Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-11-27
THEY ARE OLD SOLDIERS.
That is What the Attorney General
Says Of the Quartermaster's Volunteers.


The Attorney General has decided that men
who were enlisted in what was known as the
''quartermaster's brigade or "quartermaster' 3
volunteers" during the late war are to be con-
sidered as being in the military service Of the
United States" and .'honorably discharged,
within the intent of rule 10 of the civil service
regulations. This decision is of considerable
importance from the fact that that corps or or
ganization included large number of soldiers
whose position has been rather anomalous, es-
pecialy with reference to the advantages Of
fered by rule 10. The question was whether
or not these men could be called soldiers as
that term is used in the law. The case had its
origin in the request of an officer Of the
army who asked to have his name put in the
Army Register with his highest volunteer rank.
which, IN his case, was that of colonel of a
regiment OF quartermaster' volunteers. This
was denied by the War department. A number
OF conflicting opinions have at various times
been advanced by different officials of the de-
partment regarding the status of these men,
but the general idea has been against granting
that such men should be considered as sol
dlers' in the universal acceptance of the term.
These men were stationed at the general quar-
termasters' depots throughout the country and
performed the duties of clerks, agents. &c. 1t
was understood that they were liable to be
called upon at any time for the more active
military duties of soldier, and there are sew
eral instances where they
TOOK THE FIELD
and did excellent service. In the annual re-
port Of the quartermaster general for 1866 he
says: I'm the last annual report of this office I
had the honor to report the services rendered,
in the field, as soldiers, at Nashville, at Jack
sonville and at Washington city, by the quar-
termaster's volunteers, military organization
under your sanction of the clerks, agents and
operatives of the quartermaster's department
at the principal depots. Two brigades of these
troops, 800 strong were assigned position in
the operations of the 18th and 10th of Deem
Der, 1864, the days of the decisive battle of
Nashville, and 80 conducted themselves as to
merit and receive the approval Of their COM
manders." In 1884, however, the adjutant
general called these volunteers ''9uasi mill
tary organization" and during the present
year the quartermaster general designated
them 40 civil organization" Quartermas-
ter General Meigs, in 1865 spoke Of them as
troops and soldiers" and in 1889 they are,
Dy the same officer, but different man, en-
titled EARNED civilians"
THE CASE IN QUESTION
Thus the authorities disagreed. The case
which was presented to the Attorney General
by Secretary Proctor was that of Samuel
Mcpherson, who lost his position under the
government and desired to take advantage of
the return permitted by rule 10. The Attorney
General said: THE real question, therefore,
to decide Is not necessarily whether McPher-
son was ever regularly enlisted in the army or
was part OF the military establishment of the
United States, but whether he served in the
military service of the United States in the late
war OF the rebellion and was honorably dis
charged therefrom,' quoting from the language
OF the law. In considering this point he refers
N nr6A Of .oln
September, 1862 which directed that all the
clerks and employees on the public buildings in
washington should be organized into COM
panies, under direction of Brig. Gen. Wads-
worth, and armed and supplied with
ammunition for the defense Of the capital. He
says: 1t may be asked in passing what differ
ence it makes on the question of their service
how these men were paid 80 long as it appears
that they were clothed armed equipped and
ratloned from tie army appropriation? What
dinerence does 1t make on the question of
service whether they were mustered in or
mustered out so long as they were ordered
in and ordered out? All that is required in
that regard is that they shall have served The
inquiry, II answered in the negative, brings up
several very embarrassing questions, not simply
TO the men themselves, but to the President and
the Secretary of War, who ordered them to
serve, and to the officers who commanded and
led them in such service. If they were not in
the service then they must be classed among
those described in the celebrated
GENERAL ORDER NO. 100,
who, if captured, are not entitled to the privi-
leges of prisoners of war, but shall be treated
summarily as highway robbers and pirates.'"
The opinion rendered by the Attorney Gen.
eral is full Of strong arguments in favor of con-
sidering these men to be entitled to all the
privileges offered to those who were enlisted in
the regular service of the United States. There
are several cases now on file in the War depart
ment that will be affected by this decision, and
many more will doubtless be presented to the
Secretary as soon as this settlement of the Nc
Pherson case is made known.