The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1899-05-08

ttNE6nL
bv the court The court finds that the
allegations OF the major general COM
mandipz to the effect that the refrigerated
beef supplied to the troops was treated
with chemical conservatives have not been
established. The court also fnds that 80
much OF the Allegations Of the major gen
sral commanding In respect TO the canned
-osst beef as relates to its uDsuitabllity
or food. as actually used Ia the beef ami
20 its extensive or long continued use as
field ration are sustained In the opin-
ion Of the court none OF thp allegations ia
relation 10 the canned fresh beef are sus-
tanned The evidence shows that Colonel
John +. Western. assistant commssary
general OF subsistence. recommended the
adoption OF the canned roast beef as
component OF the field ration and to this
extent he Is RESPONSIBLE"
The report places the quantity of canned
roast beef purchased for the war by the
commissary department at 6,S4T,l74
pounds. including $4,000 pounds which
was brought from Liverpool and English
ports. The commissary general General
Eagan) is severely criticised in several
parts Of the documen; on this score. One
OF the severes. rebules is as follows:
Considering the little use that had been
made OF this beef Ia the regular army,
the probability that Inc volunteers were
entirely ignorant CT Il. that It's use as
part Of this field ration had never been
sanctioned by the president or secretary
OF war. the court can but characterize tho
action OF the commissary general OF sub
sistence as unwarranted and reckless in
that be ordered the purchase Of such
enormous quantities Of food that was prac-
tically untried and unknown and the court
so finds. The court also finds that there
is no ground for any imputation whatever
OF any other actuating motive on the part
~ e. H..
est desire to procure the best possible food
Tor the troops.
"1he court pron1unces this act OF
the commissnry general Of subSist-
ence "a colossal error, for which
there Is no paiiintion.r
The court finds that there was neglect
in Cuba and TO a less degree in Porto
Rico In delivering the refrigerated beef
THE court, says the report. does not
wish to state the case more strongly than
70 say that the finding appears to be war;
ranted THAI too much time was consumed
in distributing this perishabie article The
fault, il any there was rested with the
brigade and higher commanding officers
and their commisssrics and quartermas-
ters. but he testimony is not so definite
or specific 70 warrant the naming by The
court Of any particular officers
They say the refrigerated beef was az
hrst received with great satisfaction.
There Is also criticism Of the delay In
unloading the refrigerating apparatus OF
Swift g. Co. at Santiago
An appeal by the contractors agents
TO General Shafter for an order on the
quartermaster TO expedite the delivery
from the transport of the refrigeratlng
plant did not effect any result. The delay
In this matter WAS the cause Of serious
loss.
THE court is Of the opinion that the
canned roast beef was not suitable as :,
travel ration on transports. considering
the absence Of cooking facilities and the
absence IRON that ration of fresh vege-
tables and condiments. For use on SHORE
as neld ration, where the companies had
their camp cooking equipment and yege-
tables were available, canned roast beef ia
suitable for issue, say two days In ten
but not for two days In succession In
some organizations 1t seems 20 have CON
eiituted al least one-half Of the meat
ration and until after the surrender the
troops had no means for other cooking
than was practicable with the Individual
Kit carried. For such active Use or any
use exceeding one day In hye toe court
findh this beef unsuitable
Tho refrigerated beet is, in the opinion
Of the court. suitable ration for troops
dition.
AS to whether anything better than this
was available for a ration the opinion Is:
First, that on the transports the re.
lance on canned fresh and canned carned
beef was wise, but that the canned fresh
beef was less disabled than corned beef
Second, that while bacon Is NOT 70
garded as a suitable constant food in cam
paign for troops in the tropics. combined
with the vegetables that were available
i would have been more suitable and III
than the unknown and unfamiliar canned
roast beef eaten direct from the can
Third, that the use Of refrigerated beef
on shore after the troops had secured con.
venient harbors and landing facilities was
wise and desirable. That the court he
heyes that there was no better food avail
able or practicable"
The opinion Is expressed that 1t would
have been impracticeble TO land beer carr
lie on the hoof In Cuba, the remark OF
the court on this point being as follows.
The commanding general OF the eNpe-
oition characteriles as absurd such
proposition and many of his commanding
,nlcers, whose opinion is given in the tes-
timony, coiucided with him in this inn
probability or inexpediency of such
project.
THE court concurs in the opinion of
those men whose experience in active mill.
tary service dated from 1861
An instruction OF the president to the
court was; III the packers OF the country
are Builty IL must DrssnOMn.N
Replying TO this direction the court saws,
The court finds that at the outbreak
OF hostilities ia April, 1898, the uac,efs
OF canned beef were engaged in the manu-
facture OF an article OF standard quality
well known TO the trade and the subss
tenee department under the name OF
canned roast beef The methods OF pack
ing then in use were the same as those
habitualiy employed in the preparation OF
the meat as an article of commerce and
the court does not find that they UNDER
went any change during the war. The
large purchases for the use OF the military
forces during the months of May ana Juno
1898, were made--not al the solicitation ~
the packers or in consequence of efIorIa
put forth by them for that purp.-s- .Sat
by the order and upon the initiative of
the commissary general of subsistence
such nurchases being made In every case
by Officers Of his department in the usual
manner"
On another point connected With the
packers the court says although tho
subject OF readiustment OF accounts he
tween the United States and the contrae-
tors was not referred TO the court h, an
pears that from the testimony Whenever
any cans have been found To be defective
subsequent to their original delivery 10
the subsistence department such cans
have been replaced in every instance"
Replying specifically to the other uues-
tons set out by the president, the court
finds; That the canned beef was de-