Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1895-03-15
Shifting the Responsibility.

y remarkable sequel to the arraign
m'nt ri AdJutant General o Bricn for
extravaganza in expenditures iUr the
militia service al the state, i the re-
lily q that officer L. Chairman Idle, of
the senate committee which cooked
the r"As, that has proven 80 impal-
atah.e L. the General.
\ virtual admission ui the truth Oh
the committees allegations i, mani
lit in the effort To place the RESPONSE
h.iity upon other shoulders. In fact
the General graciou-lv comedies that
h" recognizes the right OF the com
m!ttce to report upon affairs in his de
pirtmcnt a. it finds them" provided
the committee bases its report upon
personal investigation oi facts, records
and vouchers, and not upon hear>ay
evidence, and a. he ailirm- that the
committee never visited his office to
make -ucn inspection, we, as an inn
partial critic, must score point for
the General.
That Is, however, matter OF indi-
vidual discourteay and does not neces
sarily stamp the committees report as
untrue, especially when the Generals
report furnishes the figures and we'll
known circumstances the data on
which it is based. II the committees
statements are untrue, why not say so,
instead OF making the Executive of the
state the scape-goat, as the General
does when he aflirms that "The law
makes the Governor the Commander
in-Chiaf OF the militia Of the State,
and holds him responsible for all the
! ills that have befallen the Territory
and State from the date OF its birth"
And right here we ask if the General
is not guilty OF insubordination in i'm
peaching the acts of his superior Of
ficer? Is not this the spirit which
impelled the militiamen to criticise
the acts of their superior officers to
the extent of laying down their arms
at the decisive moment OF soldierly
duty?
The General calls attention to the
fact that the Governor had certain du-
ties imposed upon him by law, among
which was the calling of an encamp.
ment annually. the expenses OF which
were, OF course, a charge against the
State, and that in the auditing OF the
expenses incurred the Governor and
State Auditor had as much to say,
and were as responsible for extrava-
CANT allowances, as the Adjutant Cen
eral, who was but a single member OF
the board. That may be true; hut
the General must admit, on reflection,
that there is a vast difference between
the allowance OF claims when incurred
and the management of the details
which augment or keep in check the
expenditures for given service. 1t is
not expected that the Commander-in-
Chief, while discharging the duties of
director OF campaign shall at any
time strike his tent and join the sap.
pers and miners in the trenches, any
more than that the General shall doff
his waving plumes and lay down his
sword to shoulder a musket and as
sumo n place at the post of danger.
All this is managed by different rule,
and whether it is just or not is de-
termired solely by military ethics.
The General says that the law is
responsible for the duty of holding
expensive encampments. 1t is not
denied that these annual conclaves
have produced anything but satisfac.
tory results, and if the responsibility
for their existence rests in the law,
who is responsible for its continuance
on the statute book but the e. o. D.,
which has been in an overwhelming
majority in the Legislature ever since
the militia law was enacted? If it is
not productive OF good results, why
has it not been repealed? If it fails
to establish a reliable soldierly that
can be used whenever necessity re-
quires, why maintain a service that
costs so much more than the liberal
estimates made when the biennial ap
preparation was made for its support?
These are questions which the PEG
pie are asking, and which will some
time have to be answered.