Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1899-01-17

Washington, January 16.-Following
is the text of the letter sent by Gen.
Eagan to the war commission to-day
with an amended statement, in reply
to the charges made by Gen. Miles con
corning the beef furnished the army:
Office of Commissary Genereral OF
Subsistence,
Washington, January IA, 1899.
To the Commission Appointed by the
President to Investigate the Conduct
of the War Department in the War
With Spain.
Gentlemen:-I have the honor 10
hand you herewith my testimony,
which is resubmitted and revised
in accordance with the views expressed
by you in your letter OF January 13,
1899. The Objectionable features and
what is considered irrelevant matter by
you, in which opinion l entirely agree,
are eliminated. In this connection l
desire to state that there was never a
thought or Intention on my part Of
any disrespect whatsoever to your
commission, but in explanation and in
eXtenuatlOn OF the language used by
me heretofore, | beg TO invite the at
tention of the commission 10 the fact
that L have been accused practically
OF feeding the soldiers with poisoned
beef, which made them sick-'em-
balmed,' so-called-that | have fur
nlshed meat to the army I'M
DER the 'pretense Of expert
men" which charge in effect is COR
ruptlon and worse, because it leopard
ICES the lives of soldiers sent to the
front in tropical climates, and VINO
were dependent on such food as was
sent them; that these statements have
gone to the whole country uncontra-
dicted; that they have been published
and | have been pilloried in the press
OF the country as q man who had fed
the army on poisoned meat and cor
ruptly So; that for about three weeks
time | AVE kept silent for the reason
that | was debarred after talking with
the Hon. Secretary of War from pre-
pairing charges because of the immun-
ity granted by the President to wit
neSSeS before your commission, not
w~ithstanding the gravity of the accusa-
tons; that IL is unreasonable to believe
that such monStrous charges could
have any other effect than to work up
on an honorable man in such a way as
TO goad him to a species of desperation
and hat it was but natural, when the
proper opportunity was given him, to
meet and refute the charges. that he
should characterize them in harsh Ian
guage and in terms that are deemed
improper, no matter what the provoca-
ton. | therefore withdraw the langu-
age and matter so Objectionable and re-
submit to you now my sworn statement
with the abiding faith that your com
mission, having all the facts before
you, will decide the points at issue
justly. Very Respectfully,
(Signed) CHARLES P. EAGAN,
'Commissary General of Subsistence"
The commission, after a brief secret
session, decided to make public only
Gen. Eagan's letter, and not the state
ment accompanying it.
In answer to a direct question. Sec
rotary Alger, at the close Of the Off
clal day. said that the War Depart
ment had taken no action in the case
of Commissary General Eagan, but
when the inquiry was pursued he de-
clined to say one word as to his in
tentions in the matter. 1t was appar-
ent during the day that this matter
was receiving attention, and, in fact,
the commissary general himself spent
some time clOseted with the secretary.
Three distinct lines of action were
talked Of as within the line of prob
ability. The first was a strong letter
of reprimand to be addressed by the
President himself TO Gen. Eagan, stat
ing that but for the immunity he had
promised all witnesses before the
commission. he would have court
martialed him. The second line was
an actual courtmartial, while the third
was a court of inquiry. The purpose
of the latter would be, it was said, to
place upon a military tribunal the re-
sponsibility for deciding whether or
not Gen. Eagan should be tried by a
courtmartial. OF course, the court of
inquiry might go a long way into the
matters which led up TO the attack
contained in Gen. Eagan's statement,
possibly involving a determination as
to the correctness Of the charges
touching the character of the army
beef preferred by Gen. Miles, though
this would appear to be appointing a
second tribunal to investigate the
methods and results of the first n
gagged already on that work.
1t was stated that Gen. Miles would
not prefer charges against Gen. Eagan
for the ~utterances delivered by him be-
fore the war investigating commission
last Friday. but that he intends 10 let
the War Department deal with the mat
ter in its W way. Touching these
charges, it is said that there is really
no absolute necessity that any one shall
father them, although the judge advo-
cate general of the War Department
would be called upon TO put them in
shape if it should be decided TO order
a eourt-martial.
1t is suggested that the war investi-
CATION commission has deprived itself
of power TO make out a legal present
ment against Gen. Eagan, if it was so
disposed, by returning the objection
able paper. So far as is known the
statement delivered last Friday is not
now in the hands of the commission
and the judge advocate, who would
prosecute Gen. Eagan, in case Of a
court-martial, might be under the ne
cessity of taking secondary evidence in
the shape of newspaper publications of
his statements, all of which are admit
tedly nothing more than abstracts. Per-
haps this fact would not have much
weight with a court-martial. but in or
binary legal practice it would place the
prosecution at a very great disadvant-
age.