Delaware gazette and state journal., 1899-05-11
REPORT OF BEEF COURT OF INQUIRY.

his full approval,
In effect, the report says that Gen.
Miles charges that the canned beef
furnished the army was unfit for food,
but it says SO in roundabout way
and censures Miles for making his
charges. The court states that Miles,
allegations that the refrigerated beef
was treated with chemicals were not
established; thatl his allegations con-
cerning the canned fresh or canned
roast beef were sustained as to its un-
suitability for food as used on tho
transports and as long continued field
ration.
General Miles is censured for "error"
in failing to promptly notify the Secre-
tary of War when he first formed the
opinion that the food was unfit.
General Eagan, formerly commissary-
general, is censured for too extensive
purchases of the canned beef as an
untried ration. Colonel Maus, Of
General Miles staff, is also oensured.
The court finds that the nackers
were not at fault; that the meats sup
piled to the army were of the same
quality as those supplied to tho trade
generally, and recommends that no
further proceedings be taken in the
premises.
The conclusion of the court adverse
to further proceedings based upon the
charges is as follows:
ut has been developed In the course
of the inquiry, as recited in this re-
port, that in some instances certain
individuals failed to perform the full
measure of duty or to observe the pro-
prieties which dignity high military
command, but the court is Of the
opinion that the mere statement in
the official report of the facts developed
meets the ends Of discipline, and that
the interests Of the service will be best
subserved If further proceedings be not
taken.
1.-THE court finds that the major
general commanding the army had no
sufficient justification for alleging that
the refrigerated beef was embalmed or
was unfit for issue to troops. 1t also
finds that he committed an error in
that, having belief or knowledge as
claimed, that the food was unfit, that
it caused sickness and distress, that
some of it was supplied under the
'pretence Of experiment. that other
beef was embalmed, he did not i'm
mediately report such knowledge or
belief to the Secretary of War to the
end that proper remedy might be
promptly applied. !"
Commenting upon General Miles,
testimony that he had first formed the
opinion last August that the re-
frigerated beef had been processed, the
court remarks: whatever the date
upon which he formed belief, or q
reasonable suspicion, that the health
Of the troops was being impaired by
the use of deleterous food, it was his
bounden duty, in the opinion of the
court, instantly to take the most
effective measures within his control
to ascertain the actual fact and to
correct the wrong, IL any should be
found.
1T would have been practicable to
obtain samples Of the beef then being
supplied to the army by contractors
and to have submitted these samples
to chemical examination, which would
have resulted In the detection of the
presence or absence Of boric and
salicylic acids, or any other chemical
agent that may have been used as q
preservative agent. Yet no such pre-
caution as that suggested was taken by
the ma aior-general commanding at that
time or at any subsequent time SO far
as has been learned by the court
1.-THE court finds that the allegations
of the major-general commanding, to
the effect that the refrigerated beef
supplied to the troops was treated with
chemical preservatives have not been
established. The court finds that so
much of the allegations of the major
general commanding in respect to the
canned roast beef as relates to its un-
suitability for food, as actually used
OH the transports, and as to its ex-
tensive or long continued use as field
ration, are sustained. In the opinion
of the court none of the other alle-
cations in relation to the canned fresh
beef are sustained.
THE evidence shows that Col. John
Il. Weston, assistant oommissary-
general of subsistence, recommended
the adoption of the canned roast beef
MS component of the field ration, and
to this extent he Is responsible.
The report places tho quantity Of
canned roast beef purchased for the
war by tine commissary department at
6,S47, l7t pounds, including $50, ZOO
pounds which was brought from Liver
pool and other English ports. This
amount is characterized as excessive,
and the commissary. general General
Esganl is severely criticised in several
parts of the document on this score.
One of the severest rebukes is as
follows:
Considering the little use that had
been made of this beef in the regular
army, the probability that the volun-
teers were entirely ignorant Of it, that
its use as part of tho field ration had
never been sanctioned by the President
or Secretary of War, tho court can but
characterize the action of tho commits
sary general of subsistence as upwar-
ranted and reckless--in that he ordered
the purchase OF such enormous quanti-
ties OF food that was practically un.
tried and unknown, and the court so
finds.
1.-THE court also finds that there is
no ground for any imputation whatever
OF any other aotuating motive on the
part of the commissary- general than
the earnest desire 20 procure the best
possible food for the troops. The court
prorounces this act of the commissary-
general of subsistence a colossal error
for which there is no palliation.
The court finds that there was
neglect in Cuba and, to less degree,
in Porto Rico in delivering the re-
frigerated beef. ''The court says
the report, "does not wish to state the
case more strongly than to say that the
finding appears to be warranted that
too much time was consumed in dis
tributing this perishable article. The
fault, if any there was, rested with the
brigade and higher commanding Off
GERS and their commissaries and
quartermasters, but the testimony ;s