New-York tribune., 1906-12-06


be true of many Because there may be in
nocent men in the battalion. must the govern
ment continue to use it to guard communities
of men, women and children when II contains
so dangerous element impossible of detection!
Certainly not. When a man enlists In the army
he knows that, for the very purpose or pro-
tectng itself, the government reserves to itself
the absolute right of discharge, not as pun
ishment, but for the public safety or interest
In such a case as this the inconvenience and
hardship TO those innocent of participation or
knowledge. arising from arbitrarily terminating
the contract OF enlistment in accordance with
the right which the government by statute re-
serves, must be borne by them in the public
interest 1t goes without saying that II the
guilty could be ascertained they should and
would be punished, but the guilty can not. be
ascertained, and the very impossibiiity or deter
mining who are the guilty makes the whole
battalion useless to the government an In
strument for maintaining law and order. The
only means of Kidding the military service of a
band of would-be murderers of women and chill
dren, and actual murderers of one man, is the
discharge of the entire battalion.
Might not any community into which the War
Department should send this battalion, in which
1t is known that there are from nine to twenty
murderers, justly complain that the Dattallon
is not q proper instrument for maintaining the
supremacy OF the law? Could we properly send
such battalion to the Philippines or Cuba to
maintain peace or furnish example Of orderly
conduct? If q similar outbreak were there To
occur could we relieve ourselves from RESPONSE
bility for it on the theory that could not
detect the particular ten twenty who were
guilty of the first murder?
Suppose dozen men Of the battalion sta
toned at Fort Brown In tlIIle OF a war with
Mexico carried plans and ammunition 10 the
enemy the other side OF the ttlo Grande
River, and then returned under circumstances
which made it clear that a large number of
men in the battalion must have known VINO
they were, but that every man in the battalion
denied all knowledge OF 1t, and thus all means
of detecting the guilty were lacking Would
a competent general for one moment hesitate, IN
the interest OF the public, TO dlsoahd the ehUIe
battalion and discharge 1t from the service In
order to avoid a repetition OF the danger!
Can a real and logical distinction be made
between the crime OF treason, under the clrcunl-
stances supposed, and the crime or murder IN
this case? Both are capital onences one per-
haps more heinous than the otner' az ahu iloto htt
dangerous to the government ITSELF put IN ooei.
cases it seems TO clear that the government
must protect itself and the community TO wnich
1t is responsible from recurrence OF suca
offences not by furnishing guilty and innocent
alike but by separating both the gullty anu anu
inpocen+ from the service so as to deprive the
guilty of q second opportunity for such a CRIME.
even though this may result in inconVehiehce
and perhaps hardship to the innocent a., T.,
IT IS a mistake to suppose that TINS oIoeI - - -
itself a punishment either of the innocent VI VI
the guilty. discharge would be an utterly IL
adequate punishment Tor tnoso a mrio Or o. of with
whether of committing the muroer. pr, or Oi Via m
holding or suppresstng evidence "LnSh ~
disclose the perpetrators or sucn a q a5i a,,o "a
use of the word penalty In the proceeonlss MSS ~ 5,s
mere rnisnomer and is unfortunate; Inc us i3
missal from the service of the members Oh inns
battalion under the circumstances is n0t pui. =
fshment however great the hardship: iheEe - q
dismissal technically known as a olshonoI ATIe pS
discharge. which is only imposed py se.eiUe tb ] N.
bers OF this battalion were not dishonoraplS @ ats
charged They could not have @ been sS. SO Gis- dIs-
charged except after trial. They were us
charged for the good of the service, as the
technical phrase is, without honor II rs not q
fortunate phrase, because so easily com uSo9
with a dishonorable discharge. 1t is called
"vithout honor to distinguish the olschdTSe
from discharge with honor. or an i
discharge, which indicates the terfnlaationi i, IN
due course of a satisfactory service. An ehnSt-
ment brought prematurely to an .bIe emu tTa 6iso
good of the service can not be an honoTaDle as
Charge Hence the distinction must be hlade.
The discharge without honor is merely me
ending of a contract and separation from tLe
sarvice under a right reserved in the statute ior
the protection Of the government WnlCn iiIat nt
work hardship to the private disonaag'en. obs be
which in the public interest," tnus1 soihe'A 49,
arbitrarily exercised
INNOCENT MAY BE RE-ENLIsTED'
Fut T. Is said that the order forbids re-entry
NV fhe discharged men into the army or masy
civil service and TINS Is s .ba a1oSd Of the
service It naturally follows mat ne can no. I, ne
taken back and the President IN I.Is IorL.si,1 -
stating this result is not imposing psalI1try IT, 80
tba nroner sense Of the term He Is only laying
down rule of ineligibility for the service VIII
respect 20 which II Is his executive duty 70 pr
scTibe t1e rules OF admission. Should hereafter
facts be disclosed new state or taoIs atI
from which It can be inferred ina, aIsntrv sa-e Of
81, one Of these men into the service, his IN
eligibility can be removed by mere executive
order o,,.a ,o- +nosa who
have been so long in the public service as SON.
of the non-commissioned oI1cers anu r. a.; 20 he
this battalion Of the 25th Infantry. l, Is 10 "a @
saiS With respect TO these non-commissioned olll
GERS that upon them especially rails the outy u
vnain+aining the discipline of the companies anu
the battalion, and that py reason ot IT, tTaT,
service and from their official authorlIy uIoS
have more influence over the men ana more oP-
portunity TO learn the circumstances ieaoliis "
a detection of the guilty in this case than any
others connected with the regiment. 1ndeeo IL
T,os thair peculiar duty 10 find out and disclose
the facts but they have failed TO do so. II may
ha that they were not derelict in this. III not'
then they have had the misfortune TO be asso-
oiated With men whose conduct and immunity
from detection require the government IN the
nublic service TO exercise It's reserved CONTRACT
right of discharge against the entlre Douy OIL
which they were members
The suggestion made in some quarters that
this battalion has been treated IN this way SIM
plv because the men are colored hardly merits
notice The fact of their color ana the raclaI
feeling aroused between them and the citizens
Of Brownsville may have been the cause ana
furnished the motive, but certainly not Justlil-
cation for the plot TO murder men, women ana
children. but to this extent only In explanation
of the circumstances is the fact OF their color at
all relevant.
In q bodv of men sworn to uphold the law,
enlisted as the instruments OF maintaining the
| supremacy Of the law, obligation of cOmrade-
ship. which would prevent one from telling the
truth and detailing the circumstances that would
lead to the conviction of his associates OF MUIR
der can be recognized by those IN authority ana
/ charged with the responsibility of maintaining
! the discipline of the army.
It is possible that evidence may be adduced
! in future which will tend to exculpate entirely
| some of the men now discharged, both from par
ticpation in the crime and assistance In the con-
spiracy OF silence TO prevent the detection of the
| offenders; and whenever such facts are shown
| in respect to any affected by the order, they
| will be brought 10 your attention. and, under
| stand. will render such persons eligible TO re-
enlistment.
|