The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-01-14

vas Allowed TO HfOceed-W w ar De
partment Held Responsible Fo1
Eagan's Conduct-Colonel Roose
velt Corroborates Miles With Ref
erence to the Beef, While Colone.
Wood Stands By War Department
Washington, Jan. 13.-There was nc
today in all the incidents connected
with the bitter attack made yesterday
by Commissary General Eagan upon
General Nelson A. Miles. AS might have
been expected, a matter Of this official
consequence was sure TO attract the
attention of the president, and, in con-
sequence, a greater part of the session
OF the cabinet today was given to its
consideration. The cabinet members,
however, were unusually reticent with
regard to what was said and declined
to express any opinion as TO what, II
anything, would be done in the matter,
which is now in the hands of the presi-
dent and Secretary Alger. Nevertheless,
all the members of the cabinet COM
mend the action of the commission in
declining to receive the manuscript of
/ General Eagan's testimony until the
Objectionable epithets have been
| changed.
! There is no doubt that the president
| deeply regrets the incident, and 1t IS
almost certain that official cognizance
viii be taken of the matter very soon.
The question was discussed of how far
General Eagan may be entitled TO i'm
munity from punishment under the re-
cent public statement of the secretary
of war by the direction OF the presi
dent, to the effect that all witnesses
appearing before the commission
would be protected in their rights and
positions, if in the service of the United
States, regardless of whom their teSti-
mony might be directed against.
The principals in the case. General
Miles and General Eagan, contributed
little during the day 20 the controversy,
but the war commission today acted
promptly to redress the affront put
upon the board itself, as the members
regarded 1t, contained IN the decisive
language used by General EaSan. Their
letter returning this Halter statement
did not indicate positively whether or
not they would receive il as evidence,
even though the Objectionable Ian
guage was eXcised, nor did General
Eagan himself give any sign of any
intention on his part to avail himself OF
friends did not hesitate to intimate
that he would expunge the objection
able language, but he would say moth
ing for himself.
SPLITTING STRAWS.
The war department officials are not
yet clear as to what would be the erect
of a withdrawal or modification of the
statements. One element holds that
S.ia failing snow
that any Objectionable language had
been used, there would be no legal
offense Another takes the view Inat
while the amendment Of the statements
would mitigate General Eagan's offense,
it would not wipe it out.
Meanwhile, General Miles is appar-
entity waiting for the war department
to act taking the position that it is in
cumbent upon it and the war commits
sion to protect the army from such
attacks.
In The excitement created by this in
cident. the issue before the commission,
the quality of the army beef, was we'll
nigh lost sight of. There are. however.
two piquant additions to that part OF
the proceedings, one consisting OF the
testimony of General Wood, to the
effect that no one who amounted to
anything had made any complaint as
to the war rations, and the other from
Colonel Roosevelt, making very Sc
we're complaint regarding the beef.
It is said by persons who may be re-
earded as authorities in military law
that in its present phase, the con-
troversy between Generals Miles and
Eaean is not one that will admit the
calling of a court of inquiry. This is
entirely apart from the question OF the
right to call a courtmartial. In the
latter case, under the strict rules OF
military law, the court would be
obliged to take under consideration
certain specific charges, such as an al
tack uoon q, brother officer, and would
not be permitted to go beyond that
matter and into the extent of inquirlnS
into the truthfulnesS of the charges
made in the attack. The court of IN
uuiry, however, as its name implies,
has a broader field of action and might,
without being bound closely, inquire
into all the facts, not even con1ning
its INQUIRY to the officer alleged to be
the offender, but, perhaps, as has been
known in the past, to return a finding
that involved the courtmartial of more
than one officer. In other words, a
court of inquiry in a case like this, if
it found reason therefor, could lndlct
for trial before courtmartial both OF
the parties to the controversy. How
ever, the best opinion is that court
of inquiry is beyond reach.
MILES-EAGAN~ FEUD.
It has been known for q month that
a bad feeling existed between the
general and the commits
sary general of the army, yet such has
been the effect through military
discipline that before yesterday this
had not manifested itself openly. 1t is
true that the two men have not come
into close contact frequently and their
relations being confined strictly to the
exchange of official communications,
there was no occasion for the develop
ment of personal friction, but in view
of General Eagan's known bitter feel
ing. it is now learned that it was with |
some anxiety that the friends Of the |
two officers saw them meet last week. |
the occasion being a periodical session !
of the managers of the soldiers home. /
General Miles is eX-officio president of |
this board, and Commissary General |
Eagan is a member Of the board. The |
two officers met, sat at the same table !
and transacted business without the /
slightest signs OF ill-feeling and with |
cut showing a trace of animosity for
what had gone before. 1t is a matter I
of speculation, however, whether, fail |
ing proceedings before courtmartial |
or some other judicial method of dis
posing of the issue between the two |