The Washington times., 1902-04-12
Schofeld's Testimony in
Favor of a General Staff
Made Public.
POWER VESTED IN PRESIDENT
Chief of Staff to Perform Same Duties
as General Commanding-Desn by
Law-Friction to Be Avoided by Re
moval

| The Senate Committee on Military AZ
fairs yesterday made public the testi-
mony given before it on Wednesday by
Lieutenant General Sehofeld and Major
General Merritt. both retired. in favor OF
| Secretary Roots plans for the creation
of a general staff and the consolidation
Of the supply demands of the army.
| In advocating the abolition of the title
general commanding the army and the
substitution of that of chief of the gen
eral staff General Schofield said there
| was no room for the former under the
| Government, no matter who occupied It,
In the first place. there was no legislative
authority for the creation of the Office In
the second. the title was an official false
hood, fiction.
The general commanding did not COM
mand the army. That authority was vest
ed by the Constitution in the President
alone, and had never but once been dele
gated. which was by Lincoln, who gave
Grant supreme authority for time dur
ing the civil war.
In General Schofield's opinion no Presi-
dent could create a general commanding
the army without violating his constitu-
tional oath. for the moment he did so he
abdicated the power given him alone by
the Constitution.
Could Not Act independently.
The Constitution made the President
Commander-in-C Chief of the Army, and
there could not possibly be under him a
commander acting independently Of his
War Minister The latter must necessari-
ly have the confidence of tho President to
the highest degree, for he must be en-
trusted with SO much of the constitutional
and legal obligations resting upon him as
relate to the military establishment not
only OF the War Department alone, but of
the entire army
The plan was an ideal one to divide the
duties OF the military administration. so
that the Secretary OF War should have
charge of those purely administrative the
commanding genera. those strictly mill
tary, and that they should act in entire
harmony. yet independently.
IN practice. however, it did not work
well The functions were SO commingled
that no possible line of demareatfon
could be drawn. Harmony never had ex-
sted. and conflict was almost always con-
slant. although not generally known to
lisagreeable exposures. and he referred to
he removal by General Scott of his head
quarters to New York. and General Sher-
nan to st. Louis. while the present COM
handing general, he said, was not on
speaking terms with the President
Relations With President.
what Is the use of great general
Is the nominal head of the army" Ger
'ral Schofeld asked, elf the President
Will not even talk to him except to cri.i-
Use him. or if the Secretary of War and
lie do not even see each other?'
The personal relations between the
President. the Secretary of War, and the
Commanding General, said General Scho-
ieid. were more important than any law
IN the subject. and that was one OF the
'easons why the passage of the pending
'ili, or something like it, was absolutely
Indispensable. The President must be
,iven discretion to select the man. as the
'ending bill provided. adding:
You might as we'll leave over a Cabi-
let officer from the preceding Admins
ration who belonged to another party
Asked by members of the committee il
he chief of staff. who under the bill,
would succeed to the duties OF commanl-
ng general. would not find his position
qually anomalous, General Schofieid re-
lied that there was only one way to cure
he evil. and that was to make the chief
{ staff subordinate to both the President
nd the Secretary e War. Then thero
Tould be no friction because if any arose
he President could detail another officer
8 chief of staff.
Law to Define Office.
The creation Of such an office by law
nd the clear defining of its duties would
title the question entirely. The question
as not to take away authority from tho
sneral commanding the army. but to give
to him by law; to make a stronger man
I'D yet 20 put a curb on him By the law
Id not let him sail under false eolors,
ot to let this falsehood continue.
Here was great name, and the people
the United States saw it; they read
lie army regulations and they thought
lie general commanding the army had en-
re control of the military establishment.
ct he had not control of single SOL
er or single officer; not one. More
Ter he had no control whatever over
e operations of the departments OF sup
CONTINUED on Eighth Page)