The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

MARINE REVIEW. Cn Engineer Corps of the Army. EDITOR MARINE REVIEW:--I have read with interest the aritcle en- titled "Worthless Government Engineering,"* to which you invite my at- tention, and while your journal is not perhaps precisely the medium for the full and professional refutation of which the subject admits, nor the present writer an adequate exponent ofthe corps to which he has the honor to belong, it is recognized that your constituency has a legitimate interest in the matter and is entitled to au opportunity to form a judgment thereon. A few words of comment may therefore be considered as not out of place. The engineer corps of the army is charged by Congress, under the direction of the secretary of war, with the designing and construction of works for the improvement of rivers and harbors, in pursuance of appro- priations specifically made to that end. The article accuses the corps, as an organization, of incompetence and inadequate professional methods in respect of these works, and the statements made or intimated, are such that, if capable of verification, a change of administrative control and su- pervision would obviously be desirable What, then, is this body of public servants against whom such accusa- tion is made, and upon what basis does the charge of incompetence seem to rest? The corps of engineers is recruited from among those members of each class at West Point whoare graduated at or near the top; such -numbers--one or more--being taken as are needful to fill vacancies as they arise. The military academy is thoroughly democratic, bothin theory and practice, its crude material being drawn from all classes of society, and the standing of each cadet being impartially determined by his in- dividual capacity and merit without reference to outside influence or associations. While participating fully in the training, mental and physi- cal, of the corps of cadets generally, the leading section in each class is given a wider scope of instruction and study in certain branches, such as engineering, natural philosophy, etc, to qualify them for the technical work which later may be entrusted to them. In thecourse of its existence, West Point has taken high rank the world over as an educational institu- tion, particularly in the higher mathematical and cognate branches. And in addition to the knowledge imparted, a strong and enduring sense of personal integrity and honor constitutes the very foundation of the moral training of the school. As already stated, the members of each class standing at or near the head are drafted into the engineer corps, and sub- sequent to graduation, have a further course of professional instruction and practice at Willetts Point, after which they are assigned as assistants to older engineer officers in adtual charge of work. The dnties and activi- ties of the corps are varied, covering, in addition to river and harbor work, the subjects of fortifications, of surveys, and of light-house construction, and its record for eighty years has been that, expending some two hundred millions of government fun s, the United States has yet to lose the first dollar from the malfeasance of any engineer officer. So far certainly, so good. It is evident that method of selection is precisely such as to promise the best results, both intellectually and morally, and something at least very much like it would be adopted anew if the organizing of a competent and reliable body of men were under consideration. Mr. Wisner under- takes to show in effect that this method is a total failure, while omitting to formulate a better one, and seeks to substantiate his position by asser- tions, or rather intimations, some of which are manifestly inconsistent and others quite groundless. It is stated, for example, that the officers of the corps admit that the works in their charge are ,in the majority of cases, failures. If this were true, no other evidence would be needed; but such an admission would be as untrue asitis preposterous. Members of Con- gress generally are represented as not hesitating to express their want of confidence in the corps and disapproval of their methods, although year after year Congress goes on giving most conclusive proof of such con- fidence by making appropriations for more work. The explanation of this singular action on the part of Congress is that their constituents ex- pect them to get appropriations, and thiscan only be done by "support- ing the river and harbor bills as prepared by the engineer department." It may surprise the reader to learn that the engineer department submits only reports and estimates for such works as Congress has already ordered, and that the appropriation bills are prepared by the committee of Congress, and discussed, item by item, in open session. Itis stated that "nearly all reputable journals admit the advisability of reorganizing the corps, while finding it to their interest to say but little on the subject,"-- an as- sertion likely to make the journals in question somewhat restive if it were true. Again, Mr. Wisner hints that the "managers of some technical journals do not give the matter the support they should for fear of losing their columns of profitable government advertising." Were this true, the influence of such journals so controlled would be nil in any case. The Engineer Officers are represented asa body of "disbursing clerks" engrossed in examining accounts and vouchers and signing checks, while they depend upon their civil assistants for all professional knowledge; and upon contractors for the execution of work. Were these assertions true, they would tend to transfer the responsbility for the general "failure" of the work in question from the enginee: officer to his assistants, which was not what the author intended. The "red tape system" is condemned as requiring an antecedent authority for expenditures, which fer se would seem to be a proper enough rule; but a specific incident proves the contrary. Some government plant in the Saginaw river caught fire, but payment to a private tug for putting it out was disallowed by "the department" because authority had not been ob- tained in advance. It is an example of the looseness of the statements made that the facts are, that the engineer department approved the pay- ment as a matter of course, and it was some clerk in one of the accounting offices of the treasury who offered the objection; possibly the same clerk that disallowed a purchase of postage stamps because advertisement for them had not been made as required by law. But leaving these points, which it must be admitted betray looseness of assertion andarather low plane of observation for matters of such seriousness, take a broader view: Engineering, while certainly a learned profession and one upon which the world has come to rely for its great physical achievements, has not yet reached the point of exact science or infallibility, nor will this be the case until the powers and forces of nature with which the engineer works and against which he has to contend, are thoroughly known and mastered. Great enterprises and great construc- tions will for long generations yet, carry with them great contingencies. With all the professional skill and knowledge possible, with all the ex- tremest care and fore-thougnt, disasters and failures will occur. The Forth bridge, a magnificient iron structure costing millions, blew over with atrain passing onit. The Severn tunnel ruined the contractors who undertook it. The Panama canal wrecked its projectors and sub- scribers. The East river tunnel drowned its workmen. Of partial failures, too, illustrations are numerous, and repeated modifications of plans and estimates have had to be made. The Mississippi jetties are an example of this--where the broad channel of 30 feet depth to be maintained by the jetties alone, had to be reduced in width, then depth, then aided by wing- danis and other adjuncts, and finally kept open by dredging. Scarcely asolidary great or monumental work in the world has been completed within the original estimates which the most skillful engineers, with allowance for every contingency that could be anticipated, were able to make ; and especially must this be the case where the question is one of canflict with the enormous and subtle forces, whose action evades direct observation, exerted by great bodies of water in motion. The record of the corps of engineers in these respects may be com- pared with that of any other. None of the great undertakings entrusted to them has yet been shown as an actual or probable failure, and against the possibility of such in a few instances, must be set the hundreds and even thousands of cases where success has been complete and satisfactory. 'Mr. Wisner's own experience has been mainly that of a surveyor, not a constructing engineer; nor is any work that he has carried to a success- ful conclusion recalled to mind. He stigmatises the contract for the Diamond shoal reef light-house in the ocean, off Cape Hatteras, which imposed all risk and responsibility upon the contractors, as "an unparall- elled example of professional cowardice," omitting to state that the con- tract was strictly in pursuance of an original voluntary proposition from ° General Sooy-Smith, who required that he shall be unhampered by speci- fications and be left free to make and execute his own plans. At the same time Mr.Wisner condemns the engineer corps for undertaking to do work themselves aud blames them for not accepting propositions from con- tractors to relieve them of work and responsibility. Such sudden changes of attidude and logic make it difficult to follow the argument. A single point in the paper has some basis of validity. The coherence and unity of an organization no doubt tend to the partial suppression of individual enterprise, but as an offset to this come the security and solidarity which accumulate,retain,and impart to its juniors, profound traditions of fidelity, industry, conscientiousness, professional accomplishment, and a lofty standard of personal and collective integrity that have made for the engineer corps of the army a record unexcelled among the professional men of the world and in the history of the service of a nation. Such is the record in time of peace, what is it in time of war? History records that a greater proportion of engineer officers were killed and wounded, 1861-1864, than of any other body of men in the service, and at the close of the war the majority of the corps commanders were officers of the corps. A final note and the matter may be left. Mr. Wisner objects that engineer officers concerted with special works, do not hesitate to appear before committees of Congress and state the facts con- cerning them. It may be mentioned in defence of this re- prehensible practice, that engineers make appearance of this kind when instructed to do so,and not otherwise; and in any case it cannot be regarded as other than in accordance with the duties of an officer. Nor will the public be distressed to learn that he should feel personal interest in the work entrusted to him, and co-operate in the fullest measure with the legitimate requirements of the general commercial interests, for the furtherance of which the river and harbor appropriations are designed. WILLIAM LUDLOW, wise Major, Corps of Engineers, Bvt. Lieut.-Col., U.S.A. Detroit Mich., Jan. 12, 1892. : | #Jn January number of the Engineering Magazine, New York,