The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-05-01
REVIEW OF THE FINDINGS.

The war department seems to have
fortified itself pretty well. 1t has es-
capped censure the second time, al
though its exposure has been COM
plete in both Investigations. The pub
lie is convinced, whether the commits
sioners We're or not, and the fact that
all the prosecuting witnesses have been
singled out for censure, shows that
men incur a certain risk when they
refuse to be made the victims of ras-
cally contractors and stupid or calcu-
lating government officials.
If ever a case was thoroughly estab-
lished, the one against the commissary
department has been. If ever charges
were completely proved those made by
General Miles have been. If ever SOL
diers fighting for their country were
mistreated and neglected the American
soldiers were in this war with Spain.
There is no richer country, no gov
eminent better able to take care of its
defenders; there are no Drawer soldiers,
none who responded more cheerfully or
stood their ground more stubbornly.
And yet they were allowed to perish
by the hundreds for want of proper
food. proper nourishment, and proper
attention. They were the victims of
the mercenary spirit which has taken
possession of the administration; vic
tins of political methods in the con-
duct of the army; victims of general
incompetency and indifference which
are known as AlgeriSm.
Let US see whether or not the case
has been made out What did the pres
ident require of the Wade court of in
quiry? In his written instructions he
asked the court to ascertain:
l. The character and quality of the
meat refrigerated and canned, furnished
shipped TO the soldiers; if good when
shipped; what the cause of its deteriora-
,. If the meat was doctored. did the
commissary general or any of his officers
have any knowledge of it or means of
knowledge?
8. Was it the meat of commerce?
4. Was il inspected by the government
inspectors as provided by law?
). Was it an authorized ration in the
army?
s If good when purchased, what made
J. Was it anybodys neglect or fault,
and, if so, whose?
s When unfit for use if you should so
find. was the fact made known to the war
When and by whom?
9 If after leaving the depot commits
sarv, Il was not cared for and properly
preserved whose fault?
10. Was it a suitable ration for the cam
pagns in Cuba and Porto Rico?
II. Was there anything better that was
practicable?
The testimony showed that the meat, /,
and bread too, for that matter, was of
an inferior quality; that it had been
purchased under Eagan's directions: |
that Eagan was acting under Ayers |
instructions, and that Alger and Nc |
Kinley were in constant consultation. |
The evidence showed that the meat |
was doctored; the man who treated it |
with chemicals testified that he had |
done so under contract from Armour;
chemists found the embalming fluid |
in the so-called refrigerator beef; ply
sicians testified to its injurious effect |
upon the men; survivors told how it |
had made them sick and their comrades
weakened from the vomiting it pro-
duced. and wasted away; and it was /
also shown that the -commissary gen.
eral had been repeatedly warned
against this chemically preserved meat;
the documents bearing his notations
are on file unless they have been de-
Stroyed since this investigation began;
and Colonel Roosevelt and scores of
other officers testified that they COM
planned to their superior officers and
sent reports concerning the beef to the
war observation-disclosures that the col
onei was surprised had not been given
% the public.
Large quantities of the beef sent to
he armies of invasion in Porto Rico
md Cuba was totally unfit for COM
nerce. 1t had to be dumped into the
ocean by the carload. Some of it had
been rejected at Liverpool and returned
o this country after lying in Armour's
there for many months.