a good landsman. As an administrator, he was often impatient, biased and impracticable. The following extract taken from the diary of Rear-Admiral Dahlgren shows the honest, plain-speaking, bluff, old sea-officer at work in the department: "Porter busy getting documents for the Secretary to sign. I told him I would not remain in the Bureau. Reasons, the report of the Committee. He damned the Committee, and said he would whip them; that I must not think of leaving."
The Vice-Admiral's large exercise of authority naturally aroused much opposition, and on the coming of Robeson in July, 1870, his power and influence rapidly waned. The new Secretary was not willing to efface himself after the manner of the old. Porter soon wiped the dust of the Navy Department from his shoes. In 1876 he testified that he had not been inside the department four times in six years. His position was an anomalous one. While holding the highest rank in the navy, officers of inferior rank as bureau chiefs were much more influential than he. Isolated and neglected, he was forced to stand aloof from the main currents of naval administration. As had Farragut before him, he felt hurt that he was not more consulted and his services more largely utilized by the department.
While Porter from 1871 until his death in 1891 was well removed from the center of naval affairs, his connection with the business of the navy did not entirely cease. On November 16, 1870, Secretary Robeson addressed a letter to him for the purpose of stating more clearly his duties as admiral, to which office he had been promoted on the death of Farragut. Under Porter's supervision were now placed the inspection of ships in commission, of ironclads and wooden vessels laid up in ordinary, and of navy-yards and naval stations. Upon all of these matters .the Admiral was directed to report regularly to the Secretary of the Navy. The trial of ships of war under sail and steam were also placed under his direction. In 1881 he was given supervision over the training of apprentices. For many years the Admiral made annual reports to the Secretary of the Navy. In these he discussed with great freedom and fullness the condition of the naval materiel and personnel. He plainly and fearlessly pointed out the lamentable state of the American fleet, and instituted comparisons between it and the navies of Europe showing its great inferiority to them. In the seventies, when the apathy and indifference of Congress and the people in respect to a naval armament were greatest, Porter vigorously and insistently declared the country's need of a new navy. His voice was as one crying in the wilderness.
Borie resigned his office on June 25, 1869, and on the same day George M. Robeson, of New Jersey, was commissioned by the President. As the Senate was not then in session, he was confirmed and recommissioned on December 8. He remained in the department until March 12, 1877, a little less than seven years and nine months. With the exception of Gideon Welles, he served longer than any other Secretary of the Navy. Richard W. Thompson, of Indiana, took charge of the department on March 13, 1877, and resigned his office on December 30, 1880. The careers of neither Robeson nor Thompson had been such as to specially fit them for their naval duties. Robeson was about 40 years of age when he become Secretary of the Navy, and Thompson was 69 years. Robeson came from New Jersey, and owning some land on the seacoast was at least familiar with the look of the sea. Thompson was an Indiana pioneer who had represented his state in its legislature as early as 1834. He enjoys the distinction of being the first fresh-water Secretary of the Navy, since all his predecessors had come from the seaboard states. Robeson was a member of the new school of Republican politicians, and Thompson was originally an old-line Whig. Their reputations and political services had been for the most part confined to their respective states, although Thompson is credited with drafting the national Republican platform of 1876. Robeson was attorney-general of New Jersey when called to the headship of the Navy Department. He had never served in the national legislature. Possibly it was for this reason that he proved so impatient of legislative control. Thompson was a Whig member of the House from Indiana in 1841-1843 and 1847-1849.
It was generally understood that Robeson owed his appointment to the influence upon Grant of Senator A. G. Cattell, of New Jersey. Robeson was a young man, Wi-strung and of excellent stock. He was a "hale fellow well met," true as steel to, his friends, and fond of good living and the pomp of his position in the cabinet. In the Navy Department he was rather easy-going. He held the reins of Administration too loosely, and had little aptitude for the details of the navy business. With an inborn desire to please he gave too ready an ear ,to his friends and the politicians of the capital. He had pone of the qualities of a reformer, and was without the capacity to check departmental abuses. He, however, served the navy industriously and had its good at heart. He was much in advance of Congress in his efforts to increase and improve the fleet, and for this reason laid himself open to the charge of violating the law. His administration of the department was severely criticised, and he was made the subject of probably more cartoons than any other man of his time. He was reputed to he a "bad sailor," and they used to tell the story that the waving lines in the old carpet at the White House, presented by the Sultan of Turkey to the President, Made him seasick. His knowledge of constitutional law suggested the mot attributed to Senator Matthew H. Carpenter that he was a "great constitutional lawyer among sailors, and a great sailor among constitutional lawyers." Hugh McCulloch wrote that the Secretary of the Navy was a "fine speaker and an able lawyer. Mr. Robeson was the most, abused member of the cabinet, but the abuse to which he was subjected neither soured his temper nor injured his digestion. He was a hard worker, without being apt in business. If instead of being Secretary of the Navy, he had been Attorney-General, he would have won an enviable national reputation. Talented, genial, warm-hearted, he was and is a favorite wherever he is known."
Secretary of the Navy, Richard W. Thompson was somewhat old, slow-moving, conservative, and obedient to the strict and narrow interpretation of the law. He shared with his section of the Union its prejudices against the upbuilding of the navy and in favor of economy in naval expenditures. Since during Hayes's administration the navy in its decline touched its low-water mark, it seems fitting that this shrewd and kindly old landsman should at this time have been called from his Hoosier home to preside over its destinies. The late Senator Hoar has left us in the following words an appreciative characterization of Thompson:
I had great respect for him. He lived in the lifetime of every President of the United States, except Washington, and I believe saw every one of them, except Washington, unless it may be that he never saw Theodore Roosevelt. He was a very interesting character, a man of great common sense, public spirit, with a wonderful memory, and a rare fund of knowledge of the political history of the Northwest. Indeed he was an embodiment of the best quality of the people of the Ohio Territory, although born in Virginia. His great capacity was that of a politician. He made 'excellent stump speeches, managed political conventions with great shrewdness, and also with great integrity, and had great skill in constructing platforms. Colonel Thompson was a very valuable political adviser. It has never been the custom to select Secretaries of the Navy on account of any previously acquired knowledge of naval affairs, although the two heads of that Department appointed by Presidents McKinley and Roosevelt have conducted it with wonderful success in a very difficult time. A day or two after the inauguration, John Sherman, the new Secretary of the Treasury, gave a brilliant dinner party to the cabinet, at which I was a guest. The table was ornamented by a beautiful man-of-war made out of flowers. Just before the guests sat down to dinner a little adopted daughter of Secretary Sherman attached a pretty American flag to one of the masts. I asked Secretary Thompson across the table to which mast of a man-of-war the American flag should be attached. Thompson coughed and stammered a little, and said: "I think I shall refer the question to the Attorney-General."
In managing the department neither Robeson nor Thompson were as forceful as Welles, and Bork was little more than a figure-head. The secretaries of Grant and Hayes failed to give the Navy Department the "executive touch." Under Welles, and especially' during the Civil War, the influence of the navy on naval administration, relative to that of the secretariat, declined. During the war comparatively few naval officers were stationed in Washington. The masterful spirits were usually in command of vessels. With the ending of the war, and more particularly with the passing of Welles, the navy reasserted itself in the department. Under Bone it was all-powerful. Although checked under Robeson, it was still strong. The number of officers detailed to duty in the department was large. The chief of the Bureau of Navigation, who since 1865 had been also the head of the Office of Detail, was an increasing power in naval administration.
The head of this office occupies a strategic position in the Navy Department. He, with the consent of the Secretary of the Navy, moves and removes the officers and controls the naval ships. In the naval firmament he is a star of the first magnitude and rivals the Secretary in brilliancy. Until after the Spanish-American War, no other officer of the navy compared with him in power, authority and consequence. Since among the officers there is much rivalry to obtain good details of duty and to escape bad ones, they are likely to blame the head of the Office of Detail for their dissatisfaction over their orders. He is therefore both feared and hated, and the visits to his office are usually of an official character only. Since his duties were taken from those of the secretariat, the power and influence of the latter have greatly diminished. The Secretary of the Navy as a positive force in naval administration has in recent years greatly waned.
For seven years under Grant and Hayes the position of chief of the Bureau of Navigation was efficiently, and to the best of his ability impartially, filled by Rear-Admiral Daniel Ammen. From 1869 to 1871 Ammen had been chief of the Bureau of Yards and Docks. His successor in this latter position was Rear- Admiral C. R. P. Rodgers, who filled it until 1874. In 1871 John Lenthall was succeeded by Isaiah Hanscom as chief of the Bureau of Construction, who held this office until 1877. The chiefs of the Bureau of Steam Engineering during the years 1869-1881 were Engineers in Chief James W. King, W. W. W. Wood, and William H. Shock. Commodore William N. Jeffers presided over the Bureau of Ordnance from 1873 until 1881. The services of other chiefs of bureaus during this period, were not especially notable. In 1876 Charles G. McCawley succeeded Jacob Zeilin as commandant of the marine corps.
During the administration of Grant and Hayes, but few changes were made in the organization of the Navy Department, and these were by way of the addition of new machinery. On the discontinuance of the judge-advocate general of the navy in 1870, his duties were vested in a naval solicitor, who was attached to the Department of Justice. This arrangement lasted for ten years. On June 8, 188o, a statute was passed authorizing the President to appoint for a term of four years a judge-advocate general of the navy from the officers of the navy or marine corps. He was to have an office in the Navy Department, and was to receive the rank, pay and allowances of a captain of the navy or a colonel of the marine corps. His duties were to receive, revise and record the proceedings of all courts-martial, courts of enquiry and boards for the examination of officers for retirement and promotion. He was also to perform such other services as had been heretofore performed by the solicitor and naval judge advocate. On June 8 President Hayes appointed Colonel William B. Remey, of the marine corps, to the new office, who served as Judge-Advocate General for twelve years.
In 1869 the chief signal office .was organized and attached to the Bureau of Navigation. The principal duties of the chief signal officer of the navy were the preparation of signal books and codes and the instruction of young officers in signaling. In 1873 Secretary Robeson established in the same bureau the office of the superintendent of compasses, and gave it charge of the inspection and improvement of compasses and the determination of their deviation and variation. In 1870 or 1871 the board of inspection was organized to inspect the various vessels of the navy and to make reports upon their condition. In 1871 the board for the examination of officers for promotion and the board for the examination of officers for retirement, which had been organized by Secretary Welles, were consolidated.
In 1877 Professor Simon Newcomb, U. S. N., became superintendent of the Nautical Almanac Office, which since 1866 had been located in Washington, and for 20 years he filled this position with great ability and distinction. In his "Reminiscences of an Astronomer," Newcomb gives a most interesting account of the work and personnel of his office. On assuming his duties in 1877, he obtained more commodious quarters for the office, reduced the prices paid for computations, and removed two employees for inefficiency. One of these latter was a proofreader, who occupied a high position in the Grand Army of the Republic and was "excellent in every respect except that of ability to perform his duty." Some of the most difficult and recondite of the mathematical studies of the office were made by Mr. George W. Hill, "who will easily rank as the greatest master of mathematical astronomy during the last quarter of the nineteenth century." Newcomb says that he never worked harder with a superior than he did "with Hon. R. W. Thompson, Secretary of the Navy, about 1880, to induce him to raise Mr. Hill's salary from $12oo to $1400. It goes without saying, that Mr. Hill took even less interest in the matter than I did. He did not work for pay, but for the love of science. His little farm at Nyack Turnpike sufficed for his home, and supplied him necessities so long as he lived there, and all he asked in Washington was the means of going on with his work."
On March 15, 1877, Secretary Thompson organized a board, consisting of the chiefs of the several bureaus of the department to reform the business of the bureaus and to correlate their work. The creation of this board is quite significant. For many years the Navy Department had developed by differentiating its functions. An attempt was now made by Thompson to unify its parts. The new board was to meet twice a week, and was to be presided over by the Secretary of the Navy. At its meetings the chiefs were to lay before it statements of the business of their bureaus, which were to be open for discussion. The board was also to consider the employment of men, in the navy-yards. The, new organization effected little, for the centrifugal forces of the department were too pinch for it.
Throughout the period 1869-1881 attempts were made in congress to create a permanent board of naval officers that should occupy a, position in the administrative, hierarchy between the chiefs of bureaus and the Secretary of the Navy. A considerable agitation for the creation of such a board was conducted in and out of the navy and the department. It is recollected that there was a similar agitation under Secretary Welles. The duties of the proposed board were not always clearly defined. It was to advise the Secretary of the Navy in professional matters, and especially in respect to the building, furnishing and equipping of the fleet. It was to review the action of the bureaus, and was to "harmonize and concentrate" their work. The line officers of the higher ranks, especially Farragut, Porter and Rowan, were chiefly interested in the project. Farragut thought that the board should be called the "Board of Admiralty," and should be composed of officers not below the grade of rear-admiral. Various bills Were introduced in Congress embodying the views of the friends of the proposed organization. But whether it was called a board of admiralty, board of navy commissioners, board of survey, or board of assistants, it proved equally distasteful to the majority of the members of Congress. One measure, however, Passed the Senate, but failed in the House. This was the famous Grimes Bill, which caused great commotion in the navy and the department in 1869. Secretary Robeson recognized that there was need of a board to correlate the action, of the bureaus, but thought that it should be "wholly advisory, and without the Power of interfering with the action of the Executive, or his responsible representative." Secretary Thompson insisted that, if a board Were created, it should be entirely responsible to himself. The secretaries did not favor the establishment of an organization that would encroach upon their powers.. The staff, officers were opposed to the proposed measures since they regarded them as drawn in the interest of the line officers, who, they thought, were attempting to seize the reins of control in the department.
It may be worthwhile to speculate upon the effects on the organization of the Navy Department, of such a navy board as that contemplated by Farragut. Had it been established in 149, it would in all probability have acquired by this time a position of commanding influence in the work of the department, if not one of dominant control. Composed of officers of the highest rank, and occupying a strategic position, it could hardly have been confined to the exercise of wholly, advisory powers. Under the laws of departmental growth and of administrative absorption and accretion of powers, it must have gradually increased its duties and authority. The actual powers of the Secretary of the Navy would have been diminished, and the influence of the navy and especially of its chief officers in the department would have been augmented. The bureau chiefs could not have held their own 'against the new organization. The ear of the Secretary of the Navy must have gradually become inaccessible to all advice emanating from officers outside of the board. The department would have doubtless received what it has for a long time needed, a correlation and unification of its parts, and a larger element of permanence, continuity and technical knowledge at its apex.
During the period 1869-1881 the number of officers on duty in Washington increased rapidly. In January, 1869, the number of line officers of the active list employed at the capital was about 15. Fifteen years later, in January, 1884, this number had increased to 102; at the same time the staff officers in Washington numbered 59. These officers were employed at the Navy Department, Washington navy-yard, Hydrographic Office, Naval Observatory and "on special duty in Washington." The civil employees of the Navy Department at the capital also steadily increased. The Blue Books show that their number, exclusive of the employees at the Washington navy-yard, was iii in 1869, and 222 in 1881—or exactly twice as many. The number of clerks increased during this period from 57 to mg. The number of regular employees of the eight bureaus changed but little. The increases occurred chiefly in the Secretary's office and the Hydrographic Office, and in the force of caretakers of the Navy Department building. The actual growth of the work of the department during 1869-1881 did not keep pace with the augmentation of the department's personnel.
During the administration of Hayes the Navy Department occupied its new quarters, situated in the State, War and Navy Building in Washington, near the White' House, on Pennsylvania avenue. This large structure is located on the site and grounds of the old buildings of the War and Navy Departments. It is a huge towering pile of granite, and is said to be honestly admired by the populace, but condemned by the architectural critics. It was designed by Mr. A. B. Mullett, when supervising architect of the treasury. Its style is that of the Italian Renaissance. Its four façades, which are substantially alike, surround a court, which is divided by a "center wing." The State Department building or south wing was first built, being commenced in 1871. The last wings were completed in 1888, when the whole building was for the most part finished. It covers four and one-half acres, contains two miles of corridors, and cost about $11,000,000.
The Navy Department occupies the east wing which faces the White House. On June 10, 1872, Congress appropriated $400,- coo to begin the construction of this wing, which was shortly commenced under the direction of the supervising architect of the treasury. After the expenditure of $923,000, it was stopped. On March 3, 1875, Congress placed the undertaking under the charge of the Secretary of War, and the work was resumed under the direction of a member of the engineer corps of the army. With the exception of the library of the department, the east wing was completed in the spring of 1879, and a year later the library was turned over to the Secretary of the Navy. The total cost of the east wing was $2,672,287. The only wood used was for the doors, floors, and interior furnishings. All other parts were constructed of stone, brick, concrete, plaster, iron, copper and glass. The length of the east wing is 341 feet, depth at the curtains 62 feet, and height from sidewalk 135 feet. The total number of rooms of all sorts is 173. There are seven floors—sub-basement, basement, first, second, third and fourth stories, and "cockloft." Two elevators afford easy communication. The library is finished and ceiled entirely in iron, and in a most artistic manner. The walls are of iron, inlaid with 32 marble panels. The green marble used in the construction of the panels is malachite, from the Alps; the yellow, sienna, from Italy; and the red, porphyry, from France. The conglomerate is from Lake Champlain. The floor is inlaid with Minton tiling. There are allegorical figures in the corners of the room representing "War and Peace," "Liberty," "Industry and Mechanics," "Literature, Arts and Commerce."
The east wing was occupied by the Navy Department during 1878-1880. The Bureau of Steam Engineering was the first and the naval library the last to move to the new quarters. It was decided that the Navy Department should temporarily share its building with the War Department. On the afternoon of April 16, 1879, Thomas Lincoln Casey, lieutenant-colonel of the corps of engineers of the army, formally turned over the east wing to the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the War, and deposited its keys with them. Casey furnished the Secretary of the Navy with twelve drawings and an explanatory memoir setting forth the arrangements respecting the supplies of water and gas, systems of heating and ventilation, telegraph service and sewerage. A brief notice of the transfer of the building to the departments was given by the Washington Star of April 17, 1879:
Shortly after three o'clock yesterday afternoon Colonel Casey, superintendent of public buildings and grounds, conducted Secretaries Thompson and McCrary, and Chief Clerks Hogg and Crosby through the new wing of the new State, War and Navy Department building and formally turned that Portion of the building over to them. The two Secretaries were much pleased with the new quarters they are to occupy, which are much more commodious and by far more elegant than those they now have. Secretary Thompson says that perhaps his new 'room is a little too elegant and Luxurious.