Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-01-13

General Eagan further stated that papers
had mysteriously disappeared from "
files OF the War Department.
MILES HAMPERED THE DEPART
s.ENT.
The vitncss charged General Miles di-
recuy with dissrranging and hamperins
the administration of the War Depart
ment by calling of officers from duty
where their presence was absoiuteN ne
cessarv. General Easan said the com
nauding general went clearly outside ms
power IN doing this, and intmatei that
Genera Miles was moved 10 40 10 py
mo ignorance and inefiiciency of his own
onpointee. Major Black. VINO was sup
posed TO BE- the cnef commisssry officer
on General Mnes's staff.
General Eagan referred 10 General Miles
testimony that he had "telegraphed the
department from Porto Rico fer complete
and proper rations," ana said that II the
commissary-g generals once had received
any such massage he should have con-
sidered IL the request OF "very ignorant
and ln-informed person"
Continuing. General Eagan referred TO
General Mies's expressed preference for
native beef. OF which he said there was
plenty. and asserted there were no cattle
whatever in the neighborhood of Santiago.
Inr naive Dttl Artutldi hliNS ANAtii''
10 General Eagan characterized rs stags.
rlnts. bulls. and over-worked cattle. The
Use OF such animals the department
would never allow General EagaR, quo
tins, General Miles's allegation that in his
judgment there was some serious detect
in the refrigerated and canned beef. sald
General Miles would rot say this was any
thing more than his Judgment.
THE LIE DIRECT.
"Wboever." said General Eagan, calls
il embalmed beef is a .liar" Citing the
renorts submitted by General Miles in
confederation of his charges Genera
Pagan submitted whether or not ms
| course of securing these reports "oulu
not he construed as seeking adverse re-
/ norts He cited General Merritt ana
/ Shafter as approving the heei
.sThe newspaper statement emanauhs
from General Miles that 10000 pounds oil
| the beef we're condemned at Porto RICO Is
| an absolute falsehood. No such quah'i'!
vas condemned there or elsewhere.
| The witness said surgeon Days report
| that the beef apparently was injected
| with chemicals TO aid in preservation was
"falsehood and he made it out OF whole
cloth" on,,
| He denounced the assertion that chemi-
colIv nrenared beef had been issued any
| where and said he did not believe sur
geon Daily had that belief.
A RUINOUS SCANDAL
why" he asked, "did he shirK MS
| duty; why did he not then make chemi'
cal analysis and why dld ne Keep TN.
irformation 10 himself and then spring
IL suddenly on the commission and the
whole country. and imply that packing
houses have been cheating the government
| and violating their contracts? Al h'
time did he inform the CommisSary-Deh
eral or the Secretary Of War OF thes'
things. This" continued the Witness i
a scandal. calculated TO ruin thousahu
of people and discredit and put I'm iniamN
one of the greatest Industries OF 'n'
world"
General Miles was asked by your com
mission how timed fresh beef became
mart of the army ration. His answer Is
sYou had better ask the Secretary OF w al
or the Commissary-Gener / think thsy
can tell YOU / know il was sent TO the
army as food, and the pretence Is 'hal II
was sent as an experiment. ,.r,,,-
= SATURATED WITH MENDACIT1'
General Miles. in saying that this food
was sent TO the army as "a pretence loi
experir,ent." says that which implies cor
ruption-which ninety-nine out OF eVerA
r 100 people will understand TO mean cor
, runfiou This is a serious charge whici
should not be made by any man hghNy
nor without ample evidence 10 support IL
Taking the statement in the sense Una
2 was probably intended. the sense tIdl WI
z he accepted by the country at large th'
b. sense that already the press almos
wholly of the United States has accepted
II Indeed some Of that press because o
In called for my dismissal from the arm!
/ land nv court-martiaD, | answer thal !
- was not furnished under the pretence o
experiment, nor even as an eApeI Iiiheh'
and when General Miles charges that
VS. furnished as a "pretence Of expert
-, +" he lies in his throat he lies in hi
I heart: he lies in every hair OF MS hea'
and every pore Of his body; he lies VII
fullv. deliberately. intentionally, and ma
, iciOusly I'm
Z SHOULD BE DRUMMED OUT
e "If his statement is true that this wa
] furnished under 'pretence OF an eApeIl
ment.' then I should be drummed out o
' the army and incarcerated IN Ohlte
States prison. If his statement Is Iais'
i as | assert It TO be- then ne shouiu y
dr1lmmed out Of the service and incarce
roted IN nrison with other libellers. III
statement is a scandalous libel renecun
ON the honor Of every officer in the de
; rartment who has contracted Tor or pui
cbssed this meat and especially ana pdi
n ticularlv on the COmmissary-Geh
, r,vsalf In denouncing General Miles as
uor when he makes this statement, VIE
to make II as emphatic and as coarse o
Tho statement itself. l wish TO force th
n lie hack into his throat covered win III
l. contents of a camp latrine. ! WISH l
, brand II as a falsehoOd of whole clotf
without a particle Of truth TO sustain !
and unless he can prove his statement
sbould be denounced by every hoheS
l. man. barred from the clubs, barred lroi
n the society Of decent people, ana so ostrs
10 cized that the street boot-black Woul
not condescend to speak TO him, LOT i
tas fouled his own nest. He has asperse
L tho honor of a brother officer without
n Darticle of evidence or fact 10 SUSTAIN
f auv degree his scandalous. hbeHous' mi
. ucious falsehood-viz: That this beet {
anvtbino whatever was furnishea u
" army under 'pretence Of experiment
e HIS SILENCE SIGNIFICANT.
- General Eagan referred to the pu'
10 iehed interviews of General Miles al
= the correspondence between them az
their authenticity, General Miles haVln
made a non-committal reply.
The witness then said: Nheh nl'
refuses to deny libel or falsehood or
II statement attributed to him II IS We
l. known that he assumes the matte
y When he avoids the question The supp
sition is that he cannot deny II. y
= ouestion is not answered yet. he n
not denied the interview puDhsheu IN |
New York Journal, dated December
j. 1895. and having refused TO distinctly de-
a q "a