The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1901-10-22
He SHES
A BRICK
Alser Out With Ills
Promised
Book.

book on the spanish American
a war which his publishers state
has been delayed and changed because
of the death of President Mckinley, >
will be issued next Thursday
General Alger opens his book with q
survey of the Cuban situation In 1873!
and comments upon our unpreparedness
for war at that time and the splen
did spectacle of our Country's response
to the governments ultimatum upon
Spain. He then leads the reader through
the hurried preparations for war. the
persecution by the Office seeker. the dis
appointment of hundreds of volunteers,
: the demands of sea coast cities and
towns for immediate protection, and
the savage criticism of the military ad-
ministraton's plans of organization and
the battle with apparently endless
shortcomings and grievances. Then
follows the embarkation at Tampa
which was severely criticised at the
time. but which General Alger Is now
convinced that. all things considered
was not a mistake.
The account of the march on San
tiago is graphically pictured.
The book takes up the round robin
signed by the general officers OF Shat
. ter's army while the negotiations fol-
surrender were pending, in which 1t was
stated that this army must move AZ
once or 1t will perish" from the fevers
threatening the camp. General Anger
has no criticism to offer of the round
robin itself, but says that its publica-
ton was one of the most unfortunate
and regrettable incidents of the war.
CRITICISM OF SAMPsO.
General Alger reviews ut length the
differences between General Shafter and
Admiral Sampson, and concludes this
chapter in these words:
d lit Is difficult to account for Admiral
SIMPSONS seeming attitude toward the
army during the operations before san
/ tiugo, as well as to excuse him for his
contradictory statements subsequently
maze in his official report After the
| 3rd of July. the admlral's conduct may
bc due TO the keen disappointment, re-
sulting from his non-particfpation In the
engagement with Cervcra's squadron
! Possibly he felt that Skaters request
/ for Il conference on the morning OF July
Bird innocent though II was, was re-
sponsiblc for his being deprived of the
honor of actively participating as com
mander in chief. in one of the most re-
marketable victories in the annals OF naval
warfare"
General Alger reviews the Niles .agan
controversy over the alleged furnis .ling
OF "embalmed beef To the army, and
tells of the appointment by the presi-
dent, at his request of the commission
to investigate the conduct of the war
department in the war with Spain. The
! commission met September "a. 1895, he
says,and up to December 81 of that year
had taken testimony in seventeen towns
and cities and>in many different camps.
granting to citizens, soldiers ana former
soldiers an opportunity to appear .or
complaint or testimony of any kind re
garding the conduct- Of the war"
Many thousands of soldiers were in
Vitcd to give their evidence without re
gard to rank or service.
"On the 2lst OF December" continues
General Alger, the major general com
mHnding the army of the United States
appeared before the committee then sit
ting in Washington and made the state
mcnt with reference to the canned, fresh
and refrigerated beef furnished ~ t..e
army during the war.
although the commission had been sit .
ting nearly three months the charges
wnn respect to canned and refrigerated
beef We're now made for the first me:
and, stranger and more ineXcusable and
more unsoldierly st!ll. during all those
months, with this splendid knowledge of
/ facts, which, If they existed, should have
been made known 10 the secretary of
war for the protection OF the army Gen
cral Miles had never mentioned the sub
! icCt.
! General Miles seemed to he pleased
with the notoriety which his startling
statements before the commission and
his subsequent newspaper interviews
gave him, for again, on the 3lst of
March, 1883 in New York city, he pub
! hshcu, through representatives OF the
Associated Press and a metropolitan
paper additional charges. This unmih-
tary ana questionable method OF max
( ing public grave and scandalous charges
! regarding a brother ofiicer and the work
of his Northumberland which subse-
quent and careful investigation proved
both unwarranted and untrue-seemed to
appeal to certain characteristics Of the
major general commanding to which ref
erence would be out of place.
( SAYS MILES WAS NOT SINCERE.
IF We are to believe written evidence
to the contrary, it does not appear that
General Miles, was even honest In max
ing his dilatory charges that ,.e timed
beef was issued as the 'preLense of an
experiment and 1t was now a part OF
the ration. On the nth of June, 1895, his
most confidential staff officer signed q
letter, by direction of the major general
commanding the army instructing the
depot commssary at Tampa to furnish
to General Nunez l0,Gii pounds of canned
| roast beef to be issued from the subsist-
ence department of the army II We are
to accept the reading of this letter as
correct II proves that General Miles knew
| that canned fresh beef was a part of the
ration; that he knew there was large
quantity OF 1t at Tampa for issue to the
[ troops, and that he SO far approved of
its use TO direct that the ration be fur
nished in large quantities to our allies
on the islands
The English cricketers won then sec