Eagle River review. [volume] (Eagle River, Wis.) 1890-1927, 1899-05-11
HIT MILES AND EAGAN
BEEF COURT MEMBERS FIND
CHIEF IN ERROR.
Declare that He Should Have Made
Prompt Report-No Chemicals Used
to Preserve Meat -Ex-Commissary
Wrong in Buying Untried Rations.

The long-drawn-out inquiries Of the mil
itary court appointed to investigate the
charges made by Gen. Miles in regard to
the beef' supplied the army during the
war with Spain are at an end and the
findings have been submitted to the Presi-
dent and approved. In its report the court
censures Gen. Miles for not reporting the
un6tness Of the rations at the time that
the complaints reached him. 1t declares
that the refrigerator meat was not chem
ically treated and holds that the canned
beef was good. Gen. Eagan is severely
scored for buying such immense quantities
of an untried ration. The packers are ex-
onerated, it being shown that they fur
nished the same goods that they put on
the general market. The court recon-
mends that no further action be taken in
the matter, while it suggests that several
persons have placed themselves liable to
prosecution.
The report is long and it reviews the
conditions under which the army operat-
ed, but it finds no excuse for the charges
Of Gen. Miles. Briefly stated, the report
not only finds that Gen. Miles made false
allegations against the War Department
and the packers, but that he furnished no
evidence to show that he had any excuse
for believing that these allegations were
true. The court finds that there was
overwhelming testimony to the fact that
the refrigerated beef was not chemically
treated, but was preferable in every way
to the fresh beef killed in Cuba and Porto
Rico; that this beef was not a serious
cause of sickness; that the canned roast
beef was not furnished under the pretense
of an experiment, and that it was not beef
pulp, from which the nutriment had been
taken for beef extract. 1t is admitted
that canned roast beef was not intended
for field ration, and that the commissary
general committed "a colossal error for
which there is no palliation" in making
such large purchases of this ration.
In answering the questions propounded
by the President to the court as to the
character of the rations and who was re-
sponslble, the report censureS only Gen.
Miles for allegations which were untrue,
and Gen. Eagan for purchasing 100000
pounds of canned roast beef, considering
the use that had been made of it in the
regular army. Regarding Eagan, the
court finds no ground for any imputation
of any other actuating motive than the
earnest desire to procure the best possible
food for the troops. The court was I'M
able to find any worthy motive for Miles
mistake in making such allegations or any
excuse for his not reporting at once to the
President or Secretary of War, if he be-
lieved his allegations were true.
Throughout the fifty printed pages the
report is tempered scotching of the COM
handing general, showing him as an off,
Ger at the head of the army, who, without
excuse, bore false testimony against the
Government in it's conduct of the war.
The concluding paragraph in the summing
up is in it's mild phraseology a severe CEN
sure upon Gen. Miles. The court says:
1T has been developed in the course of
the inquiry, as recited in this report that
in some instances certain individuals fail
ed to perform the full measure of duty or
to observe the proprietes which dignity
high military command, but the court is
of opinion that the mere statement in the
official report of the facts developed meets
the ends Of discipline, and that the inter-
ests of the service will be best subserved
if further proceedings be not taken"