Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-01-13
PRAISED BY CHANDLER.
The Author of enclosure No. 4" Cred
tied with UneqaIed SagacitY.

The Author of enclosure No. 4" Cred
tied with UneqaIed sagacity.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 12.-Gen. Drum
forwarded to-day to Gen. W. B. Hazen,
Chief Signal Officer, a memorandum pre-
pared by the Secretary of War to express
his views with regard to the charges re-
Gently preferred by Gen. Hazen against
Lieut.. Darlington in connection
with the latter's management
of the Greedy relief expedition Of 1888.
There are, Secretary Lincoln says in his
memorandum, two charges against Lieut..
Darlington. First, disobedience OF orders
with five specifications, and second, ne
glect of duty with thirteen specifications,
both being laid under the ed article
of war. The Secretary of War does
not regard Lieut.. GarlingtOn's conduct
as free from criticism and blame. On the
contrary, he thinks that the language of
the PrOteus court of inquiry respecting it
was as mild as the circumstances of the
case would permit, but he is not willing
to proceed further in the matter,
on the basis that Lieut.. Darlington is
solely chargeable with the disaster to
Lieut.. Greely's party. 1t is said by Lieut..
GarlingtOn's friends that the refusal of
the Secretary of War to order the court
martial on the charges preferred by Gen.
Hazen is great disappointment
to Lieut.. Darlington himself, and that by
his counsel and in person he repeatedly
urged the ordering of such a court, and
that he learns with great regret of the
decision of the Secretary of War that the
circumstances do not seem to justify it.
HIGH PRAISE FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL
ORDER.
Some other correspondence upon this
subject has been given to the public TO-
"a T.. IL i -.-IT -
Secretary Chandler to the Secretary of
War with reference to the controversy
between Commander Wildes and Gen.
Hazen concerning the RESPONSE
bility for the failure of the
Greely relief expedition of 1888. 1t con-
tains some interesting observations with
regard to the famous supplemental
order," which, upon the return of Lieut..
Darlington in 1888, it was said at
the Signal Office that officer had
failed to obey, but which the court of
inquiry decided was in fact "nO order at
ALL" In this Secretary Chandler writes:
I'm justice, however, to the author of the
paper, well known and enormously
designated as supplemental Instructions
and enclosure No. A. l desire to state
that he seems to have been the
only person who adequately compre-
hended the true course to be pursued by
JLC lObCu5 anu duOlCs buC bnlpo VI bnC
relief expedition of 1888. He realized
that the mission of the PrOteus was. one
of serious danger, and that the Yantic
was provided as an actual and
not as a nominal means of succOr
IN case of disaster to the advance vessel,
and that she was not, as Lieut.. CARING
ton has said, "sent up simply to satisfy
public opinion, as a good many papers
had advocated sending a vessel.'' The
concluding paragraph of this letter is as
follows:
''The subject Of this memorandum has
been fully discussed in the report of the
army court of inquiry. 1t is now con-
sidered by me for the purpose of placing
on record my high opinion Of the sagacity
of the officer who formulated the plan and
my condemnation of the treatment which
it received from the Chief Signal Officer
and in the navy"
The officer whom Secretary Chandler
thus compliments is Lieut.. Louis v.
Caziarc, of the Second Artillery, at that
time attached to the Signal Office.