It is hardly to be doubted that, in matters connected with the
general welfare of the Navy, government has paid rather too much
deference to the opinions of the officers of the Navy, considering
them as men almost born to the service, and therefore far better
qualified to judge concerning any and all questions touching it
than people on shore. But in a nation under a liberal Constitution,
it must ever be unwise to make too distinct and peculiar the
profession of either branch of its military men. True, in a
country like ours, nothing is at present to be apprehended of
their gaining political rule; but not a little is to be
apprehended concerning their perpetuating or creating abuses
among their subordinates, unless civilians have full cognisance
of their administrative affairs, and account themselves competent
to the complete overlooking and ordering them.

We do wrong when we in any way contribute to the prevailing
mystification that has been thrown about the internal affairs of
the national sea-service. Hitherto those affairs have been
regarded even by some high state functionaries as things beyond
their insight--altogether too technical and mysterious to be
fully comprehended by landsmen. And this it is that has
perpetuated in the Navy many evils that otherwise would have been
abolished in the general amelioration of other things. The army
is sometimes remodelled, but the Navy goes down from generation
to generation almost untouched and unquestioned, as if its code
were infallible, and itself a piece of perfection that no
statesman could improve. When a Secretary of the Navy ventures to
innovate upon its established customs, you hear some of the Navy
officers say, "What does this landsman know about our affairs?