Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-09-06
tines was enormously deduced and Is nc
longer entertained.
BUTLER ACTED HASTILY

strlcted as the court IL. to the consde-
ration OF the conduct OF men belonging
to the Third Virginia Volunteers, az
charged in General orders No. IS. Head
quarters OF the First Division, Second
Army Corps, on the night Of August Sth
only, and had he possessed his present
knowledge of the behavior that night OF
all the officers Of this regiment, who were
shown 10 be cognizant Of the trouble. he
could not with his high sense Of right
ana justice. have issued the order at all.
The court does not consider itself au-
thorized to make any suggestions as to
further action in the matter"
REVIEW OF PROCEEDINGS.
The following review OF the proceed
ings is also published:
Headquarters Second Army Corps.
Camp George G. Meade, Pa, August 81,
ls9s.-rhe foregoing proceedings are APP
proved, subject TO. and so far as they
do not conflict with the following re-
marks: 1t appears from the evidence that
a large number of the Third Virginia
Regiment were engaged in a disorder in
which the life of a man was threatened;
that the disorder at its inception, though
the crowd afterward dispersed without
forcible means being used amounted to
so much that a staff officer Of General
Buffers, who witnessed It. telephoned TO
the adjutant-general of the division that
a regiment would be needed to quell Il,
and this witness says so many were en-
gagged in IL that he asked for "a large
armed party to quell a mutiny.' General
Butler received this message, rode per-
sonally to the scene, and saw seventy
five or one hundred men around the
Young Mems Christian Association tent
and in rear. shouting and going on in a
disorderly way, and ordered them to their
quarters, they obeyng reluctantly, and
their manner appearing very disrespect-
fuL They replied disrespectfully to mis-
STAFF officer Captain Brooks. who ordered
the yelling stopped. Later men stopped
on their way returning from the bushes,
apparently from pursuit of the coored
mum 9"iN III reply 10 OtieTdl But
Ter statement that ne would see that
they got to camp and were kept in order;
that there were some four or five hundred
of US to keep in order Upon the infor-
and upon his own personal observation,
General Butler acted. and issued the or
Ger in question
QUESTION OF DISORDER.
"There is evident conflict in the evidence
on the point of disorder at the time Gene
raj Butler testifcs that he witnessed it,
1t is negatiyed by a large number Of wit
nesses, who state that they did not hear
it and would have heard it if it had exist
ed and, therefore, il appears not TO have
been general; but the Generals own expe-
rience with individuals is not to be denied
and upon that, in part, his action was
based.
There is nothing in the evidence to
show that the ringleaders or men guilty
Of starting this disorder were identified
or apprehended.
upon a commanding officer, and whilst
General Butler might have ordered an in
vestigation before issuing the order in
question, yet he acted largely upon his
own personal observation, and his own
judgment therefrom, as to what was ne
cessary to enforce discipline
ORDER WAS SEVERE.
whilst the order may be severe, and
was So upon all those Of the regiment
not engaged in this affair, yet military
orders often place restrictions and innct
upon unoffending and innocent
men. because of the necessity Of correct
ing the failure or neglect of others to con-
form TO the required discipline. Orders
are often issued affecting the good soldier
because of the acts of the
bad one, and it apparently seemed 10 Gen
cral Butler. I'm this case, that lesson to
the whole command was necessary, the
secured and identified. The fact :hat
large majority of the regi- |
ment-had no part in the transaction
!d not lessen the bad reflection
which the actions Of those engaged made
upon the discipline of the entire regi-
nent. Those men constituted the weak
,oint Of the chain on this question. 1T
s frequently the case that the reputa-
ion of an entire command is injured by
he acts OF a few individuals belonging
o it, as seems 20 be the case here.
The severe action of the general COM
handing at the time would seem justified |
rom his standpoint of the insubordina- !
ion apparently existing. This was due |
o the acts of a large minority of the |
but there being no possibility |
f distinction Of persons, the whole regl-
nent necessarily suffered.
WHOLE SUFFERED FOR \ FEW.
THAT portion of the order relating to |
he discharge of men referred solely to |
he dsorderly persons who were a dis
race to the regiment and their State;
whose acts tended TO injure the character
nd reputation of both. The acts Gene
,ere not by detached body Of men,
ut were committed in the immediate
resence of the camp of the entire regi-
lent, which became. thereby affected.
nd the whole organization thereby be-
anne responsible for the acts OF its IN
ividual MEMBERSHIP whole for its COM
onent parts. which could not be sepa-
lted.
also, we cannot tell, nor can General
utler himself perhaps. all that in
h..