Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-09-04
zanrdster fntRlliQetlre.


MONDAY EvENnSo. SEPT. 4. loe2.
A Qaestiea Of DlRerence.
There is an army regulation, establish
ed q couple of years ago, which forbids
officers to use political influenc. to Sc
cure q change of their orders. 1t ap-
pears TO be very good order, and if it
was universally carried out in its spirit
it doubtless would be a very good one.
But it does not seem to be 50 universally
carried out and it does not seem that it
can be; 80 that it is not very good or
der despite its good appearance.
Major Taylor, stationed at Newport
barracks, Kentucky, has found it to
bring him trial by court martial and a
reprimand from the general in chief.
Major Taylor made no defence to the
charge against him, appearing to have
come to the conclusion that it.wOuld be
inexpedient to excuse himself by show
ing that there were plenty of others
equally guilty who had not been
hauled over the Goals for their Of
fences. Whilethis case of Maj. Taylor
is before the public, their attention is
also drawn to that of Gen. Sturgis, who
was not long ago made superintende mt
of the Soldiers Home at Washington,
expecting the usual four years term,
but was lately relieved and ordered to
his regiment in the North West by the
secretary Of war. The cases of Major
Taylor and Gen. S.urgis do not seem to
be dissimilar 50 far; and they were
alike still further for General
Sturgis also employed political influence
to retain his place. But the similarity
is not further continued since General
Sturgis was not only not cOurtmartialed
for the interference of Senator Conger-
we believe it was-in his behalf, but he
has secured the substantial advantage of
retaining his pleasant post. The sec
retary Of war has revoked the order send
ing him into exile.
Why this difference of treatment has
occurred is not explained. Sturgis had a
Republican senator to interfere in his be
half and Tcylor had only two or
three Democratic congressman but
here the difference is in Taylor's favor
because it is not clear how Democratic
congressman could exercise political in
fuence over a Republican secretary !;
while it is quite plain how Republican
senator's influence would be political.
In fact, the result demonstrated that the
Democratic congressman had no politi-
cal or any other effective sort of influ-
ence over the secretary of war, but that
the Republican senator was potential.
1t can hardly he questioned that Gen.
Sturgis violated the army regulation if
Major Taylor did and we should very
much like to know why fish is made O!
one and flesh of the other. It seems
rather bold at a time when the cases of
both officers are up for public considera.
tioE. An officer must obey his order,
slys General Sherman, and if he thinks
wrong is done him he can appeal through
intermediate commanders up to the very
highest-the president. ITO seek out.
side Influence or to accept outside influ
ence is destructive of good discipline
be declares. That is very fine talk in
deed, but it don't butter the parsnips
When Major Taylor had gone away will
his family and household goods into the
wilderness he would have happy time
in conducting his appeal to the presi
dent and a slow time getting back te
Newport, to say nothing of the cost OF
the double expedition if he had
been successful in his appeals. His
way, and General Sturgis' way OF
getting somebody to help them before
they were shipped away recommends
itself by its many advantages. And W.
would very much like to know wlla!
power exists in commander-in
chief o. = secretary of war to forbid
citizen to appear before him to secure
change of an officers orders, or t.
punish the officer for such interference
of friend in his behalf; especially
when his advocate is his representative
in Congress. We greatly fear that thi:
military regulation is very silly in il:
essence as well as its practice. A secre
tary of war ought not to confess tia,
any illegitimate influence can affect hi:
discharge of his duty, and he should moi
shun any legitimate influencs.