Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-02-13

| taken to the sufferers in Alaska, and also
| for the subsistence of the troops there. and
| ascribing the sickness in that locality to
| the use of salt meats, and in reply thereto
| the Secretary of War desires me to call at
tention to the following remarks of the
medical department of the army in which
the major general commanding the army
| concurS:
| Canned meats put up by reputable firms
are wholesome and have the full nutritive
| value of the meat contents, and in the alb
! sence of fresh meats are to be preferred to
| any of the three substitutes suggested by
! the writer. Meat, when salted, loses a GER
| tain proportion of it's aIbuminoids and ex-
! tractives. but what remains is valuable as
| food. and has no specific influence in the
| production of scurvy. With hard bread
| bacon, pea meal and an occasional issue of
| fresh beef, or in its absence canned meat,
a dietary of a satisfactory force value can
| be provided. To these there should be
! added, for the prevention of scurvy, occa-
| stonal issues of potatoes, onions or canned
| vegetables, or. in their unavoidable alb
| sence, desiccated vegetables and dried
fruit. Very respectfully,
{Signed) w. H. CARTER,
| Assistant Adjutant General.
/ Mailed October 10, 1897.
All the above in quotation is the indorse-
ment upon the letter of Mr.. Marshall,
eral, L. S. A. The Endorsement of the ma
jor general commanding is in the following
| words:
| HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARMY.
| Washington D. c., October 49, 1895
| me major general commanding concurs
| in the remarks of the deputy surgeon gem
eral, fourth Endorsement.
(Signed) J. c. GILMORE.
Assistant Adjutant General
| The major general comma nding'' here
referred to is Maj. Gen. Nelson A. Miles.
| Breckenridge Criticised.
| The full criticism of the inspector gem
| erals department is as follows:
| The commission finds that the inspector
| generals department was not as efficient
as it ought to have been. There seems to
| nave been question as to the authority by
| which inspections We're to be ordered. On
at least one occasion, May II, the Secretary
| OF War instructed the major general COM
| handing the army to inspect certain camps
| VIZ, those at Chickamauga, Atlanta New
| Orleans. Mobile, Tampa Miami and Key
| West The major general did not act upou
| such instructions stating it to be his place
| to order inspection.
Further, the commission finds that al
| thoush several OF the officers of this depart
| ment were assigned to duty in command of
| troops iii the field, still competent officers
| We're left in charge of the department in
| Washington to perform such duties as were
| assigned to them. The organization in the
neld was ample, and the inspectors made
| reports to the commanding officers to
Whom they had been assigned Those re-
| ports We're often not acted upon, and were
not forwarded to the War Department"
| The Comm skfOn's HethOd
referring to its method of work. the COM
| mission states: During our sessions ex-
| amined 495 witnesses. All of these were
| sworn or affirmed, except one who declined
| to take the oath. The chief examination
was conducted by the member designated
| for that purpose, but each witness was in
| terrogated by every member of the COM
mission who desired to do So
our purpose, in the discharge of our
dutlcs, was to arrive at the facts touching
| the conduct of the war, and no effort was
spared by us to reach that result We have
examined the Secretary of War the com
| handing general, heads of departments
off1cers of corps, divisions brgades, regi-
l<nentS and companies, nOn-commissoneS Of
ncers and prtvates. nurses and persons
from many employments in private life No
man Or woman who has stated to Us that
ne or she had any material matter touch
ing the subject of our inquiry to communi-
cate has been refused a hearing
All the members of the commission have
been engaged in taking testimony. 1t has
happened that subcommittee have been
occupied in hearing witnesses at four diff
ferent places at the same time
No Evidence of Dishonesty
The places where examinations were held
are enumerated, and the report continues:
AT all of these places We have invited,
some times with special insistence every
person to come before us and testify who
could throw any light on the conduct of
the War Department in any of its branch
es.
Any charge of corruption or intimation
of fraud or bribery in connection with the
letting of any contract, even a hint of
wrongdoing, has been carefully investi-
gated.
1T may be said now that there has been
no evidence before US that any one in or
connected with the War Department has
dishonesty received dollar. We have
made persistent efforts to secure the at
tendance of persons to whose names rumor
had attached an allegation that they knew
of corruption of officials in the War De-
paftment, but these men have either de-
MED the statements attributed to them or
have maintained silence when invited to
tell what they knew.
I'VE think it would be wise to make it
discretionary with the President to use the
officers the retired list for filling posi-
tons during war, and not trench the
active organization, that may be needed in
the field
During the recent war many positions
We're filed by the appointment of civilians
to which retired officers could have brought
professional training, valuable knowledge
and large experience.
In the matter of regimental officers the
commission found that all volunteer COM
mands differed by men of military expert
ence and training Jared much better than
those Differed by amateurs. The soldiers
Were more effectively cared for, enjoyed
better health and were better fed and
clothed.
The commission recommends for the flu
ture a strict examination into the qualif-
cations of all officers appointed to the
army, regular volunteer. The establish
ment of schools of instruction for inexperi-
enced officers taken from civilian life 20
meet the emergency created by the war is
highly commended. Quite a number of
regular officers assigned to the command
of volunteer troops adopted this eXpedient
and the results Were eminently satisfactory
A most important criticism by the COM
mission is as follows:
Had Department Methods.
THE routine work in the DEPARTMENTS
in our opinion, is far beyond what is neces-
sary, and each year seems to increase it,
The methods employed make it almost i'm
possible to transact business promptly. The
heads of all departments, officers of large
depots, chiefs of staff departments, corps
and divisions have necessarily been obliged
to give time and attention to details which
should have been given to matters of larger
moment. No well-regulated concern or
corporation could transact business salts
factorily under such regulations as govern
the staff departments, and the fact that
of of tha off