The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1902-01-04
M11Es-DEwEY RRPRIMANp.

A New York paper in discussing the
| reprimands administered to General
Miles and Admiral Dewey by Secre-
taries Root and Long. makes the fol-
lowing observations:
1t Is the general impression that law
yers ere less addicted than military
men to summary methods, but this be-
lief is not borne out by the proceedings
of the two able attorneys in charge re-
spectively of the war and navy depart
ments
Secretaries Root and Long have pub
licly reprimanded the highest officers of
the army and navy without trial or
hearing. Now a reprimand in the fight
ing services differs materially from the
compliments sometimes exchanged By
washerwomen over the back fence. II
Is regarded as a much more serious
matter. 1t is a definite punishment
whose infiiction Is strictly guarded by
the regulations.
The rebukes so airily launched by
Lawyers Root and Long have caused
deep agitation in the military and naval
services. The Army and Navy Journal
discussing the case of General Miles, OBJ
serves:
1T would seem to be well, therefore,
in the interests of discipline, and for the
instruction of the service, to determine
how far the president, or the secretaries
OF war and the navy, speaking in the
name of the president, have the right to
thus inf1ict humiliation, not to say dis
grace, upon military officers subject to
the control of the president by virtue
or MS authority as chief
I'VE speak of the right of the chief
executive and not of his power to do
as he pleases in the matter, for that is
practically unlimited, as more than one
officer, of otherwise blameless reputa-
nv
was the common practice during the
days of the truculent Stanton for army
officers to be subjected to humiliation,
ana even insult, without redress, and 1t
is because there appears to be a dispo-
sition Of late to return to this method
OF enforcing discipline that the question
of right involved becomes important"
Our service contemporary proceeds to
show that the army regulations do not
apparently contemplate the infection of
a reprimand. even by the sentence of
a court martial, for such an offense as
that attributed to General Miles. But
when a reprimand is to be inflicted at
all it is after trial and conviction
by article 1893 of the regulations,
punishment for light offenses is limited
to the censure of the commanding off,
Ger, and a reprimand such as has been
can only be administered on the verdict
of a court martial, as 1t is a distinct
and well defined punishment, for spe-
cially named offenses Even a nom
commissioned officer is under the pro-
lection of article 256, which directs Off
GERS to be cautious in reproving him in
the presence or hearing of private sol
dierS. Is it not incumbent that at least
equal consideration should be shown to
the officer commanding in the presence
of his military interiors;"
Mr.. Root would not sentence a pick
pocket off-hand to sixty days in the
county Jail without a trial. Yet that
would be an infinitely lighter punish
ment for the piczpocket than a pubic
reprimand is for an officer imbued with
the traditions of military honor. But
the training that has made Mr.. Root
such an admirable counsel for corpora
lions has not qualified him to under
stand that