Dirigible Metal Found to be Poor
(See page 464, April, 1927, Proceedings)
Editor’s Note.—The Editor has been furnished by the Chief of Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, with a copy of a letter received by that official from George L. Clark, Research Laboratory of Applied Chemistry, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, as follows :
There has appeared in the newspapers yesterday and today an account of a supposed exclusive interview with the New Haven Register in which the statement was attributed to me that the disaster of the Shenandoah was due to faulty metal. Please permit me to inform you that this newspaper item is erroneous, and that no interview was obtained by the New Haven Register or any other paper.
On February 15, I addressed the Civil Engineers Society in New Haven upon the subject of our X-ray investigation upon the structure of materials, and upon the differentiation between satisfactory and unsatisfactory specimens. Numerous examples of metals were presented. A question was asked me whether the Shenandoah failure was due to the metal, and the reply was that there is no direct evidence whatsoever that this was the case but that the X-ray method was now available for the very careful study of all materials which might be subjected to any sort of severe conditions. This simple statement was twisted into the newspaper article as it appeared.
I am presenting these facts so that you may rest assured that there has been no intention at any time of criticising or calling into question the methods of testing and of construction used by the government.
I am sorry indeed that this misleading article has appeared at the time when we are all trying to contribute our best efforts to a profound knowledge of the structures of materials, and I sincerely hope that the Bureau of Aeronautics will not be innocently embarrassed on this account.
Delivery of Man to Foreign Civil Officials
(See page 2327, November, 1926, Proceedings)
The Editor has received the following comment from the Commander, Naval Forces, Europe, Vice Admiral G. H. Bur- rage, U. S. Navy:
- On August 26, 1926, Emilio Paredes, mess attendant second class, was shot by LeBon Emanuel Smith, gunner’s mate first class. Paredes died a few days later. Both men were attached to the U.S.S. Lardner, then at Gravesend, England. Both men were ashore on liberty at the time of the shooting. It will thus be seen that the scene of the crime was in foreign territory.
- On August 27, 1926, the civil police authorities came on board the U.S.S. Lardner with a warrant for the arrest of Smith. The Commanding Officer of the Lardner refused to allow the warrant to be served and refused to give Smith up to the police authorities.
- In the U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings for the month of November, 1926, under Professional Notes, there appeared, under the heading “Naval Rights,” a quotation from the Naval and Military Record. of September 8, concerning the refusal of the Commanding Officer to deliver up Smith to the English authorities. Particular attention is invited to that part of the article which reads. “The course taken by the commanding officer of the Lardner was justified but unusual.”
- The Commander, Naval Forces, Europe, is of the opinion that the commanding officer of the Lardner took the only logical course. The U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings is read by a great number of officers in the naval service. Due to the character of this publication, officers are inclined to rely upon the information contained therein. Consequently a number of officers may have obtained an erroneous impression of the course which should be followed in a situation of this kind. The course to be followed where a foreign government is involved is not covered by Naval Courts and Boards.
It is believed that Chapter III, Naval Courts and Boards, should be so changed as to show specifically the course to be taken by the commanding officer of the naval vessel when a demand is made upon him for delivery to foreign civil authorities of any person in his custody. Probably most commanding officers would naturally follow the proper course from what is said concerning state and federal authorities in Chapter III, Naval Courts and Boards. Some commanding officers might fail to do so, however, and the department be seriously embarrassed thereby. When a foreign government is involved it is very important that the actions of naval officers be in accordance with law. Hence specific instructions are desirable.
Adventures of Old Glory
(See page 318, March, 1927, Proceedings)
Henry W. Belknap.—I venture to suggest that William E. Beard has overlooked one very interesting occasion of the display of “Old Glory’’ in his article in your March issue.
On July 4 in Paris during the exposition of 1900, the American flag flew from the top of the Eiffel tower all day, the occasion being the unveiling of the statues of Washington and Lafayette when John Philip Sousa’s superb band officiated at both ceremonies, marching from the Trocadero to the Tuilleries and thence through the Avenue de l’Opera to the Place de l’Opera where the band played continuously until daylight the next morning.
If my memory serves me this was said to be the first time that a foreign military organization had traversed the streets of Paris.
The Naval Officer in Diplomacy
(See Editor’s Note, page 309, March, 1927, Proceedings)
Admiral Knapp relieved Admiral Sims after the Armistice, but the former became Military Governor of Santo Domingo in 1916 not after the Armistice. Acknowledgement is made to Commander Ralph Whitman (CEC), U.S. Navy, for calling our attention to the error.
The Case for the Capital Ship
(See page 2473, December, 1926, Proceedings)
The editor’s attention has been called to what was apparently a misstatement of fact in the article referred to above, in which the author stated that the 16-inch guns of the Colorado class of battleships could hurl a projectile weighing a ton a distance of thirty-five miles. When this was referred to the author, he asked that a correction be made, as the error was a typographical one and should have read thirty-five thousand yards.
Historic Ships of the Navy
(See page 171, February, 1927, Proceedings)
Rear Admiral A. W. Grant, U. S. Navy, Retired.—Referring to the February, 1927, Proceedings, under “Historic Ships of the Navy,” the following appears:
This cruise lasted four years, under several commanders. Captain Joseph G. Eaton (1902) took her out to the Philippines, but that summer he turned her over to Captain Frank T. Burwell (August 29, 1902).
As I was executive officer of the Oregon during the period referred to, I think it well to correct the errors underscored. The Oregon remained at the Navy Yard, Puget Sound, from April, 1901, until September, 1902. During this period she was thoroughly overhauled and the temporary repairs made to her bottom in Nagasaki were made substantial in the Bremerton drydock.
During 1902 while at the Navy Yard, Puget Sound, she was under command of Captain Joseph G. Eaton until August of that year. He was never in command of her at sea, nor did he take her to the Philippines. He was relieved of command by Captain William T. Burwell (not Frank T. Burwell).
During the return voyage to the China station in November, 1902, when approximately half way between Honolulu and Yokohama the Oregon encountered an exceedingly severe storm and came very nearly foundering. The damages sustained at this time were so great that she spent two months at the Uraga Dock Yard, near Yokusuka, Japan, undergoing repairs. She joined the flagship Kentucky (Admiral Evans) in Hongkong about March, 1903, and returned north with the flag, stopping at Amoy, Shanghai, Nagasaki, Kobe and Yokohama, and early in the summer of 1903 went to Chefoo. During the autumn of 1903, the Kentucky and Oregon made a trip to Honolulu, and in January, 1904, arrived in Manila.