Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1899-05-08
MILES CENSURED
By the Report Of the Beef
Investigating Commission.
EmbaImed Beef Charge Not Proven
Delay in Reports Criticized.
Eagan Sharply Censured Canned Roast Bee
as Ration Condemned


inss, Acting Secretary Of War Meikle-
john. today, made public the report and
findings of the military court appoint
ed TO investigate the charges made by
Maj. Gen. Miles, commanding the
army, that the beef supplied to the
army during the war with Spain was
unfit for the troops. The most impor-
tant features Of the report are:
The findings that the generals ale
cations that the refrigerated beef was
chemically treated were not establish
ed.
That his allegations concerning the
canned fresh. or canned roast beef We're
sustained as 70 its unsuitability for
FOOD as used on the transports and as
long continued field ration.
Censure Of Gen. Miles for error in
falling to promptly notify the secretary
Of war when he first formed the opin-
ion that the food was unfit.
Cansure Of the commissary general
CGen. Edgan) for the too extensive
purchases Of the canned beef as an I'M
tried ration.
Censure Of CO... Maus Of Gen. Miles
staff
The finding that The packers were
not at fault and that the meats sup
piled 70 the army were Of the same
quality az those supplied To the trade
generally and the recommendation that
no further proceedings ba taken in the
premises.
The conclusion Of the court adverse
to further proceedings based upon the
charges as follows: 1T has been de
veloped in the course Of the inquiry as
intended in this report that in some in
stances certain individuals failed to
perform the full measure of duty or to
observe the proprieties which signify
high military command. but the court
is Of the opinion that the mere state
ment of the official report Of the facts
developed meets the ends of discipline.
and that the interests Of the service
will be best subserved If further pro-
ceedings be not taken.
There is more or less criticism Of
Gen. Miles in various parts Of the re-
port. Probably the most direct in
stance is the one which states that be
y0nd the criticism Of officers found
elsewhere in the report:
The court finds that against none Of
the officers commanding corps. divis-
ions, brigades and regiments and their
staff officers should a charge Of guilt
be brought
The court also finds that the major
general commanding the army had no
sufficient justification for alleging that
the refrigerated beef was embalmed
o" was unfit for issue to troops. 1t all
SO finds that he committed an error in
that having belief or knowledge as
claimed. that the beef was unfit. that
il caused sickness and distress. that
some Of it was supplied under the pre-
tense of experiment. that other beef
wa embalmed. he did not Immediately
report such knowledge or belief to the
secretary Of war to the end that a
proper remedy might be applied"
The censure of Col. Maus. inspector
general on Gen. Miles staff. is based
upon his failure to call attention to
charges concerning the beef at Chicka-
manga contained in a report of inspec-
ton made by DR.. tMajor) DAILY. on the
26th of October last, in which he stated
his belief that the beef was chemically
treated.
THE silence of Col Maus,'' says the
court, 'on so important matter as the
chemicalized beef, reported by Major
DAILY and personally known to himself
is most remarkab le."
The remark is also made that Gen.
Miles failure to draw special attention
to this report, is unexplained"
Commenting upon Gen. Miles testi-
mony that he had first formed the opin-
lDc ~ Z 1A fyis tod
beef had been processed, the court re-
marks:
Whatever the date upon which he
formed belief. or a reasonable suspi-
cion, that the health of the troops was
being impaired by the use Of deleter-
iOus food. it was his bounded duty in
the opinion OF the court instantly TO
take the most effective measures with
in his control to ascertain the actual
fact and to correct the wrong. if any
should be found. 1t would have been
practicable to obtain samples of the
beef then being supplied to the army
by contractors and to have submitted
these samples to Il chemical eXamna
ton which would have resulted in the
detection of the presence or absence Of
boric and salicylic acids, or any other
chemical agent that may have been
used as a preservative agent. Yet no
such precaution as that suggested was
taken by the major general command |
ing at that time or at any subsequent !
time, 50 far as has been learned by the |
court"
The court finds that the allegations /
IF the major general commanding to
he effect that the refrigerated beef I
supplied to the troops was treated with /
chemical personalities have not been i
established.
The court also finds that 50 much of
the allegations of the major general \
in respect to the canned
'oast beef, as relates to its suitability
or food as actually used on the trans
ports and as to it's extensive or long
continued use as 2 field ration are SuS-
-ained. In the opinion Of the court
none of the other allegations i'll relation
% the canned fresh beef is sustained.
rhe evidence shows that Col. John f.
Weston. assistant commissary general
# subsistence. recommended the adop-
l. 4 FV