The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-04-25

Prefacing his argument, Major Lee
said:
Il may be permitted to remark that |
j have not appeared, nor do | appear, |
in any technical sense as the the coun- !
sci Of the major general commanding |
the army. If, as has been, let us hope.
enormously maintained by some that !
the inquiry under the order conVening
this court, was as much for the pur-
pose of investigating implied accusa- /
ton or imputation against the major
general commanding. for entertaining
the complaints and representations of
his officers and soldiers as to improper
food, as to investigate their merits, !
then the role of counsel might be APP |
propriate. But the correspondence be-
tween the court and the major general
commanding shows quite clearly the
extent to which he has been represented
before this court, the purpose being to
present and elicit evidence pertinent to
the inquiry. His allegations are moth
ing more, nothing less, than the COM
plants brought to his official knowl-
edge by the officers and men of the
army who participated in active seIv-
ice during the recent war"
Inquiry Forced Upon Miles.
Major Lee said the major general
commanding the army was obliged by
his position to institute searching in
the food supply of the army. He then
referred to that superb little army
which embarked from Tampa last June
for the invasion of Cuba and won JIM
perishable renown," adding that in less
than nine weeks the remaining part of
it was returned to the United States, "a
pitiable wreck in body and mind No
one claimed any one article of food was
to blame.
But" said he "the overwhelming
evidence of. we believe not less than 90
per cent of the officers and fully %
per cent Of the men shows beyond rea-
sonable doubt that the so-called canned
roast beef as a meat ration was all
that it should not have been and noti.
ing that it should have been for the
American soldier who was for human
itys sake perilling his life in a torrid
cline in the interest of an oppressed
people.
we neither a}lege nor charge that
there was any intent or design on the
part of any officer of the army to fur
nish a bad or unfit ration, but the evil
dence-the unimp12chable evidence-of
regiment and company commanders re-
speeding practically oVery soldier there,
shows that an irreparable mistake had
been made: that someone had blum
dered, and that the soldier became the
sufferer.
He contended that the canned roast
beef had been adopted as a ration
without adequate or proper test, the
sole test being a single case sent to
Tampa and cooked with vegetables and
condiments.
Responsibility For Experiment.
"This experiment." he said. was at
the instance of a distinguished officer
of the subsistence department The
error was an honest one of judgment
caused, perhaps, in some measure, by
the pressure Of his duties; but the
adoption of this canned roast beef as
material component of the meat ra-
ton in place OF fresh beef was a re-
sponsibility belonging to higher au-
thority."
Major Lee declared that some of the
inspections were 50 perfunctory that
canned meats were accepted ION the
reputation Of the packing firms"
since when" he asked, have gigan-
tic corporations and trusts become eX-
empt from that close scrutiny that
would be applied to a dealer of mod
crate means"
lie then took up the question of re-
Sricerated beef, and said:
Here again as in the case of the So
called canned roast beef was under
taken another experiment. new and
novel in the extreme, of attempting to
supply an army in the field in a cam
paign with refrigerated beef. The
INGENIOUS " llttll lldQ III 1ii prev lDAS Nf1iS
been tested, and approved in efficien-
cy. We're discarded Tor this hitherto I'M
tried experiment.
The Refrigerated Beef.
Various proposals were asked for
and among them one STIMULATING that
the refrigerated beef should keep sew
enty-tWO hours after issue or delivery
to the army. As represented by corre-
spondence, and testified to by witnesses,
this stipulation involves what was re-
gai'ded by many experienced men as
impossible Of satisfactory fulfllment.
a preserVative process, in addition to
the ordinary refrigeration, seemed q
sine qua non. and in discussing the
subject with General Eagan, the COM
missaIy general of subsistence. four
itneSSes-Sypher. Giddings, Simpson
and Armstrcng-all testified in effect
that the conmiSsary general stated
that the refligeratinS people had a spe- 5
cial process for preserving meat and
that one process was being tested at
Tampa.
Major Lee quoted testimony to the
effect that General Eagan had said
Armour * Co. and Swift & Co had
knowledge OF q preserving process, and
continued:
All this transDired before the open
ing of the bids on June Is. and shows
clearly that preservative process was
then under favorable consideration !
Armour & Co s bid. as shown by their
attorneys letter Of June l. withdrawn
from the files about June 23}, involved
che ownership and use of the Powell
process above described and upon that
process they based their claims or ap-
peal from the award of the contract
though not the lowest bidder.
In an endorsement on that letter by
the commisSary general to the honor
able secretary Of war, justifying the
award to the lowest bidder CSwift &
COD, the coGnmissary general said the
tests made by Armour & Co. are not
the only tests that have been made.
etc. this apparently With direct refer
ence TO Swift & Co.'S bid as shown by
the contract and subsequent award to
Swift & Co"
Question of Preservatives