The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-02-09
GEN. MILES is CRITICISED.
The War Investigating Boards Re
port.

Washington, Feb. S.-The War Inves-
tigating Commission has now completed
it's labors and its report will be i'll the
hands of the President tomorrow.
The report of the Commission is a
voluminous document of $50 printed
pages. The report makes an important
feature of the beef issue and dismisses
as a general proposition the charges
that have been made against the beef
furnished the army. 1t finds, it is UNI
derstood, that most of the beef was
such as could be properly furnished as
an emergency ration, pointing ont that
the evidence showed it never was in
tended to be anything but an emergency
ration. IT says there We're only two
witnesses who really testified against
the beef. General Miles and Major
DAILY. the Chief Surgeon, who made the
report regarded as the most sensational
forwarded TO the Commission by General
Miles.
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 offsetting
this testimony. AS to such of the
canned beef as was found to be obiec-
tionable, the Commission points out tho
effect of the tropical climate in producing
liquefaction of the fat in the meat and
the consequent rendering of the contents
unpalatable. Most of the beef, though.
is found to have been satisfactory for
emergency use, where fresh beef or beef
on the hoof could not be procured. The
structures of General Miles made public
on the beef and his public expressions
in other ways, it is understood, are sub
jected to severe criticism. The methods
and 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 OK
perts, who were also placed on the stand
1t quotes from Major Days testimony
and then takes up the testimony of
Chemists Clarke. of the Geological Sur
vey, and Bigelow, of the Agricultural
Department, who examined the analysis
of beef submitted, and finds that as
chemical expert Major DAILY is not sup
ported by other chemical authorities,
and that therefore his testimony is re-
garded as not worthy of credence. There
are also said to be some recommends
lions as to the organization of certain
branches of the army, but. it is stated
the recommendations are not radical
AS to the administration and conduct Of
the war, the conclusions of the Commits
sion are understood to be that every
thing possible was done by the Depart
ment in the limited time that it had at
it's command in making its preparations
for the war, and the report says that
the conduct of the war not only worked
out in the end successfully, but in such
a way as to be worthy of great common
dation.
The report says that the evidence be-
fore the Commission shows that Secre-
tary Alger exercised proper diligence and
supervision, and that his subordinates
also were efficient, experienced and
faithful. The Commission is a unit on
its report, and there is no minority re-
port.
At the outset the Commission divided
itself into sub-commissions for the sep
arate consideration Of DESIGNATED branch
es of the main subjects of inquiry. These
sub-repOrts will he added to the principal
statement of conclusions handed to the
Chief Executive.