The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1899-02-23
GEN. NILES DEFENSE.
Not Required to Report to
Commissary General.
THE INTERVIEWS NOT AUTHENTIC.


the Canned Meat
WAsHINoToN, Feb. 2i.-The Miles
court of inquiry spent some time with
calls of ceremony on the president and
the general commanding the army and
later thereafter General Nelson A.
Miles appeared as the first witness. He
and three other army officers summoned
asR witnesses were examined and dis
posed of before the court closed its ses.
sion. General Miles testimony, of
course, was the feature OF tba days
proceedings. Colonel Frank Michler,
his chief of STAFF, and gentleman in
citizens clothes, who took seat by the
fireplace and gravely watched the course
of proceedings retiring with the gen.
eral as silently as he had come, accom-.
panied the general to the courtroom.
General Miles appeared in fatigue
uniform, rather striking in its contrast
with the display of scarfs and buttons
on the full dress uniforms of the court.
He submitted TO the questioning of Col.
Davis, recorder Of the court. with
equanimity, except for flash of min.
gled Indignation and irony when he in
formed the recorder that he was not
compelled to report" TO the commls.
sary general of the army. This was in
reply to question as to whether or not
he had reported TO the commissary de.
partment che fact that complaints had
been made to him as TO the quality Of
meat being issued to the troops. An in.
slant later General Miles resumed his
cool and carefully considered replies to
the inquiries of the court.
AS indicated by letter of the ad-
jutant general, read by the recorder for
the information of the court, the scope
of the inquiry was limited to the allega.
tions of General Miles before the war
commission as to the qua litv of the
army beef. land the matter purporting
to have been furnished TO the public
press by the same official"
Only two interviews were called up
by the court, the first an interview with
New York journal representative
early in the beef controversy, in which
General Miles was quoted as charging
that certain chemicals were used in the
preservation of the army meat. and
another of the New York Herald under
date of Feb. /, covering about the same
ground.
General Miles was very slow and
careful in his replies TO the recorders
questions on this point. He called at.
teutlon to the fact that in both in
stances he was credited in the intur.
views with refusing to answer certain
questions and insisted that these refu.
sails should be given due weight in con.
sidering tho questions to which he did
reply. He sald in the case of the in
terview of Feb. |, that he had letter
from the man who wrote the story offer
ing to swear that General Miles had re.
fused to be interviewed and that the
whole story was made up in the Office
from the writer's general knowledge Of
the facts.
Notwithstanding this, when his final
answer was asked as to the authenti-
city OF the interview General Miles did
not specifically deny it, but merely said
that it did not quite fairly represent his
own opinion in the case. The same
qualified denial as to The journal inter-
view of Dec. % was made, leaving the
witness on record as not assuming any
responsibility for the newspaper state.
ments, but taoitly admitting that there
was good deal in them with which he
agreed.
The trend of questions put to the
other witnesses OF the day indicated
that 30 long as they agreed with Gen
eral 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 reme6ied at the time. In
every instance, the reply was that the
circumstances in which the army was
placed in sickly foreign country with
q large amount OF lighting and great
scarcity of transportation on hand pre-
cluded the possibility Of any such
action. In each the question was
pushed no further on this line.
1t was general talk among the officers
at Ponce, General Miles said. that the
refrigerator beef must have been sub.
jected TO some chemical treatment to
make 1t keep for ~ hours. DIR. Daly's,
however, was the first official report.
General Miles then read long sum.
mary of 100 letters received by him at
army headquarters, giving the various
terms in which the army meat was
characterized These included "em-
balmed," 'decomposed," ''injected.
poisoned" spoiled and the like.
He said that he should fix Sept. II (the
date of DIR. Daly's report) as about the
earliest at which the question of chemi.
cally treated meat bad been brought to
his notice SO as to command his full at.
tentioD.
In addition he showed a summary Of
reports on refrigerator beef condemned
and thrown overheard from transports.
O. O. Yeamans, from the Yosemite, re-
ported the condemnation of 5000
pounds; Lieutenant Colonel O'Neil of
the steamship Chester, 1000 pounds;
Colonel James Hamilton Lewis, 10, 900
pounds.
Lieutenant Colonel Van Horne COM
plainei Of the bad condition of the
canned roast beef and the spoiled re.
irrigated beef. The fresh refrigerator
beef was good.
Lieutenant Colonel Minor told of the
bad condition OF the canned roast beef,
but said the refrigerator beef was good.
Major Harry jackson complained of
the canned beef, but said the refrigera.
tor beef was good, as far as he saw.
1t wss said after the court adjourned
that Or. DAILY, whose "embalmed beef
report was the genesis Of the meat con-
troyersy probably would appear at TO-
days session.