The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-02-21
LOST HIS TEMPER BUT ONCE
WHEN HE SAID HE DID NOT HAVE
TO REPORT TO EAGAN.
Letters Introduced to show that SOl-
"POisOned" and "SpOiIed."

WASHINGTON Feb 20.-The Miles court
of inquiry to-day made a good start in its
work. The court was comfortably quar-
tered in the old meeting room of the war
investigating commission, in the Lemon
building. Calls of ceremony on the Presi-
dent and the general commanding the army
occupied a large part of the forenoon, and
Immediately thereafter Gen. Nelson A.
Miles appeared as the first witness. He and
three other army officers summoned as wit
nesses were examined and disposed of be-
fore the court closed its session at o'clock.
General Miles's testimony, of course, was
the feature of the days proceedings. Col
Frank Micher, his chief of staff, and
gentleman in citizens clothes. who took
seat by the first place and gravely watched
the course of proceedings, retiring with the
general as silently as he had come, accom-
panied the general to the courtroom.
General Miles appeared in fatigue uni-
form, rather striking in it's contrast with
the display Of scarfs, bullion and buttons
on the full-dress uniforms of the court He
submitted to the questioning Of Colonel
Davis recorder of the court, with equanim-
ity, except for flash of mingled indigna-
ton and irony, when he informed the re-
corder that he was not compelled to re
port to the commissary general OF the
army. This was in reply to a question as
to whether not he had reported to the
commissary department the fact that COM
plants had been made to him as to the quail
ity of meat being issued to the troops. An
instant later General Miles resumed his cool
and carefully-considered replies to the in
quiries of the court.
AS indicated by letter Of the adjutant
hxr ho rooOrdar f0r the in
formation of the court. the scope Of the
inquiry was limited to the allegations OF
General Miles before the war commission
as to the quality of the army beef, "and
the matter purporting to have been fur
nished to the public press by the same Of
fetal" Only two interviews were called up
by the court, the first an interview with a
New York Journal reporter early in the
beef constroversy, in which General Miles
was quoted as charging that certain chem.
icals were used in the preservation of tbs
army meat, and another of the New York
Herald, under date of Feb. l. covering about
the same ground.
General Miles was very slow and careful
in his replies to the recorders questions on
this point. lie called attention to the fact
that in both instances he was credited in the
interviews with refusing to answer certain
questions and insisted that these refusas
should be given due weight in considering
the questions to which he did reply. lie said
in the case of the interview of Feb. /, that
he had letter from the man who wrote
the story offering to swear that General
Miles had refused to be interviewed, and
that the whole story was made up In the
office from the writer's general knowledge
of facts. Notwithstanding this, when his
final answer was asked as to the authen-
ticity of the interview, General Miles did
not specifically deny it, but merely said that
it cid not quite fairly represent his own
opinion in the case. The same qualified de-
NAL as to the Journal interview of Dec. q
was made, leaving the witness on record as
not assuming any responsibility for the
newspaper statements, but tacitly admitting
that there was a good deal in them with
which he agreed.
The trend of questions put to the other
witnesses of the day indicated that. as they
agreed with General Miles as to the quality
of the meat furnished the troops in the field.
the only criticism of their position the
court had to make was why they had not
taken some official steps to have the matter
remedied at the time. In every instance the
reply was that the circumstances in which
the army was placed in a sickly foreign
country with large amount of fighting and
a great scarcity OF transportation on hand
precluded the possibility of any such ac-
ton. In each the question was pushed no
further on this lire.
1t was saiG after the cour' adjourned that
Dr. DAILY, whose original ''embalmed beef
report was the genesis OF the meat contro-
versy, probably will appear at to-morrow's
session.