Evening star., 1899-03-21

the army officer whose approaching light
gave sufficient warning to the workmen to
enable them to throw up bulkheads to hide
! the great cavities behind the lining.
But it has turned out that the court has
come upon some very important testimony.
Just whether the witnesses in question
would have been available had the court
remained in Washington may not be known.
1t is in fact immateriaI. 1t suffices to
know that all question as to the quality
of the canned roast beef furnished the
army during the war has been dispelled and
that at last something tangible is being
adduced in the way of evidence about the
''embalmed'' beef. 1t is to be borne in mind
that Gen. Miles addressed his charges to
two points: first, that the army was fed on
refrigerated beef which he suspected to
have been chemically treated, ''in the way
of experiment second, that the canned
beef. new ration, was unfit for use.
For time it appeared though the al
legation against the refrigerated beef was
the gravamen of the indictment, involving
the most serious possibilities and insinuat-
ing an experimental tampering with the
soldiers food in time of war. The fiercest
battles of the war investigating commission
were fought over this matter of ''embalmed
beef" The Eagan episode, a mere incident
in the course of the inquiry sprang chiefly
from the allegation of the use of chemicals
in the preparation of the meat But after
time, when both the commission and the
court of inquiry had gone over much testi-
mony, it appeared as though there had been
no definite proof of the general use of such
chemicals. Then attention was directed
particularly to the canned beef. The evil
dence of its unfitness was swiftly cumuia-
tive. At last in Chicago testimony came
out to leave question as to the atrocious
character of this ration, and to esta blish
for good and all Gen. Miles charge that it
was utterly unfit for the use. of human be-
ings.
And now comes testimony taken at Fort
Leavenworth, to bring the matter of the
chemical treatment of refrigerated beef into
controversy once more. A commissary ser
geant has sworn that an agent of one of
the large packing houses told him that
certain paraftine-like coating on some of
the spoiled beef which he refused to accept
was 'preservatine, used to keep the meat
longer than ordinarily. The sergeant has
practically identified this agent and has
sworn so positively to the conversation
that for the time it would seem that the
burden of proof is lifted from Gen Miles
and placed upon the beef concerns. now
called upon to demonstrate that no foreign
materials were used to aid in the preserva-
ton of the beef.
General denials will not suffice. Until the
testimony of Sergeant Mason is plainly
broken down by corroborated evidence the
fact seems established that something
called ''preservatine was used on the beef
1t will not answer for the beef men to de-
clare that the ''preservatine'' was harm
less They have already gone on record as
asserting that absolutely no foreign ma
terials We're used-nothing but refrigerated
air. To admit now that such other sub
stances Were in fact used, even with a dis
claimer as to their quality, is to admit in
turn that all that General Miles has
charged against the army meat ration is
true, in substance and in fact