Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1901-12-25
SECRETARY OF WAR ROOT.

of inquiry filed by Schley's attorney.
incidentally the man who is called the
cause of it all was asked for his resig-
nation-Maclay. Probably General
Miles was given one of the sharpest
reprimands ever received by a United
States General officer.
How the Lieutenant General Offended.
The first letter of the series is one
from Secretary Root to General Miles,
in which the latter is asked to explain
an interview published as with him
at Cincinnati, Dec. 6. The pith of the
words quoted as coming from Miles is
as follows referring to the Schley find
ings: 81 think Dewey has summed up
the matter in clear and concise man
ner, and l believe his conclusions will
be Endorsed by the patriotic people of
the United States. have no sympathy
with til eefforts which have been made
with the efforts which have been made
to destroy the honor of an officer under
such circumstances"
Miles Explains His Remarks.
To the very brief note asking an
explanation of the foregoing General
Miles replied that his words had no
reference to the action, pending or 9th
erwise of a coordinate branch of the
service; they We're merely my person
nj views based upon matters set forth
in various publications which had been
given to the world, and concerning
which l conceive there was no impro-
priety in expressing an opinion the
same as any other citizen upon Il mat
ter of such public interest"
Makes Further Explanation.
Later, but before the secretary's re-
ply had left the latter's Office, Miles
made an additional statement in which
he says that as he understands 1t, the
court of inquiry unanimously eXoner-
ated him [Schleyl from such epithets
as coward, poltroon. etcetera, and their
opinions We're given to the public for
the information of all citizens. When
/ said that l had no sympathy with
those who had endeavored to destroy
the reputation Of a high officer :"
l had In mind and referred to those
assaults aaginst which the admiral had
appealed for protection and justitica-
ton, and certainly not to a coordinate
branch of the government"
RESPONDS WITH A REPRINIAND
| Root Communicates Roosevelt's ConcIu-
sion to the Chief of the Army.
Roots response to the two notes
from Miles, who is also stated to have
had very warm half hour or so with
the president personally, is as follows
in full. dated War Department, Wash.
ington, Dec. 2, 1901:
"Sir: BY direction of the president
I communicate to you his conclusions
upon your course in the interview tC
which your attention was called by my
letter of the 10Th inst. Your eXplana
| ton of the public statement made by
you is not satisfactory. You are il
error if you suppose that you have the
same right as any other citizen to eX
press publicly an opinion regarding of
fetal questions pending in the cours,
Of military discipline. The established
invariable rules of official propriety
necessary to the effective discipline OF
the service impose limitations upon I'll,
public expressions of military officer.
with which your long eXperieuc,
should have made you familiar. You
duty is to express your opinion on Off
cial matters when called upon by YOU
official superiors, CT in the due course
of your official reports and recommen
dations, and not otherwise.
"rhe first article of the regulation.
governing the army of the United
States provides: deliberations or dis
cussions among military men convey
ing praise or censure or any mark OF
appreciation, toward others in the mill
tary service, are prohibited Til.
provision has been II part of the arm,
regulations for at least half a century
and the highest obligation to obscrv,
lit rests upon the officers whose higl
rank should make them examples Il
their subordinates. Any other rule OF
action in the military service would b,
subversiye of discipline. 1t would no
be tolerated in subaltern, and it vii
not be tolerated in any officer of what
eve. rank.
!, 'The present facts are that for sew