Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1906-12-22

innocent and the guilty alike. evil
IDENTIFY unmindful of the fact that
this is just what he and his Chief
as representatives Of the govern
ment nave done and are now doing.
Is there a man this side of Heaven
or the other place who could be de
,eived by such language as the
following used by Secretary Taft?
1t is a mistake 10 suppose that
this order is In itself a punishment
either OF the innocent or of the gull
~. 4 discharge would be an utter
~ inadequate punishment FOR those
Who are guilty whether Of commit
ting the murder or of Withholding
or suppressing evidence wnich would
disclose the perpetrators Of such a
crime"
It is inconceivable for one TO be
lieve that man of Secretary Tafrs
widom and influence would declare
that this order of dismissal is not
q punishment of either the innocent
and the guilty unless without tae
statement being at the time before
aim. Here is an order of dismissal.
supplemented By humiliating and
Infamous conditions and yet Score
tary Taft in one breath declares that
it is not punishment and then I'm
the very next sentence declares it
to be an inadequate punishment
thereby admitting that IL is what
moment before he had asserted that
lit is not.
To be plain. he trips himself"
within half-dozen lines. He con-
.tinues.
The use OF the word penalty I'm
the proceeding is a mere misnomer
and is unfortunate The dismissal
from the service of the members of
this battalion under the circumstan-
ces is not a punishment. however
great the hardship There is dis
missal technically known as "a dis
honorable discharge which is only
imposed by sentence by a court.
This is a punishment But the mem
bers Of this battalion were not dis
honorably discharged They could
not have been so discharged except
after trial. They were discharged
for the good of the service. as the
technical phrase Is without honor.
The more we read of the Iabored
efforts OF this distinguished gentle
man, the more we become disguised
He reiterates that this order Of dis
missal is not a punishment and
thereby SAYS that a punishment ISL
not punishment that DISCHARGED
without honor is not a dishonorableI
discharge although the men dischareI
ed without honor are designated I'm
the same order as thugs and muir
derers and declared unsafe guard
ians OF the peace and were put out
of business" for the good OF the ser
vice.
The public VIII fully understand
Judge William H. Tafrs apprchen-
sion along this line. He knows That
his Chief and the War Department
have exceeded their authority in
melting punishment to these men.
the innocent and the guilty without
a civil or a military trial He knows
that this punishment IS weapon
exclusively placed by the Consutu-
tion of the United States and the.
rules governing the army and navy
In the hands OF court-martial or
a civil trial court
II is his strenuous aid to get a.
way then from that part Of the order
which carries with it a penalty. But
can he do IL? Here is the order:
81 recommend that orders be is
sued as soon as practicable discharg-
ing without honor every man in
Companies b. c. and ID of the Twen-
ty-fifth Infantry serving at Fort
Brown, Texas on the night Of Au-
gust 18Th, 1906 and forever debarr-
ing them from re-enlisting in the
army or navy OF the United States
as well as from employment in any
civil capacity under the govern
ment"
Secretary Taft tells us that the
above orders with all of its drastic
provisions. following the colored
soldier even into private life is not
"a punishment. But Inspector Cen
eral Darlington said il was a punish
ment, and President Roosevelt said
it was a punishment; for a penalty
is a punishment and a punishment
is a penalty. Here is another ex-
tract from that now famous order
and recommendation:
In making this recommendation,
recognize the fact that a number
of men, who have no direct knowl-
edge as to the identity of the men
of the Twenty-fifth Infantry. who
actually fred the shots on the night
Of the 18th of August. 1906 will