The Portland daily press., 1899-04-08
They Do Not Help Cause Of Canned
Beef Much.
But Compli-
mentary to Rations,
Powell Of .Preseryatiye Fame
Testifles Today.

Washington, April T.-Having decided
at its forenoon session today to accept as
evidence the official reports of officers of
the army. the beef inquiry court devot-
ed itself to listening TO the reading Of
those reports They were read by Major
Lee as the representative of Gen. Miles,
who had read only about so of tho l47 of
them when court adjourned for the day.
| The reports were generally brief state
ments of the personal experiences of the
officers or summaries OF the opinions of
the men under them.
The reports bore almost exclusively on
the canned beef, but there were occasional
references to refrigerated teef.
The officers generally condemned the
meat as component part of the soldiers
ration. The complaints were that 1t was
stringy and tough and in many instances
IL was stated that 1t made the men sick
and In others that hungry though they
generally We're they threw it away rather
than eat 1t. In some oases, however, the
officers reported that they had heard no
complaints of the meat.
Mr. A. IL. Powell, proprietor of the
Powell preservation process will be heard
| tomorrow.
Brigadier General Visle pronounced the
canned beef "a miserable apology for
food"
A large number of reports were made
from officers OF the First Cavalry among
| these the following:
Major James NJ. Bell-"It Is better than
no beef, but L sannot recommend 1t as n
Ioomponent.of "a field ration"
Lieut.. q. Oyerton-"lt Is an undesira-
Bile portion of the travel ration
Lieut. J. ID. j. Hartman thought the
| Gurned beef preferable to the canned beef.
Lieut., II. u. Wiiliams-.The beef when
not cooked was unpalatable, but as an
OCCASIONAL substitute for bacon 1t was
acceptable"
Lieut. Walter NJ. Whitman-"The pro.
ionged issue OF the beef on the transport
was injurious to the men,"
Lieut. NJ. +. Davis considered the beef
as OF poor quality and said he had found
four magSots with the beef IN the cans
while in the tield.at Quay simas.
Lieut.. IL. ID. Berkeley-"No more un-
palatabie article of food could be issued"
| Lieut.. W. q. Riyers-''IJ was an un-
suitable article OF food "
Lieut. E. ). Wright--"It was distinct
failure.
Lieut.. Col. ". A. Rafferty, stated that
he agreed with the report OF his commits
nutrittye and said the men soon tired Of
.sCapt f. S. Eoulkes thought.it inferior
| TO corned leef.
Major jackson pronounced the quality of
the beef ueed in canning poor. 1t mad
served very we'll in hash, but as a sepa-
arte article of food it was nauseating.
Lieut.. Col. Carroll said that most of
the meat issued to his troops on the
transport had been thrown overheard as
1t made some of the men sick.
Capt. +. West-'The men did not eat
much OF the canned beef, complaining
OF nausea afterwards. Hell himself had
preferred going without meat to eating
it."
Lieut. X. d. Paddock Men would go
hungry rather than eat it. n
Capt. q. ;. Grimes, Second Artillery
1.-THE meat was soft, watary and insipid
and unsatisfactory to the men,
.aCapt. Ellis OF the Fourth Artillery
"1t was stringy and tough end and 9TH
ers found it unpalatable.
Capt. Walter l.. Finley of the Ninth
Cavalry-"Ihe beef was tough and de-
Capt. NJ. q. Hughes, Ninth Cavalry
THE meat became distasteful after a
few days"
Capt. Philip b. Powell, Ninth Caval-
ry--' Almost wholly devoid of the flavor
of beef. "
I: Capt. Hutchinson. Ninth Cavalry-"It
should be altsrnated with other meat
Lieut.. NJ. ". McName, Ninth cavalry,
bad found it tasteless and the men would
not eat it.
Capt. McI.ains had found the meat
teSteless, insipid aud much OF 1t spoiled.
Lieuts. Hardwick. Barbour. Nc Cormick.
White, Cavanagh, Lyman and Everett,
also made reports very similar to those
preceding Lieut.. Barbour thought it good
us u change.
Lieut.. Hamilton pronounced it good
food.
capt. Best of the First ARTILLERY"
men soon tired OF the canned beef
Capt. Albert Cummings of the Second
Artillery thought that some of the meat
contained ptomaines and caused n great
doal OF sickness. As a ration it was
failure.
Capt. 7. A. Adams of the Fifth artil-
lery - 1t was not q success as u field ra-
tion in "a hot climate
Capt Ii. j. Reilly of the Fifth artil-
lery-"It was pslatabls with vegetables,
but not otherwise desirable"
Col Sinclair OF the Seventh artillery
"Ihe meat used was of poor grade. II
u better grade was secured it might
prove proper food"
Lieut.. &. :. Benton of the Seventh
artillery-"It was more wholesome than
the fresh reef
Lieut.. Browne, Second infantly-"It
was unit for use. Many of the men
said it had beeen 'doped, meaning that
chemicals had been used in its prepara-
tion.''
Can't. J. Warine, Second infantry-s'It
WAS not it to he issued. -
Major Baker, Fourth infantry-'fT The
canned beef was of an inferior quality,
anything but palatabls."
Lieut. Col. Miner of the Sixth infan-
try-'.The canned beef was; utterly unft
as an article of diet. Much of 1t appeared
lika Inent from which extract of beef has