With the present prospects of this long-awaited reform encouraging us, it would be singularly unfortunate if this monetary question should by any chance become a party issue.  And I sincerely hope it will not.  The exceeding amount of consideration it has received from the people of the Nation has been wholly nonpartisan; and the Congress set its nonpartisan seal upon it when the Monetary Commission was appointed.  In commending the question to the favorable consideration of Congress, I speak for, and in the spirit of, the great number of my fellow citizens who without any thought of party or partisanship feel with remarkable earnestness that this reform is necessary to the interests of all the people.

The war department.

There is now before Congress a Dill, the purpose of which is to increase the efficiency and decrease the expense of the Army.  It contains four principal features:  First, a consolidation of the General Staff with the Adjutant General’s and the Inspector General’s Departments; second, a consolidation of the Quartermaster’s Department with the Subsistence and the Pay Departments; third, the creation of an Army Service Corps; and fourth, an extension of the enlistment period from three to five years.

With the establishment of an Army Service Corps, as proposed in the bill, I am thoroughly in accord and am convinced that the establishment of such a corps will result in a material economy and a very great increase of efficiency in the Army.  It has repeatedly been recommended by me and my predecessors.  I also believe that a consolidation of the Staff Corps can be made with a resulting increase in efficiency and economy, but not along the lines provided in the bill under consideration.

I am opposed to any plan the result of which would be to break up or interfere with the essential principles of the detail system in the Staff Corps established by the act of February 2, 1901, and I am opposed to any plan the result of which would be to give to the officer selected as Chief of Staff or to any other member of the General Staff Corps greater permanency of office than he now has.  Under the existing law neither the Chief. of Staff nor any other member of the General Staff Corps can remain in office for a period of more than four years, and there must be an interval of two years between successive tours of duty.

The bill referred to provides that certain persons shall become permanent members of the General Staff Corps, and that certain others are subject to re-detail without an interval of two years.  Such provision is fraught with danger to the welfare of the Army, and would practically nullify the main purpose of the law creating the [missing text].