The Washington times., 1906-05-22
A|NSNORTH-BELL
FRICTION DENIED
Chief of Staff Declares Re-
port GrOundleSS.
ISSUES FULL EXPLANATION
General Ainsworth to Act as Secretary
of War on the Recommendation Of
General Bell and Not Over
Latters Protest.
ISSUES FULL EXPLANATION

BriS. Gen. J. Franklin Bell, chief of
staff of the army, has efectualiy sill
enced reports Of friction between him
self and Major General Ainsworth, mill
tary secretary. who outranks him. but
who is not HIS superior officer.
Recently, IT developed that General
Oliver. Assistant Secretary Of War, was
planning TO be absent from the city in
August. at n time when the Secretary
would be absent also. In such a situa-
tion. under the system that had been in
vogue since the creation CT the Office OF
chief of star General Bell would have
become acting secretary. which would
have put him in the position of issuing
orders not only 10 General Ainsworth,
but to the whole army, including a num-
Der Of major generals
When it was recently suggested 10
General Bell that he should fiji the posi-
tiOn, he declared and recommended that
General Answorth, as the ranking Off
Ger IN the general Offices of the army,
De placed in line of succession as act
ing secretary. after General oliver
General Bells statement, in denial OF
the published report, IS as follows:
General Bells Statement.
"In military organization and admin
istration due regard must always be
paid to relative rank. on which depend
nearly all the prerogatives, privileges
and perqulsites of military men.
In this connection. however, mis-
apprehension seems to exist in some
quarters with reference to the position
Of the chief Of staff. Because II took
the place and was substituted for the
position of commanding general Of the
army when that place was abolished by
Congress, It seems to have been general
" assumed that the chief Of star would
hereafter possess the pTerogatiVes. the
functions. and exercise the control here
tofore in the hands Of the commanding
general OF the army-that Is to say,
that he would command the army
This IS not true. RCEimcntal adju-
tants. adjutants general. and chiefs Of
STAFF. being simply executive officers,
have no independent power OF their own.
Their legal functions are confined 90
carving out what they know TO be
the wishes OF their commanders. and
Transmitting their orders Because they
have no real independent power OF their
own. such custom has never been
seriously questioned or objected to by
anyone. But when it comes 10 acting
as Secretary Cf War in his absence, then
real power is exercised
Suggested General Ainsworth for Place
Il have never derived any satisfaction
or pleasure out Of going over the heads
OF any Of my seniors IN rank and length
of service. / have no desire whatever
TO exercise any supervision or control
over them. General Ainsworth IS my
senior both in age and rank and in
length Of service. Because the officer
holding the position Of chief Of stan
has heretofore acted as Secretary OF
War in the absence Of the Secretary, II
was proposed TO designate me 10 dc
the same thing. but having been con.
suited ! recommended the designation
OF General AiuSWOTLh, because as III
is the senior officer in Washington. and
also closely connected with the ad
ministratiOn of the army as myself
preferred he should be designated 81
far as I know. General Ainsworth die
not seek the assignment or raise any
question about it There were certainly
no differences between US about IL. and
never have been. This power has not
have never had IT.
Friction Reports HurthfuI.
1.-The continual repetition in the public
press Of unfOunded suspicious Of friction
between General AinSworth and myself
IS harmful TO the service. It would be
far more logical 20 assume that both
he and I are sufficiently sensible tC
take a reasonable and impartial view
of promoting the best interests OF the
service TO mutually arrive at just and
disinteTesteG solutions Of questions af.
fectlng US both. This assumption would
have another Virtue-it would be IL
strict accordance with the truth"