The steady progress that is being made in warship design and construction in the United States must be gratifying to every citizen. The hulls, the machinery, the ordnance, and the numerous items of equipment all show advance over previous constructions.
As to the size of these ships, nearly every boy in the country knows that the United States usually has the biggest warship in the world. It would appear not improbable that before long we shall have a 50,000-ton battleship.
Then there are the numerous auxiliaries, the destroyers, the submarines, scouts, gunboats, fuel-ships, transports, tenders, minelayers, and so on. Each successive year witnesses an advance in design, and usually increased speed of construction.
So great is the potency of individual vessels of all of the fighting types, and of divisions and fleets, that the burden of responsibility which in these days rests on the shoulders of the commander and his subordinates is at times almost appalling. The destiny of a nation may depend upon the proper handling of the main fleet; and the success of the main fleet may depend upon the maneuvering of a minor fleet; and so on down to the humblest command.
It is thus seen that, unless a nation can and does maintain a fleet of overwhelming size as compared to that of any other nation, it must pay extraordinary regard to both materiel and personnel of the fleet which it actually possesses.
In our own country the opinion appears to prevail that we shall never stand higher than second or third among the naval powers. This rating, of course, is made on the basis of size alone, and contemplates chiefly the materiel.
So it seems plain enough that we of the United States should strive to the utmost to secure such a quality of personnel and materiel in our naval service as to make the world assign to us a coefficient that will attest recognition of superiority.
How is such a desirable condition to be attained?
I have expressed an opinion as to the high quality, of our materiel. But I have not committed myself to the opinion that a still higher standard cannot .and should not be attained.
Indeed, it seems self-evident that if we improve our already good personnel to that point of excellence which is imperative, then a considerable improvement in the materiel will naturally follow.
The personnel should be taken to include commissioned officers Of the line, and of the various staff corps, the warrant officers, petty officers and the non-rated enlisted men, and the navy yard forces.
For the purposes of this brief paper I am going to confine myself to consideration of the commissioned line officers.
As is well known, each senator and representative in Congress is allowed to maintain two midshipmen at the naval academy. There are also a few appointments at large; and provision has recently been made for the appointment of a number of young men annually from the enlisted force of the navy.
Some of the senators and representatives assign their appointments to the winners of competitive examinations, the competitions being open to such young men as may be designated by the appointing authority. But, as a rule, the appointment is bestowed outright. However the appointments of midshipmen may be made, it happens that a certain proportion of each graduating class is composed of bright young men, who are more or less adapted for the naval service, while the remaining members of the class vary in capability from good to ordinary.
Opinions differ as to the advisability of making the entrance examinations more difficult or easier than they are now, and as to whether the candidates should be older or younger than they are at present.
Doubtless the majority of naval officers agree as to the undesirability of lowering the mental standard of admission; and I believe also that the present age limits, 16 to 20 years, are considered satisfactory by most officers.
One question that bobs up perennially is that of waiving physical defects. These would hardly ever be waived except through influences outside of the navy itself. Of course waiving physical requirements practically assures an increased retired list.
Now let us ask ourselves the question: Is the present system of appointment of midshipmen the best system possible? Is it the one that is bound to give us the best results; the best officers for the best ships?
I believe that the correct answer is "No."
The present system produces fair results. Some of the young men who come to the academy as midshipmen are bright, some are of good intellectual quality, and some are of a quality that can perhaps be designated as "fair." Some of them have superb physiques, some are only "fair to good" in bodily qualities, and some are headed for the retired list. Some possess a high degree of aptitude for the naval service, if not the spark of genius, and will make excellent officers; some are destined to make good naval officers; and some, because nature intended them for other roles, will never rise above mediocrity as naval officers.
It would appear that, if only the best is good enough for our naval service, a decidedly improved system of appointment of midshipmen should be established. In a country with a population of approximately one hundred millions, it is surely possible to gather a couple of hundred lads between the ages of 16 and 20 each year who possess fine physiques, fine mental qualities, excellent characters, and a high degree of aptitude for naval life.
Why not abolish the present system of appointment, which tempts the appointing authority to use this power to pay political debts, and which, in any event, produces only results which average not better than "good," and substitute a system of appointment which will throw the whole burden upon the individual states?
The present system has the good characteristic of placing in the naval academy representatives of all parts of the country; the proposed system would preserve that feature.
Apportion the appointments among the several states as the representatives and senators are apportioned. Let the government of each state settle in its own way which young men of the lawful age it will send as its representatives at the academy.
At first glance the new scheme appears to invite the machinations of politicians; but further consideration will, I think, convince us that when the representatives of one state at the academy have a higher standing than those of another state, the latter state will be incited automatically to increase the standard of its appointees.
Were the proposed system adopted, I do not doubt that each state would throw the competition for midshipmen appointments open to every schoolboy of suitable age within its boundaries. The newspapers would see that the competition would be fair; and the points of merit of the successful candidates would be heralded from one end of the state to another.
I do not doubt that this system would give us a practically "all star" entering class, at least as far as mental and physical characteristics are concerned. The moral characters of the matriculates would doubtless be good, if not uniformly excellent.
As to aptitude for the naval service, I see no means of determining this quality except at the academy itself. Besides the ordinary means of determining aptitude, as at present employed, it may be that the comparatively new science of character analysis by the observational method, which is said to be employed at certain large industrial establishments, would be of great assistance; but this at least seems certain: the aptitude of the growing midshipman should be one of the chief concerns of his instructors.
It may be thought that an objection to the proposed scheme would lie in a tendency to send to the naval academy too great a proportion of young men of the "high brow," or mental, type. But I believe that a natural check would operate. The illustrated press of the country, weekly and monthly, now keeps the nation so well informed as to the materiel of the navy and of many of its operations that the average boy in almost any section is fairly well posted on many of the essentials of a naval officer's life; and I believe that the young men to whom the naval life would naturally appeal would be the ones that would apply for the competitive examinations.
Hence I should expect that the predominant temperamental constitution of the new midshipmen would be motive-mental-vital or mental-motive-vital, rather than vital-motive-mental or any other combination. In Nelson, Howe, Hood, John Paul Jones, Farragut, and other great naval captains the facial characteristics were such as can be predicated of all great military leaders.
I might mention also that, in spite of Kipling's famous verses on "The Female of the Species," it is probably not good policy to encourage the acquisition of men of distinctly feminine characteristics.
It must be admitted, of course, that it would probably be disadvantageous to have all officers cast in the same mold. I believe that the best all-around officer is the one with the mental and motive temperaments well in evidence and about evenly balanced, with the vital temperament not too glaringly deficient, a case that was exemplified in Sir George Rooke. It is well to have a few officers, like Mahan, for example, with the mental temperament predominant.
Under a system as proposed I should expect some midshipmen to be dropped for inaptitude, but not many for mental, moral or physical defects.