Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-02-09
ITS WORK COMPLETED
War Commissions Report to Bsin
Presidents Hands To-Day.
MUCH ATTENTION TO BEEF.
Dismissal as General Proposition
Of Charges Made AGAINST II.
MILES is SEVERELY CRITICISED.
Major Days Testimony Not Worthy
of Crcdence-Sec'y Aiger Excrcfned
the Report Unanimous.

WASHINGTON, February s--The War
Investigating Commission has now COM
peted its labors. and its report will be
in the hands OF the President tomorrow.
The report of the commission is a
voluminous document OF $50 printed pages.
Ii makes an important feature OF the
beef issue. and dismisses IA a general
proposition the charges that have been
made against the beef furnished the army.
1t Gnds. It is understood. that most %
the beef was such as could be propse1R
furnished as an emergency ration, point
ing out that the evidence showed II never
was intended 10 be anything but an
emergency ration. IL says there were
only two witnesses who really testified
against the beef-GeneraI Miles and Major
Daily, the chief surgeon, who made the
report regarded as the most sensational
forwarded TO the commission by General
Miles.
MILES TESTIMONY OFFSEr
As To the testimony Of these two wit.
nesses. the commission, It is understood,
goes on to point out the mass OF evidence
submitted to the contrary. as offsettins
this testimony.
As to such Of the canned beef as was
found to be Objectionable. the commission
points out the effect OF the tropical eli.
mate In producing llquefaotion Of the fas
in the meat. and the consequent rendering
OF the contents unpalatable. Most ot
the beef, though is found TO have been
satisfactory for emergency use, whero
fresh beef or beef on the hoof could not
be procured.
MILES STRUCTURES CRITICISED.
The structures General Miles made pub
lie on the beef. and his public expressions
in other ways. It IS understood. are SUBJ
jected TO severe criticism The methods
snd manner of loading the transports In
! General Skaters Cuban expedition are
| also discussed. and responsibility placed
| for the results.
The report finds that the statements OF
| chemical treatment made by General
| Miles, on the authority Of Major DAILY,
are not borne out by the chemical experts
who were also placed on the stand. IL
quotes Major Daly's testimony and then
takes up the testimony Of Chemists Clark.
OF the Geological Survey. and Blgslow. OF
the Agricultural Dopar ment. who ex3 mn
ined and analysed the beef submitted 10
them, and finds that the report of Major
DAILY is not supported by other chemical
Yauthorities and therefore his testimony
4 - regarded as not worthy Of credencc.
ARMY REORGANIZATION
There are also said to be some recon-
mendations as TO the reorganization OF
certain branches OF the army. but, IL is
| stated the recommendations are not radi-
cal.
CONDUCT OF WAR COMMENDkBLE.
As 10 the administration and conduct ot
the war, the conclusions OF the cOmmis-
sion are understood 10 be- that everything
possible was done by the department I'm
the limited time that Il had at It's COM
mand towards making preparations Tor
the war. and the report says that the con-
duct OF the war not only worked out I'm
the end successfully, but I'm such u way
as 10 be worthy Of great commendatiOn.
Tho report says that the evidence be-
fore the commission shows that Secrc-
tary Alger exercised proper diligence and
supervision. and that his subordinates
also were efficient, experienced, and faith
ful
The commission IS 4 unit on its report,
and there IS no minority report
sUB-COMMIssGON REPORTS.
At the outset the commission divided
itself into sub-cOmmissions for the con-
siderltion Of designated branches OF the
main subject OF inquiry. The sub-reporis
will be added to the principal statement
OF conclusions. handed 10 the Chief ENe-
| cutiVe