ASSIMILATED RANK 
0” THE 
CIVIL BRANCH OF THE NAVY. 
Oi ' £-> »-v .2- r\ 
Within a week, a member of Congress from Ohio-blade some 
remarks on the assimilated rank of medical officers and pursers 
in the Navy, which were reported in the National Intelligencer 
of the 14th. If that report be correct, the gentleman from Ohio 
is in error; and if not corrected, the report is calculated to con- 
vey wrong notions on the subject to the public. The honourable 
member has not studied the subject with his usual care, but has 
probably relied on the erroneous statements of some officers about 
Washington, who are themselves in error on the subject. A few 
plain propositions will render it clear, to all persons who do not 
concur in the sentiment lately uttered by a well-known Cap- 
tain, at a public dinner, that “ principles depend upon circum- 
stances.” 
An army is a body of men armed to defend the country on 
land. 
A navy is a body of men armed to defend the country on the 
sea. 
An army consists of two classes: officers and privates, the 
latter being bound to obey the former. The same is true of a 
navy. The organization and government of both an army and 
a navy cannot be democratic, but are necessarily aristocratic in 
their nature. 
An army is divided into two branches: a military branch and 
civil branch, the latter embracing the several departments on 
which the military branch or “ line of the army” depends for its 
efficiency. These several departments are called staff corps, and 
include the medical department, pay and subsistence departments, 
engineers, &c. &c.; therefore, surgeons, pay-masters, commis- 
saries, engineers of all kinds, are termed staff-officers. 
In the same manner, a navy is necessarily divided into two 
branches: a military branch and a civil branch, which includes 
similar departments to those of an army, but the officers of these 
departments are not called staff-offcers, although they, in fact, 
discharge staff duties. Like an army, a navy has its medical 
department, a pay and subsistence departments, in charge of 2 
pursers, its engineer department—including steam-engineers and 
naval constructors or naval architects—its department of instruc- 
tion, including chaplains, teachers, &c. 
All persons pertaining to a military body, no matter whether 
of an army or navy, live under martial laws, and are required to 
conform socially to the conventional customs of a military com- 
munity, even to the costume in which they may appear. Even 
personal association is in a degree regulated by the usages and 
published laws or regulations which always prevail in a mili- 
tary organization. What is simply conventional in civil life, is, 
in military organizations, reduced to laws or regulations, the in- 
fraction of which incurs certain penalties. In civil life, a gen- 
tleman might, if so disposed, go to an evening party among 
ladies in a round jacket, or without a jacket, without subjecting 
himself to a legal trial before a court, though he might be put in 
Coventry; but a member of a military society could not appear 
on parade, or on the quarter-deck, without his proper uniform 
dress, which is made distinctive of position, standing, or respect- 
ability, among his military associates, and escape trial by court- 
martial, under charges of disobedience of orders, insubordination, 
disrespect to his superior officers, and conduct unbecoming an 
officer. The conventional laws of civil life, or fashion, determine 
what, in costume, are the badges which distinguish a gentleman; 
but in military communities, these badges are determined, on cer- 
tain principles, and prescribed by regulations or general orders. 
In all Christian armies, and in the navies of Great Britain and 
the United States, epaulets of some kind are the prescribed badge 
of officers holding commissions, without regard to the nature of 
the duties pertaining to these commissions. To these badges, or 
labels, respect is paid in a prescribed form, according to the im- 
portance of the commission held by the officer. Fashion, or the 
conventional usages of society, have made coat-tails answer the 
place of epaulets, among military men, to distinguish persons 
who are entitled to the forms of respect and consideration which 
are commonly accorded to gentlemen—that is, to honest, honour- 
able, and intelligent men, refined by education, without regard to 
their vocation. 
The uniform is the badge of rank, or the position of the officer 
as to power or authority, and respectability, relatively to others 
of the military community. Each individual of a military body 
has, or should have, a position—that is, a rank of some kind, rela- 
tively to every other individual of the same body; he must be 
superior or inferior, in some degree; he cannot be on the same 
absolute level, under the same circumstances, with any other in- 
dividual of the body. If he be a captain, although on a level of 
all of his grade socially, he must be either inferior or superior to 
other captains, as to his authority or right to command under 3 
particular circumstances, according to the date, or number of his 
commission. The same is true of other grades. It is for this 
reason that officers are so jealous of rank—that is, of lineal rank, 
which confers authority or right to command, but not to treat 
any with disrespect. 
All writers on military organization and law, lay it down as a 
principle, that the relative position, rights, and privileges of every 
member of a military community should be clearly defined. On 
this principle, staff-officers are clothed with “ assimilated rank,” 
or rank relatively to lineal rank, or rank in the line. Assimi- 
lated rank confers no authority to command, or right to exact 
obedience, except from those of the same staff-department; a 
surgeon of our army, for example, has the assimilated rank of a 
major in the line, and wmars epaulets similar in type, but not in 
detail, to those of a major, but he cannot, in virtue of his assimi- 
lated rank, command junior majors, captains, or lieutenants of 
the line: his assimilated rank, however, gives him the right to 
exact obedience from junior surgeons, assistant-surgeons, and all 
subordinate medical attendants placed under his command, by 
the Executive, or chief authority controlling for the lime. His 
assimilated rank as major simply entitles him, in the military 
body, to the social position or level of majors of the line; he re- 
ceives the military salutes and courtesies prescribed for a major; 
in all military formalities, ceremonies, processions, &c., he takes 
his place as a major, without cavil or dispute; and in the lan- 
guage of the member from Ohio, “ whatever moralists or senti- 
mental people may talk or write, about the weakness of being 
tickled with so empty a distinction, yet it is well known to every 
man versed in the feelings of human nature, as it is actually found 
in every military and naval service under heaven, these honours 
are dear to the human heart.” 
It is not possible for any man to become so familiar with the 
personal appearance of every officer of an army or a navy as to 
be able to recognise them. For this reason, it is necessary that 
certain badges, military hieroglyphics, should be used to mark 
the officers, and distinguish them from each other and from pri- 
vates, and that all of a military community should understand 
their import. Officers of a military branch will perceive the ne- 
cessity of wearing a uniform dress: it is hoped no one will con- 
tend that officers of the civil branch of a military body should 
not be distinguished or marked in a like manner; or question 
the authority of the Secretary of the Navy in giving an order to 
regulate this uniform. Surgeons have always worn navy but- 
tons, cocked-hats, and swords similar to those of other commis- 
sioned officers; these military badges do not strike military men 
as being inconsistent with the vocation of the naval or army 
surgeon, and their novelty alone, causes epaulets to appear incon- 4 
gruous and offensive. Since they were placed on the shoulders 
of officers of the civil branch of the navy, some of their military 
associates petitioned the Secretary to excuse them from wearing 
this universal badge of the commissioned officer, but having 
failed to assign any conclusive reasons why the request should 
be granted, it was refused. If further proof were required on 
the point, the simple fact, that the laws recognise the right of 
civil officers of the navy to share prize-money, shows they are 
regarded as discharging military services, although they may 
not “point the guns;” and as officers of the civil branch, sur- 
geons, pursers, paymasters, &c., when they die in actual ser- 
vice, are buried with the military ceremonies, called “ the 
honours of war,” it is pretty strong evidence that the military 
officers do not regard them as “ mere civilians,” but as offi- 
cers of the military establishment, in every sense of the term. 
Custom has taught all persons serving in an army or a navy to 
recognise the position or standing of officers by reading the signs 
or badges worn on his person. Respect is paid to the coat, not 
to the man who wears it; in a military community, a man in the 
garb of a citizen, and not personally known, receives no con- 
sideration whatever: even members of Congress, visiting a ship- 
of-war, would be treated as “ mere civilians,” unless they were 
personally recognised by some of the officers. 
What is said above of the effects of the assimilated rank of an 
army surgeon, is true of the assimilated rank assigned to pay- 
masters and other officers of the civil branch of an army. 
In the navy of Great Britain the rank, lineal and assimilated, 
of every individual, from the side-boy to the admiral, is clearly 
defined, and set forth in the Queen’s Regulations. The same is 
true of the armies of England. 
The organization of the navy of the United States has always 
been defective, because no assimilated rank had been defined or 
prescribed for any members of its civil branch, until Mr. Ban- 
croft issued the General Order, which seems to offend the mem- 
ber from Ohio. For want of this General Order, or the assign- 
ment of an assimilated rank, many difficulties have occurred, and 
much heart-burning has been suffered, even by chaplains and 
teachers—to whom a proper assimilated rank and uniform should 
be assigned. For want of regulation on this subject, several 
highly esteemed medical officers resigned in the course of two 
years; as many as eight or nine left the service because they 
conceived themselves not to be treated with due respect in the 
naval community. 
The member from Ohio stated that the General Order in ques- 
tion, gave rank from that of lieutenant to commander, and placed 
medical officers and pursers in the line of promotion. The 
members of the naval committee will have no difficulty in dis- 5 
covering this statement to be erroneous. Assimilated rank can 
never give promotion in the line. 
The member from Ohio questions the authority of the Secretary 
of the Navy, to give assimilated rank to the officers of the civil 
branch of the service. Does he also question, in behalf of the 
military officers of the navy, the right of the Secretary of the 
Navy or of the President, to give to lieutenants, commanders, 
and captains of the navy, assimilated rank with captains, majors, 
colonels, and brigadier-generals of the army? If the authority 
of the President be good in one case, is it not equally good in the 
other? Have the military officers of the navy no regard for 
their assimilated rank with the lineal rank of the army? Let an 
answer be gathered from the recent events in California. 
The member from Ohio complains of elevating civil officers— 
nay, he denies there are any officers but those “ who point the 
guns,” and talks of “ elevating mere civilians” to a level with 
officers of the navy! He thus virtually admits that the civil offi- 
cers employed in the navy are necessarily and unquestionably 
regarded as the inferiors of the naval aristocracy. Can any de- 
gree of assimilated rank really elevate the medical gentlemen of 
the navy in civil life, or are we to take any degree of lineal rank 
in the navy as the criterion, standard or level of social elevation 
by which civilians are to be measured? The member from Ohio 
indulges in hyperbole when he attempts to make us regard the 
official position of any grade in the navy or army, as the goal 
or level to which we should all aspire, in order to be respectable. 
The gentleman asks, “ Who works the ship?” Certainly not 
the surgeons or pursers. When epidemics, plague or fever pre- 
vails on board, who works the ship then, or who works in the 
ship? When the enemies’ shot have laid these military men of 
the sea on the couch of pain, of suffering and of danger, who 
works in the ship then ? The “ mere civilians” then, may have 
any rank or pay their present opponents could give ? 
The opposition to assimilated rank springs exclusively from 
not clearly understanding its object and purpose; a little calm 
reflection would concede that the officers of the civil branch do 
not, cannot seek to command beyond their own sphere, or in- 
terfere in any manner with the real interests of the navy, or of 
its officers. Officers of both branches have or should*have a 
common motive in preserving the harmony, subordination, dis- 
cipline, and efficiency of the whole service, and where there are 
differences of opinion as to measures, throw aside personal sel- 
fishness, and sacrifice something of ego to the common good. 
That every individual of a military community should have 
his position and relations to others clearly defined, cannot be rea- 
sonably denied. All officers of the civil branch of the navy with- 
out exception, should have an assimilated rank; the lineal rank 6 
of the officers of the military branch establishes their relative po- 
sition with each other. 
The admission or denial of assimilated rank to medical or other 
officers of the navy, must be decided on the justice of the princi- 
ples laid down. No military officer, or class of officers, should 
be so meritorious, in the eyes of the people, as to authorize them 
to practise injustice towards their fellow-labourers in the civil 
branch. The habit of “ pointing the guns” on deck, or “ work- 
ing ship,” in the most skilful manner, requires no extraordinary 
eflbrt of the human mind; and the personal exposure is not greater 
in officers of the quarter deck, than in the seamen on the fore- 
castle or at “ the side and train tackles;” the profession of mili- 
tary seamen should not be so exaggerated before the people, that 
legislators may be induced to confer on them exclusive privileges, 
and encourage unjust or unbecoming behaviour towards “ mere 
civilians.” 
What, after all, is this “ labour of working ship,” upon which 
so much stress is seemingly laid? Gentlemen should not forget 
there are other ships besides our vessels of wrar, and that the 
mates of our packets and merchantmen, keep watch night and 
day, and work ship most admirably, without being aware that they 
achieve anything worthy of special admiration. The mate of a 
merchantman of a thousand tons keeps at least every third watch 
at sea, and every “day’s duty” in port, which is rather more labo- 
rious than keeping a four hours’ watch in regular turn with five 
or six, as naval lieutenants are often able to do, in the larger 
vessels. It sometimes happens too, that lieutenants are enabled 
to put in practice the axiom, qui facit per ahum, facit per se, and 
confide the “ working ship” to some one of the passed-midship- 
men of the watch, while he lounges under the forecastle. The 
exercise of the ship’s artillery and “ pointing the guns ” are la- 
borious duties for the time; but the labour, bodily and mental, 
will contrast unfavourably with the labour which falls to gentle- 
men engaged in other pursuits. The duties of lieutenants are fatigu- 
ing, often laborious, sometimes harassing and hazardous, but they 
are not so transcendentally oppressive as to entitle them to ex- 
clusive consideration and distinction. Nevertheless, they should 
have, in full, all their rights carefully secured, but not to the ex- 
clusion of others. These remarks are made with a hearty ap- 
preciation of the duties of lieutenants, and are provoked only by 
a desire to correct the impression probably conveyed to Congress 
by the gentleman from Ohio, while any intention to detract or 
injure is honestly disclaimed. 
It was stated that the surgeon can leave the ship without ask- 
ing. No officer of any grade ever leaves a well-disciplined ship 
to visit the shore without first asking permission; and it is well 
known that duty is so arranged in port, as to afford lieutenants 7 
an equal opportunity with others to be temporarily absent from 
duty. But even if they were closely confined by duty, as all of- 
ficers are sometimes, it does not constitute a reason for denying 
to medical officers the assimilated rank which has been given. 
A false issue and false arguments have been attempted before 
Congress on this question. It has been contended, virtually, that 
because A has certain rights, neither B nor C can have any,— 
that A is an officer par excellence, never having been, what B 
and C should ever remain, a “ mere civilian,” and therefore it is 
presumptuous in B and C to suppose themselves worthy of any 
consideration. B and C are given high pay by Congress, that 
they may tolerate in A the exercise of exclusive aristocratic 
distinctions ? 
But the nature of the service, or its duration cannot be regarded 
as arguments against the just rights of any class of men. It does 
not follow that because A serves as a lieutenant forty years, that 
B is not entitled to the assimilated rank of commander. 
The question of assimilated rank cannot be properly decided 
on the professional, intellectual, or moral qualifications of officers 
of either the military or civil branch of the naval service. On 
this point, a comparison is neither necessary nor useful. Nor is 
period of service an element of argument, since time alone can- 
not change or affect the lineal rank or position of any man in 
service. It would be absurd to ask, How long must a boatswain, 
lieutenant of marines, purser or surgeon serve, to become a cap- 
tain in the navy ? Nor does it necessarily follow as a conse- 
quence, that, because some lieutenants have been twenty years 
in the navy, man and boy, before reaching the grade of com- 
mander, the assimilated rank of commander cannot be given to 
any one who has not been commissioned twenty years. It will 
not be seriously urged that an assistant-surgeon or a purser, on 
being first appointed, ought not to be admitted a member of the 
ward-room mess, because lieutenants serve ten years as midship- 
men before becoming ward-room officers; or on the ground, that 
medical officers and pursers are “ mere civilians.” 
The necessity of the staff or civil branches of the naval ser- 
vice to its efficiency, is admitted. No commander willingly goes 
to sea without surgeon and purser, no matter how small the ves- 
sel may be. On the representations of commanders on whom 
the duties of purser have been recently imposed, in small vessels, 
the Secretary of the Navy has suggested that Congress create 
the grade of assistant-pursers; all grades will be pleased to see 
this suggestion carried into practice, for it is not just to require 
men to be responsible in a vocation in which they have not been 
educated. But every man should be duly respected, and pro- 
tected in his rights and privileges, both socially and officially, in 
every military community, and not left to depend on the cour- 8 
tesies which his personal, moral, or religious character may or 
may not win from his associates. Dependence of this kind is 
always offensive to men of proper pride. 
It is believed there is no just reason why medical officers 
should not have assigned to them the same degree of assimilated 
rank in the navy as medical officers of our army, relatively to 
officers of the line of the army. No degree of assimilated rank 
can, in any manner whatever, interfere with the just power, 
authority, privileges or position of officers who possess lineal 
rank; nor can assimilated rank conflict with lineal rank in pro- 
motion. Then why do military officers of the navy so warmly 
oppose the “ General Orders” of the Secretary of the Navy ? 
Why should they expose themselves to being suspected of insub- 
ordination by appealing to Congress, so long as the Executive is 
open to hear their reasons, and give them a just appreciation ? 
The observance of a Christian principle in the examination of 
this question, would soon reconcile all difficulties and differences: 
it is therefore recommended to all,—Do unto others as ye would 
others shall do unto you. 
The medical officers and pursers are content with the assimi- 
lated rank conferred by the Secretary; but if Congress change it 
at all, they ask to be placed on a level with corresponding 
grades of our own army, and to reckon their pay from the date 
of original entry into the navy, in accordance with the English 
plan of counting the service of medical officers. The medical 
officers ask this modification, under an honest conviction that 
granting their request can in no manner or degree lessen the 
efficiency of the naval service, or interfere with the just rights 
of others. 
, Chloroform. 
January 17,1848.