General
It appears to be the peculiar psychology of the American people that routine efforts to improve matters of Public interest are usually viewed with Hie greatest complacency. It seems that some headline tragedy is necessary to shock the authorities into action. This is Particularly true as regards interest in °Ur Navy and Merchant Marine.
The blowing up of the Maine precipitated the Spanish war, which, it has been claimed, might have been avoided except tor the passions engendered. The sinking of the Titanic resulted in the establishment of international agreements regarding steamer lanes and ice patrols. The destruction of the Lusitania was the final Punch that caused us to abandon neutrality and enter the World War. The recent tosses of the Morro Castle and Mohawk have resulted in focusing public attention Upon the Merchant Marine to an extent Unequaled since the World War.
As a result of this interest, measures are under consideration which, if adopted, Mil result in the complete reorganization of the government control and administration of the Merchant Marine. The President has recently transmitted a message to Congress recommending legislation for this purpose, and enclosing two reports °n the subject of an adequate Merchant Marine: a report of an interdepartmental committee known as the “Committee on Shipping Policy,” and a report from the Postmaster General on ocean mail contracts.
A study of these reports shows that in the future a much closer naval co-operation is expected in building up the Merchant Marine. The Merchant Marine as a component of national defense is emphasized to a greater degree than ever. Naval training of the personnel for increased operating efficiency is recommended. The object of this paper is, therefore, to elaborate a plan which will produce a closer co-operation between the Navy and the Merchant Marine in accordance with existing and suggested policies.
The importance of the Merchant Marine, as a third component of sea power, has long been recognized by the Navy. It is a matter of common knowledge that approximately two-thirds of the commercial tonnage now under the American flag would be required by the Navy in support of war-time operations. The worn-out condition and the slow speed of this tonnage is also appreciated. What is not generally appreciated is that the present inferiority of our Merchant Marine as a naval auxiliary lies not only in the lack of fast modern vessels, but also in the absence of naval training of the personnel to prepare them for efficient operation with the Navy. Important as it is to build new and fast merchant vessels, it is of even greater importance to obtain trained crews to man them. All ships, whether naval or merchant, are effective in proportion to the skill and training of the crews who operate them.
Practically all foreign maritime states utilize a Merchant Marine Naval Reserve as a medium for building up the efficiency and discipline of their Merchant Marine personnel. Since 1860, for instance, the British government has maintained a Merchant Marine Naval Reserve of average strength of about 20,000 officers and men, at great annual expense. Japan, France, and Italy have large forces of Merchant Marine Naval Reserves, organized and trained as a result of conscriptive service, for which large sums of money are annually appropriated. Of all the great maritime nations, the United States alone has failed to develop a Merchant Marine Naval Reserve. Although billions of dollars have been spent on building ships and other millions are being spent in subsidies to operate them, the expenditures for education and training of the personnel have been negligible.
At the beginning of the World War, 1914, the organization and administration of the British Royal Naval Reserves was such that by sending out a 3-word telegram, 50 per cent of the Merchant Marine Reservists were mobilized within 48 hours. The great value of the Royal Naval Reserves to the British Navy in carrying on the war against Germany is a matter of record. Their efficiency has been ascribed to the naval training received and to the close contact maintained with the personnel of the Royal Navy.
Our own experience in the World War was not so fortunate. The crews of the ships were 80 per cent foreigners with very little sense of discipline or responsibility and were more loyal to their labor leaders than to their officers. The additional inexperienced men it was necessary to train for our merchant ships proved superior to the regular crews. The training of crews for merchant ships required numerous naval officers who were badly needed with the regular Navy to prosecute the war. Instead of the Merchant Marine personnel being an asset by furnishing to the Navy men disciplined and trained in the seagoing profession, the reverse was the case. The Navy actually turned out about 7,000 officers from the schools at Pelham Bay and Stevens Institute of a much higher caliber than the American
Merchant Marine had known since clipper-ship days. The vast undertaking of naval training is shown by the fact that at the end of the war the Shipping Board requested the Navy to furnish 20,000 officers and 200,000 men for the merchant service. It is not probable that in the next war conditions will be such that naval personnel can be diverted from their primary mission for this training. It therefore seems a matter of common prudence to build up and train an adequate Merchant Marine Reserve in time of peace.
The efficiency of our Merchant Marine has greatly improved since the World War. The percentage of American citizens who ship and reship has increased from 20 per cent in 1917 to 56 per cent in 1926 to 75 per cent in 1934. The seamanlike qualities of our Merchant Marine officers compare favorably, man for man, with those of any other nation. The daring rescues performed by the crews and officers under the command of Captain Fried, Captain Stedman, and others will ever be an inspiration to the seagoing profession. Neither the glory of these heroic deeds nor the reputation for devotion to duty and high standards, justly earned by thousands of our officers, can be tarnished by the single horrible Mono Castle disaster. From the personal observation of many naval officers who have cruised with our Merchant Marine officers, it can be confidently asserted that, given an equal opportunity with trained crews, the majority will handle emergencies as well as an equal number of naval officers.
In this respect, attention should be brought to the increasing tendency to interfere with discipline on board our merchant ships by labor control of the crews. There have been an alarming number of recent cases of insubordination and even violence among members of the crews, as the outgrowth of labor controversies. It is alleged that the authority of the master and officers on board in some cases is being weakened to such an extent as to jeopardize safe operation. The Mono Castle disaster and the recent Pacific coast labor difficulties have caused unpleasant and costly notoriety to our Merchant Marine personnel. It is not surprising that foreign steamship lines have taken advantage of this situation to divert trade to their own vessels. One has but to read the elaborate advertisements of certain foreign companies, which are appearing in our current periodicals, to realize that an insidious propaganda against the competency of our Merchant Marine personnel is being carried on under our very noses. This is done by inviting attention of American tourists and shippers to the long record of efficiency of certain foreign Merchant Marine personnel, their tradition, esprit de corps, and, most important of all, to the fact that the personnel have been trained as Naval Reservists. The inference is that the American Merchant Marine has none of these things and therefore the efficiency of the personnel suffers accordingly.
There can be no doubt that an efficient naval trained Merchant Marine Naval Reserve will be an important factor in combating propaganda of this type.
Evolution of our Merchant Marine Policies
It is believed to be of interest to show some of the various acts which determine the present United States naval policy toward our Merchant Marine:
(а) Early legislation was principally to obtain favorable reciprocal trade relations with other nations. From 1830 to 1875 various mail pay acts were made and rescinded.
(b) Legislation affecting the modern Merchant Marine begins with the Panama Canal Act of 1912, amended by the Act of 1914, which admitted for United States Registry, to be employed in foreign trade, foreign built merchant vessels. The advent of the war prevented foreign built vessels from being acquired by American owners and thus made the act ineffective. In order to provide necessary shipping to carry our trade, which was interrupted by foreigners withdrawing their merchant vessels for war purposes, Congress passed the Act of 1916, which created the U. S. Shipping Board and gave authority “to form one or more corporations for the purchase, equipment, construction, lease, charter, maintenance and operation of merchant vessels in the commerce of the United States.” It was under this act that the Emergency Fleet Corporation was created which supervised the construction of our war-time Merchant Marine.
(c) The Act of 1920 transferred to the Shipping Board certain authority granted to the President as a war measure, which had been by him delegated to the Shipping Board and Emergency Fleet Corporation. The Act of 1920 announced the basic shipping policy of the United States as follows:
“That it is necessary for the National Defense and for the proper growth of its foreign and domestic commerce that the United States shall have a Merchant Marine of the best equipped and most suitable types of vessels sufficient to carry the greater portion of its commerce and serve as a naval or military auxiliary in time of war or national emergency, ultimately to be owned and operated privately by citizens of the United Stales.”
(d) The Act of 1928 reaffirmed the U. S. Merchant Marine policy as expressed in the Act of 1920. It also provided as follows:
Shipping Board is directed to present to Congress from time to time recommendations for the construction in American shipyards of new cargo, combination cargo and passenger, and passenger ships so as to maintain an adequate Merchant Marine under the United States flag suitable as a naval or military auxiliary in time of need.
(e) The payments authorized under the mail contract provisions of the Act of 1928 carry certain obligations and restrictions as follows:
(1) Ships are subject to commandeering by the United States in event of national emergency.
(2) Ships must be of types, sizes, and speeds best adapted to the needs of a particular service.
(3) All licensed officers and two-thirds of their crews shall be composed of American citizens.
(4) Ships must be fitted and equipped with the most modern, efficient, and economical engines, machinery, and commercial appliances.
(5) Ships must have incorporated in them the special features imposed by the Navy, to comply with its requirement that they must be built “with particular reference to economical conversion into an auxiliary naval vessel.”
(f) Naval Reserve Act, 1925, is the basic law regulating the Naval Reserve and is entitled “An Act to provide for the creation, organization, administration, and maintenance of a Naval Reserve and a Marine Corps Reserve.” It provides for the establishment of a Merchant Marine Naval Reserve, voluntary training duty, and extra pay per annum amounting to about 44 days pay of the rank or rate of those enrolled, who comply with prescribed regulations.
Section 36 of this act provides as follows:
“That the Secretary of the Navy shall prescribe all necessary and proper regulations, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, for the recruiting, organization, government, administration, training, inspection, and mobilization of the Naval Reserve hereby created and established, and shall detail such officers and enlisted men and shall make available such vessels, material, armament, equipment, and other facilities of the regular Navy as he may deem necessary and advisable for the development of the Naval Reserve in accordance with the provisions of this Act.”
(g) Economy Act, 1932.—As a result of this act the U. S. Shipping Board was abolished and its duties and functions assigned to the Shipping Board Bureau and Bureau of Navigation of the Department of Commerce.
Miscellaneous Legislation
The principal miscellaneous acts which are also factors in the formulation of naval policy toward the Merchant Marine are:
(a) Act of 28 May 1896, which provides that masters, mates, pilots, and engineers shall not be drafted in war except to perform duties required by their licenses.
(b) Act of 30 June 1906. The President was authorized to furnish cutters for training of cadets in states bordering on the Great Lakes.
(c) Act of 4 March 1911. Authorizes the Navy Department to furnish suitable vessels for nautical school ships to certain states to promote nautical education.
Navy Department Policies
Certain departmental policies affecting the Merchant Marine have been adopted as follows:
General naval policy.—(a) To maintain the Navy in sufficient strength to support the national policies and commerce and to guard the Continental and over-seas possessions of the United States.
(b) To support American interests, especially the development of American foreign commerce and the Merchant Marine.
Fleet operating policy.—(a) To assign suitable vessels for training Naval Reserves.
Personnel policy.—(a) To build up, train, and maintain Naval and Marine Corps Reserves to provide for mobilization.
(b)To cultivate close association of officers of the Navy and Marine Corps with the Reserves, and to assign officers to duty with the Reserves and to educational institutions.
A study of the above legislation and announced policies shows the intention that the Navy should have an active and continuous interest in the development of the Merchant Marine in both its material and personnel phases. These policies imply that the Navy take an interest in the administration, procurement, training, and inspection of the Merchant Marine personnel for the purpose of increasing the efficiency of operation in peace and securing a rapid and effective mobilization in war.
Navy Department Agencies Co-operating with the Merchant Marine
The below mentioned activities provide the principal existing naval co-operation with the Merchant Marine:
Joint Merchant Vessel Board.—(a) This Board inspects, through district section boards, all merchant vessels of American registry with the purpose of furnishing War Plans Division and the bureaus with the necessary information to determine whether or not a merchant vessel is suitable for the use of the Navy in time of war, and if suitable, what use should be made of her and what alterations would become necessary at time of taking her over. These inspections are at the same time conducted for the Army, information obtained being incorporated in the complete report. The Army is represented by one member at headquarters, and by one member on each of the district section boards.
(b) The Department (Operations) issues from time to time a list of vessels which are suitable for use as naval auxiliaries in time of war, on which the appointment of officers and the enlistment of men is authorized, under such instructions as may be issued by the Bureau of Navigation.
(c) Merchant Marine Naval Reserve officers are procured from seagoing vessels documented under the laws of the United States from those on the “Approved list”: vessels on this list must have certain physical characteristics which make them suitable for service as naval auxiliaries in time of war.
(d) The commandants of Naval Districts are responsible for the procurement of officers of the Merchant Marine Naval Reserve. Such officers must be approved by the commandant, must be serving on seagoing ships, must pass a physical examination to enroll and, in addition, must pass a physical examination every four years. At the present time there are enrolled about 3,300 Merchant Marine officers. No men have ever been enrolled.
(e) The Bureau of Navigation has established educational centers at New York, N. Y., New Orleans, La., and San Francisco, Calif., for the purpose of maintaining correspondence courses in professional subjects for all classes of reserve officers. An officer is in charge of each center. It is the intention of the bureau, when funds are available, to give Merchant Marine Reserve officers similar training duty as is given to officers of the Fleet Reserve.
(f) The Secretary of the Navy may issue to vessels on the approved list a warrant to fly a Naval Reserve flag, provided the master or commanding officer and not less than SO per cent of the officers are members of the Naval Reserve. There are now listed 208 vessels of this class.
(g) In addition to the Naval Reserve Personnel Division of the Bureau of Navigation, the bureau maintains contact with the Merchant Marine through the following agencies: commandants of Districts, Hydrographic Offices (including about twenty Branch Hydrographic Offices), Supervisor New York Harbor (naval officer under War Department) and the Marine Superintendent Canal Zone (naval officer under the Governor of the Canal Zone).
(h) While the Navy Department exercises no direct supervision over the State Nautical Schools of New York, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and California, whose mission is the training of apprentices for Merchant Marine officers, the department has contributed vessels for the use of the above schools and in addition contributes to each annually approximately the sum of $25,000 for upkeep, plus cost of repairs to vessels.
(i) As a result of the Morro Castle disaster, at the request of the Department of Commerce, the Navy Department detailed numerous officers to make tours of inspection on board merchant vessels to report on conditions found. The services of these officers were loaned to the Department of Commerce and reports were made directly to that department.
(j) The Office of Naval Communications promotes interest in Naval Communications by maintaining a competition between naval vessels in contacting and communicating with merchant ships.
(k) Material Bureaus aid Merchant Marine operations by technical advice as to efficient operation. This service is available to all vessels upon application.
(l) A general liaison is maintained with the Merchant Marine through the Ships Movement Division of Naval Operations.
The existing agencies provide a limited means of co-operation but are not considered sufficiently co-ordinated to meet the requirements of existing policies. There does not appear to be an adequate central office or agency to co-ordinate interested activities in building up our Merchant Marine in time of peace. The lack of such an office has not been so noticeable in the past due to the co-operation extended by the Shipping Board. As long as the Shipping Board was in existence the Navy had a limited voice in the development of the Merchant Marine as a naval auxiliary, through the individual naval officers on duty with the board. The Shipping Board was abolished as a result of the Economy Act of 1932 and its functions transferred to the Department of Commerce. There has been no adequate agency created to take the place of the Shipping Board in the necessary liaison between the Navy and the Merchant Marine.
Whatever plan is developed for closer naval co-operation with the Merchant Marine should provide for the following:
(a) Joint administration.
(b) Procurement and education of the personnel.
(c) Training of the personnel.
(d) Material and personnel inspections.
In developing a plan for joint administration it seems desirable that certain basic factors should be emphasized:
(1) The Merchant Marine should be built up as a measure of national defense as the ultimate aim.
(2) The administration of the Merchant Marine should provide for the Department of Commerce to have primary interest in time of peace and for the Navy Department to have primary interest in time of war.
(3) The administrative organization should be such as to permit a rapid transition from the Department of Commerce to the Navy Department in time of war or national emergency.
(4) The Navy Department should inspect and pass upon all ships acquired for the Merchant Marine with a view of their fitness as naval auxiliaries in time of war.
(5) No vessel of the Merchant Marine should be permitted to share in a direct or indirect government subsidy unless it meets the conditions demanded by the Navy as an auxiliary in time of war.
(6) An organized and trained Merchant Marine Naval Reserve is essential for efficient operation both in time of peace and in time of war.
(7) The general average of the personnel as to educational, physical, and moral requirements should be on a higher plane.
(8) Education of the personnel of the Merchant Marine, which is a component of national defense, should be provided for by the federal government and not by state governments.
(9) Personnel should be encouraged to take service in the Merchant Marine as a life career. Opportunities should be given merchant seamen to be educated for Merchant Marine officers at a national merchant marine academy.
(10) Shipping interests and government departments should reserve certain shore billets for seagoing personnel in order to rotate sea duty and shore duty.
(11) Training duty, under naval supervision, is necessary to prepare Merchant Marine Naval Reserve personnel for their duties in operating with the Navy in time of war and to increase their effectiveness in time of peace.
(12) The present system of inspections of the Merchant Marine by the Steamboat Inspection Service, should be improved and supplemented by operating inspections made by regular naval officers upon the high seas and in the home ports of vessels concerned.
(13) The size of the Merchant Marine Naval Reserve should be based on the following as minimum requirements:
(a) Master, chief officer, chief engineer, and two other officers of each ship on the approved list to belong to the Merchant Marine Naval Reserve.
(b) Two complete gun crews, a communication unit and an engineering unit to be organized from the crew of each vessel on the approved list.
(c)It is estimated that the Merchant Marine Naval Reserve should be composed of a minimum of 5,000 officers and 35,000 men.
A study of the legislative acts and basic factors shows that many agencies are interested in a joint administration of the Merchant Marine such as:
(a) The Department of Commerce
(b) Navy Department
(c) Post-Office Department
(d) Shipowners and operators
(e) Merchant marine personnel
(f) Allied industries
(g) Labor organizations
The predominant administrative interests remain, however, in the Department of Commerce and the Navy Department. Both departments have an interest in the types and characteristics of the vessels acquired as naval auxiliaries. Both departments are interested in the procurement, education, and training of the personnel —one for peace-time operation, the other for war operations. Both departments are interested in material and personnel inspections. The interests of the two departments should be co-ordinated through a joint board, committee, or other advisory body. Other interests should also form part of the advisory board, in accordance with the importance of the interests concerned.
The Committee on Shipping Policy recommends that joint administration be effected as follows:
(a) To establish a quasi-judicial and policy determining body to be known as the “Federal Maritime Authority.” The membership should consist of two classes:
(1) Members or commissioners appointed by the President to serve long terms.
(2) Representatives of the appropriate federal departments to be designated by the President.
(b) To establish an executive or administrative body in the Department of Commerce to be known as the “Office of Maritime Affairs,” and to be under an Assistant Secretary for Maritime Affairs, whose tenure of office should be as permanent as possible. Under this office should be grouped all government administrative functions in connection with the Merchant Marine.
(c) An advisory council to be appointed by the President from interested elements of labor and industry, associated with the authority.
This proposal is an improvement over the administration of the Shipping Board, on account of giving all interested parties a voice as to policies and methods of administration.
There is nothing to indicate, however, that the Navy has any more weight in the administration of the Merchant Marine than any other government department.
A Plan for Closer Naval Co-operation
General.—(1) To co-operate with other government departments and shipping interests in building up a U. S. Merchant Marine suitable for carrying the greater portion of our commerce in time of peace and capable of serving as a naval auxiliary in time of war or national emergency.
(2) To build up an adequate and efficient Merchant Marine Naval Reserve for the dual purpose of operating the Merchant Marine in peace time and furnishing trained personnel for the Naval Transportation Service in time of war.
Administration.—(1) To co-operate with the Department of Commerce, Federal Maritime Authority, or other advisory bodies that may be established, in advising the Department of Commerce and Navy Department as to joint policies and methods to be followed in order to build up our Merchant Marine for both peace and war operations.
(2) To expand the present administration of the Naval Transportation Service in order to coordinate all naval activities dealing with the Merchant Marine in peace time, and to provide for rapid and efficient taking over of the necessary administrative duties from the Department of Commerce in time of war.
Procurement.—(1) To raise the general educational average of the Merchant Marine personnel by co-operating in establishing and operating a National Merchant Marine Academy.
(2) To co-operate in selecting students for education from candidates who have served one or more years at sea in an unlicensed grade, as far as possible, and who have definitely decided upon the Merchant Marine as a career.
(3) To establish training stations separately or in co-operation with the Department of Commerce for the following purposes:
(a) To train recruits before being assigned to merchant vessels.
(b) To organize special schools for the instruction of both licensed and unlicensed personnel in their specialties and to prepare them for promotion.
(c) To examine men for lifeboat certificates.
(d) To offer facilities for a limited number of licensed and unlicensed personnel to perform annual training duty.
(e) To offer facilities for the establishment of a recreational and welfare center for merchant seamen.
Training.—(1) To train annually on board naval vessels as many Merchant Marine Naval Reservists as facilities will permit. Each reservist should have two weeks training duty per annum, one month every two years, or six weeks every three years.
(2) To provide drills and facilities for training duty under the supervision of competent Naval Reserve officers on board those vessels warranted to fly the Naval Reserve flag, and other designated vessels on the approved list which have watch, quarter, and station bills and other organization bills approved by the Navy Department. Such drills to consist of routine emergency drills, damage control and communication drills, in accordance with Navy standards and procedure. While it is deemed impracticable to have fire control and gun drills on board merchant vessels, it may be possible to provide loading machines and a limited amount of fire control material to certain vessels for training.
(3) To provide equivalent or appropriate training duty on shore under naval supervision, or at special training schools, for personnel unable to receive required training duty at sea.
(4) To provide an active and inactive class of Merchant Marine Reserves. The active class must meet certain physical and professional requirements and perform annually certain drills and training duty prescribed by the Secretary of the Navy. The inactive class should be composed of all other Merchant Marine Reservists who take extension courses and occasional training duty with their own consent.
Inspections.—(1) To expand the present Joint Merchant Vessel Board as may be necessary to make periodic material inspections of all vessels designated as naval auxiliaries.
(2) To expand the present Naval Reserve Inspection Board to make annual inspections of Naval Reservists afloat in a manner similar to the inspections now made of units of the Fleet Reserve.
(3) To make annual military inspections of those vessels warranted to fly the Naval Reserve flag. While undergoing inspection these vessels and their crews should be considered as being a component of the naval service.
(4) To make annual inspections of other vessels on the approved list, not inspected by the Naval Reserve Board, by:
(а) Boards organized by the commandant of the district in which the vessel has its home port.
(b) Boards ordered for this purpose from regular officers on sea duty.
(5) To make annual operating inspections of other vessels not on the approved lists by boards of Merchant Marine Naval Reserve officers.
Conclusion
The Naval Reserve Act should be modified to provide higher ranks for Merchant Marine Naval Reserve officers, with a different method of distribution and promotion. Above all, Congress must provide annual funds for support and training of this branch of the Reserves. It is estimated that one-half of the reserve of 5,000 officers and 35,000 men could be trained as provided in the above plan for approximately $3,000,000 annually. This also includes travel expenses and subsistence.
The Committee on Shipping Policy has recommended that the necessary funds for the support of the Naval Reserve be provided as a special subsidy.
The peace-time preparation of this component of sea power is considered a very important naval problem. Let us, then, capitalize the great interest now being taken in the Merchant Marine, and provide effective co-operation in building up this component of sea power to make it more effective for both peace and war service.
The importance of an adequate Merchant Marine was early recognized by the founders of the country, and the very first laws passed by Congress had to do with the development of shipping. These laws granted a 10 per cent tariff reduction on goods brought into the country by American vessels. Preferential tonnage duties were also given to our own ships. During the period from 1789 to 1828, no less than 50 laws were enacted by Congress for the benefit of shipping. Our Merchant Marine thrived, until American-flag vessels were carrying 90 per cent of our foreign trade.—Shorts about Ships.
*This article was submitted in the Prize Essay Contest, 1935.