This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
Leaders and Leadership
(See page 301, March, 1954, Proceedings)
Lieutenant John Burkam Ferris, Jr., U. S. Naval Reserve.—Mr. Edmund A. Gibson concludes that although the extensive list of admirable qualities he set forth initially may be desirable ones in a great military leader, they are not all necessary ones. Those he decides to be necessary ones are: adaptability, courage, earnestness, technical skill, education, the ability to judge character and genius. There is little reason to take issue with his conclusions, but it might be of interest to pursue them further.
The 21 characteristics discarded as desirable but not necessary include such fine traits as considerateness, dependability, fair play, and tactfulness. There is a significant overall difference between these desirable characteristics and the seven necessary ones mentioned earlier. The necessary characteristics are all inward ones exercised by an individual for his own benefit and advancement. The 21 rejected characteristics are the type qualifications Mr. Gibson considers “essential to the character of a gentleman.” But a gentleman is only such in the eyes of others and because his actions toward others are well received. Of the three great military leaders studied, only Robert E. Lee appears to have possessed any fair number of these “gentlemanly” traits. Is there any significance in this fact?
Frederick the Great and Napoleon were both commanders of professional armies in the post-feudal tradition. Their careers were the means for personal aggrandizement. Their need was only for the inward, personal characteristics that would equip them to achieve high position and, once there, to discourage competition and devote a maximum effort to the furtherance of personal ambitions. The opinions of subordinates or the public meant little provided these men could maintain both a strong domestic position and a long string of victories.
Robert E. Lee, however, commanded a civilian army in a popular but downhill cause. His military greatness cannot be disputed and rests primarily upon the seven inward characteristics that a man cultivates in his own interest. But Lee was a soldier in a democracy. He received his appointment and maintained it largely through public confidence. Furthermore, although he was the South’s military leader throughout the war, he was not a dictator but rather was obliged to adapt himself to compromises with politicians, statesmen, and even other generals. These conditions explain why Lee required so many more of the “desirable but not necessary” characteristics than did either Frederick or Napoleon. Lee, just as is the case with later military leaders in democratic nations, could not afford to limit his characteristics to those that tend toward arbitrariness. A military leader in a democracy must conduct himself in a way that elicits support and cooperation from people who are characteristically suspicious of anyone who demonstrates dictatorial tendencies.
There always exists the danger that a military—or other—leader, having once attained success by the balanced display of both the necessary and the desirable characteristics, may retain only the necessary ones in a drive for expanded personal power. Civilian control in a democracy is perhaps the surest guarantee against such tendencies.
Perry's Visit to Okinawa
V. G. Griffin.—Commodore M. C. Perry’s achievements in Japan have been the reason for numerous celebrations and ceremonies both in 1953 and 1954, but one somewhat isolated spot has apparently been forgotten. I refer to the small cemetery hidden away in a small courtyard in the Northwest corner of Naha, Okinawa. There are the graves of twenty American seamen (all members of the Perry expedition) who died in 1854 and were buried in that far-off island which their countrymen captured 91 years later.
The First Light
Captain Edgar K. Thompson, U. S. Navy.—The year 1954 celebrates the Jubilee of Edison’s invention of the incandescent lamp, and it is to the Navy’s credit to recall that only four years after this form of illumination was devised, that an “isolated lighting” installation was made in an American warship.
The Bureau of Navigation of the Navy Department was not slow to appreciate the advantages which the electric light promised for use on board ship, and early in 1883 specifications were prepared and arrangements made for lighting the steamer U.S.S. Trenton, then fitting out at New York for her second cruise, by the incandescent electric lamp. The U.S.S. Trenton was the first man-of-war in the world to be so lighted, and this experiment to ascertain the practical efficiency of the electric light on shipboard, aroused considerable interest both in and out of the Navy. While the Trenton was the first naval vessel to be lighted by electricity, the U. S. Fish Commission Steamer Albatross, built under the direction of a naval officer, and officered and manned by the Navy, received her electric plant in 1882.
Seven electric power companies were asked to submit bids for installing lights in the Trenton but only one, the Edison Electric Lighting Company, complied by making an offer of $5,500.00. The contract, awarded the Edison Company, called for “one dynamo and engine complete to supply light to the following lamps: 104 16-candle power lamps; 130 10-candle power lamps;
and 4 32-candle power lamps; a total of 238 lamps and 3,092 candle power; 238 key sockets for lamps, 6 extra brushes, 1 automatic regulator, and 1 dynamo foundation.” All of the necessary conductors, switches, safety devices and appliances were to be of the most approved patterns then used by the Edison Company, and the fixtures for the lightswere supplied by theNavyDepartment.
A Lieutenant Commander Bradford, who had interested himself in the subject of electricity and electric lighting, was appointed Executive Officer of the Trenton and ordered to her before the ship went into commission for duty connected with the installation of all the electrical apparatus. The plant was installed during the summer of 1883, and in September of that year it was started into regular operation. A careful record was kept of its performance under all circumstances and reports submitted from time to time to the Navy Department. This plant was in operation throughout the full three years’ cruise of the ship, and in spite of the fact that it was the first plant to be put on board a naval vessel, that the officer in charge and men running it had no previous experience, and that many difficulties were encountered for these very reasons, the lighting of the Trenton by electricity was an undoubted success.
The Trenton had what was known as a single plant; that is, one dynamo machine and one engine. The plant could not be run all the time as it was necessary to rest the engine, so oil lamps were used below in the engine and fire-rooms, orlops, store-rooms, and holds, during the daytime. This necessitated the Trenton, being supplied with a full allowance of lamps and candles.
Lieutenant Commander Bradford, the Navy’s first specialist in electricity, was to go far. In January 1887 he was ordered to duty under the Bureau of Navigation as “Inspector of electric lighting of ships of the Navy,” and took charge of the office of “Naval Inspector of Electric Lighting.”
Although the Trenton was the first naval vessel in the world to be lighted by electricity, a display or exhibition of the new electric light had been demonstrated on board a naval vessel one year earlier. In July, 1882,
Admiral Pierce Crosby, U.S.N., Commander of the South Atlantic Squadron, was in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in his flagship, the U.S.S. Brooklyn, and he arranged for an electrical display for the Brazilians in that seaport. That this novel form of illumination volubly excited the admiration of the spectators can be appreciated from this contemporary account of the proceedings: “Lieutenant W. H. Beehler then commenced to rig the ship with the Weston system of electric lights. This consisted of ten lamps, one being suspended from the ends of each of the lower yard-arms, one at the end of the flying-jib boom, one under the poop, one in the machine shop by the generator, and one in the alley leading to the dock. It was dark, however, before the circuit could be tested, and, after one or two trials, the exhibition was postponed.
The next evening, however, the effect of the light was exceedingly beautiful. Each lamp gave a light of two thousand candle- power, and made a brilliant illumination of the dock-yard and vicinity. About 8:30 p.m., while hoisting the lamp on the starboard cross-jack yard, the lamp-frame got loose and made contact with the fine wire in the feeding mechanism, which fused it and burnt a hole in the casing. The machine was stopped at once and the circuit examined, but the fault was not discovered until the next day. The machine was started again, however, but the break disabled the machine, and further efforts had to be postponed until the next day. Admiral and Mrs. Crosby were present, and a great crowd of people thronged into the dock-yard. These people were noisy, and their presence interfered so seriously with the discipline of the ship that the Admiral directed that the exhibition be discontinued. The damages were repaired the next day, and at 4 a.m. the lights were started again and worked well. Midshipman James B. Cahoon and armorer, Charles Kelsey, rendered very valuable assistance with the electric light.”
From this modest but venturesome beginning, time has confirmed what was learned from the first installation in the Trenton, that no modern warship is complete without electricity to light and fight the ship.
Battle of the Caribbean
(See page 976, September, 1954, Proceedings)
Lieutenant Colonel E. A. Dueber, Jr., U. S. Marine Corps.—Commander Smith’s “Battle of the Caribbean” in the September issue stirred a very vivid memory experience of my part in the U-94 episode. The 9th Defense Battalion was stationed at Guantanamo Bay, organizing, equipping, and training for combat employment which later turned out to be Guadalcanal. But at the time the war seemed remote for us, and most of the Marines were very envious of those of our friends who were making history in the Solomons and at Makin Island. I was Officer of the Day for the base, engaged in the normal routine of inspecting sentries and otherwise seeing to the physical security of the sprawling establishment, when the Executive Officer of the garrison called me in, announced that we were to assume custody of the captured crew of a vanquished German submarine, and gave me, and several other officers so detailed, our special instructions. The outcome of it was that we emptied the brig on Caravela Point of all Navy and Marine prisoners, making the lesser offenders PAL’s, and billeting the remainder in the unused squadroom over the Marine Fire Station. Carpenters and working parties scurried about doubling up the barbed wire stockades and installing towers for machine guns and searchlights. Late in the afternoon the prisoners were brought ashore in a motor launch, huddled on the floorboards with their heads below the gunwales. The unhurt were lodged in the brig, under the custody of a special permanent guard under a captain. The wounded, including the skipper, were placed in the hospital, with a sentry from my guard of the day at each door.
In making my rounds the rest of the tour as well as subsequent tours as officer of the day, I took a great deal of interest in observing my first contact with the enemy. Two things impressed me. First was the physical condition of the men, who belied the popular conception of U-boat personnel. They were all tanned, husky, and well-fed looking. The only thing they really showed gastronomic enthusiasm for was the fresh butter we had in our ration. Some of the younger told us they had never eaten real butter in their lives. The other thing that struck me was the ruggedness of the discipline with which the Chief Petty Officer, a tattooed oldtimer of the Imperial Navy, enforced the daily routine of his subordinates. All the Sergeant of the Guard had to do was pass on the necessary order to the chief, and he had the crew carry it out with the smartness of an honor guard. Whenever he spoke to a seaman, that individual snapped to a rigid attention, heels together, fins out, and an immediate “Ja ja, mein Herr” (or equal) and then carried out the required evolution, keeping as far ahead of the Chief’s boot toe as possible. There were a few young Nazi Youth types included, whom the Chief seemed to delight in working over at first, but I noticed that after a few days they appeared to be reconstructed to obedient German seamen. They were on the whole model prisoners, and it was with somewhat of a feeling of regret that we watched them loaded aboard a transport plane to be transported to Miami into the custody of the ONI interrogators, and thence to some POW camp in the States.
“As Far as the World Extends Itself”
(See page 889, August, 1954, Proceedings)
Lt. Colonel C. E. J. Eagles, Royal Marines.—It was with great interest that I read the article “As Far as the World extends Itself” by Lieutenant Colonel Rankin, but the author is not, I think, altogether accurate when he claims for the Royal Netherlands Marine Corps the distinction of being the senior marine corps of the world, dating this claim from the year 1665.
On October 28, 1664 Charles II signed an Order-in-Council at his Palace of Whitehall which directed “That twelve hundred land Souldjers be forthwith raysed, to be in readi- nesse, to be distributed into his Mats Fleets prepared for Sea Service wch said twelve hundred Men are to be putt into One Regiment Under One Colonell. One Lieutenant Colonell and One Serjeant Major and to be divided into Six Companies, each Company to consist of Two hundred Souldjers; And to have one Captain, one Lieutenant, One Ensign, One Drume, Fowre Serjeants, an Fowre Corporals, and all the Souldjers aforesaid to be armed with good Firelocks; all wch Armes, Drumes and Colours are forthwith to be prepared and furnished out of his mt!ei Stoares; the care of all which is recommended to the Duke of Albemarle his Grace, Lord General of his Mats Forces.” (See Privy Council Register, C II, Vol. IV, fob 264.)
So was born the Duke of York and Albany’s Maritime Regiment of Foot, the Lord High Admiral’s Regiment, and thus ultimately, the present Corps of Royal Marines. Although termed “land Souldjers” in the Order-in-Council, they were specially raised for service afloat, for in the preamble to the Order it is stated that it was issued “Upon a Report From the Lords of the Comttee for the Affayres of his Mats Navy Royall and Admiralty.” Nor is this the whole indication, for, though at this time almost all the few Army regiments then created constantly embarked for temporary service with the Fleet, none of them was armed entirely with muskets, but, as was then the custom, had a considerable proportion of pikemen in their ranks, whereas the Admiral’s Regiment had none.
It is of interest to recall that when Admiral De Ruyter attempted to follow up his successful raid on Chatham by an attack on Harwich on July 2, 1667, the town and Land- guard Fort, commanding the entrance to the harbour, had been garrisoned by six companies of the Lord High Admiral’s Regiment —that is, by Marines. These men defeated the assault by the Dutch marines who had been landed from De Ruyter’s fleet, forcing them to abandon the attempt.
Whilst on the subject of early marine regiments, it may be noted that there were also two regiments of Marines raised in France before Colonel Rankin’s year 1665. They were the 6th Regt., “La Marine”, of four battalions, raised in 1627, and the 26th Regt., “Royal Vaisseaux,” of three battalions, raised in 1635. There are, of course, no French Marines as such today.
Russia Fights Another Cold War
(See page 959, September, 1954, Proceedings)
Mr. Alexandre Tarsaidze, New York City.—I would like to make a few comments regarding the article, “Russia Fights Another Cold War” by Rodger L. Simons.
In this article the author gives a great deal of credit to the Soviet government for the development of the Northern Sea Route. After reading this article, however, one gathers the impression that the old Russian government did not accomplish enough in this same field. It is interesting to point out that in many of the latest Soviet books on the Northern Sea Route the authors .claim achievements of their own times, ignoring entirely the deeds of the old Imperial government. Practically none of them state that Lieutenant-Commander B. A. Vilkitsky was the first in the history of Arctic sea voyages to sail successfully from East to West, i.e., from the Pacific to the Atlantic.
It is obvious why the Soviet government gives so little mention to this historical and unique feat yet, there is no doubt that Vilkitsky’s expedition was fully utilized later by the Bolshevik regime. Moreover, if it were not for the outbreak of World War I, this voyage would have received more publicity than it did. (See an account of this expedition in the Geographical Journal, New York, Vol. 54, pp. 367-375, “Vilkitsky North-East Passage, 1914-15.”) i In 1909, from the dockyards of St. Petersburg, two sister ships of ice-cutting type (1500 tons), lhe Taimyr and the Vaigach, were launched. Equipped with radio apparatus, with a transmission of 100-120 miles and carrying coal sufficient for 12,000 miles of navigation, they left the autumn of that year and proceeded to Vladivostok via the Indian Ocean. In 1910, 1911, and 1912, they began their preliminary expeditions into the North Arctic. Already in 1911, for the first time, the steamer Kolyma of Volunteer
Fleet, made a successful commercial voyage from Vladivostok to the Kolyma River and back, thus inaugurating a regular steamship service. The Kolyma was ^commanded by Rear Admiral Peter A. Troyan.
Finally, in 1913, the Taimyr and Vaigach ventured far enough into the Arctic and discovered on September 2, 1913, a low island named “Tsarevich Alexey,” 30 nautical miles off Cape Cheluskin. The next day the expedition made its major discovery—the “Nicholas II Land” (later renamed by the Soviets “Lenin Land” and finally changed to “Northern Land” or “Severnaya Zem- lya”). Both ships arrived in Vladivostok on November 25, 1913, after completing 13,000 miles of navigation.
But it was the fifth and most important expedition which made history. On July 7,
1914, three weeks before Russia entered the war, the two ships, Taimyr and Vaigach under the command of the 29-year old Lieutenant Commander B. A. Vilkitsky, sailed from Vladivostok with the intention of reaching Archangel via the Northeast route. This remarkable feat was accomplished on September 14, 1915, when both ships entered the port of Archangel amidst a great rejoicing of the population. Thus Vilkitsky was the first in history to make the passage from East to West.
For this achievement Vilkitsky was made an aide-de-camp to the Czar, at that time a great reward of the Empire. Personally, I remember only too well when we Midshipmen and Cadets of the Imperial Naval Academy in St. Petersburg in the autumn of
1915, at our traditional school day, November 19, feted Commander Vilkitsky '&C a dinner.
The war and the ensuing Revolution of 1917, brought a halt to further explorations but it fell to the Soviet government to continue the task which Imperial Russia so successfully began.
★