The Washington herald., 1910-09-12
Cause for Desertions.

Cause for Desertions.
Editor The Washington Herald:
II was with great interest, although
with keen disappointment, that read an
editorial in your issue OF the 26th re-
garding the matter Of army desertions.
l have not read the article in the
Cosmopolitan Magazine on the subject
and so cannot pass judgment upon II. al
though am willing to give you benefit
Of the doubt and assume that the mag
azine writer erred in some OF the state
ments made.
But as far as your article Is concerned
/ wish 10 say that you have evidently
/ surveyed the matter at a distance. and at
| present see through a glass darkly; al
| though II you could have the privilege
Of serving several years in the army OF
our country, especially IN foreign service.
you would be able TO see face TO >ace and
then be in a position 10 Judge fairly.
/ acknowledge that as a rule the man
who is in trouble and works under armed
guards Is the one who disregards orders.
shirks duty, is disrespeetful to his su-
/ periOrs. drinks too much al times. and
in general, those who would also be IN
continual trouble II they were not in
the service.
But as 70 the matter OF assertions. that
is different proposition. Some OF these
unfortunstes desert on account Of the
punishment given for their onense. The
army loses nothing through their deser-
lions. as the service is far better on
without them.
But where inves ugation should be made
is why some OF the men with tho best OF
characters, men whose department is
always exemplary, who can always be
depended upon 10 do their duty under
all circumstances, also desert, and why
some OF the men who prove to be the
best soldiers refuse 10 enlist after serving
one enlistment.
The only difference between the latter
two classes is that the man who deserts
has not the fortitude Of the man who re-
mains until the expiration Of his enlist
ment
served four years six months. and
twenty-one days in the service, and know
whereof I speak. Ny discharge was hon
orable, as I was one Of the fortunate
ones who had sufficient fortitude to en-
dure to the end. but would not enlist
again under any circumstances, nor for
any inducement that might be offered.
To tell just why the most assertions
are made and why men refuse 10 re-
enlist 1 wish TO state few facts.
First, TO 20 in the service, a msG may
be native born of blue blood with un-
improbable character, still when he once
dons the uniform he must renounce all
his manhood, independence. and sense OF
justice No matter what indignities may
be heaped upon him he has no redress.
he has no chance to be heard, and II he is
heard IL is in a matter-of-form way at
the best. and his testimony counts for
nothing.
An officer can lie and perjure himself
against an enlisted man, and in the vast
majority Of cases his testimony is taken
In preference 70 that Of the private
soldier. who is counted not much more
than an animal In fact. 1 saw an officer
talk very unruly 10 a man who then
asked If the officer thought he was a
dogA which brought forth the reply that
the man>was not much better than one
While such~expressions may not be fire.
ouent thu fact IS worked out in daily
routine by the treatment and considera-
ton given the men.
Then again as TO the food. Have you
ever sat down 20 eat what is known as
Stun, have you ever eaten duck eggs,
strong enough to almost walk alone;
have you ever eaten decayed and rotten
canned meats. boiled mush. and tar heel
molasses, nnoldy and worm-eaten hard
tack. corn beef hash, wormy bean soup,
with other meals Of like quality?
True, at times we received fair meals.
but never good one, and most Of the
times such meals as enumerated above.
Every soldier who served IN Cuba. 1898:
the Philippines, from 1899 20 1902. inclusive. !
and in China, 1900, will recognize the