The San Francisco call., 1910-07-16
INVESTIGATORS
SCORE MARINE
CORPS OFFICERS
Navy Department Blames Major
General Elliott for Lack of
Firmness and IrritabiIity
Personal Strife Among Officers
Is Result of Clash Between
the Line and Staff

WASHINGTON. July 15.-Personal
strife among officers of the United
States marine corps reached a climax
today when the navy department, as
the result of a court of inquiry, sent
letters Of censure to nearly all the Of
hcers concerned No further judicial
proceedings are contemplated.
The censured officers are Major Cen
eraI George F. Elliott. commandant of
the corps: Colonel Charles H. Lau-
sheimer adjutant and inspector; Colonel
Frank I. Denny, qHartermaster at
Washington; Colonel Charles A. Doyen,
commanding the marine barracks at
the naval academy at Annapolis; Lieu
tenant Colonel Thomas C. Prince, as
ststent QuarterRa ster at Washington:
Lieutenant Colonel Henry c. Haines,
assistant adjutant and inspector at
Washington. and Major Louis J. Ma gill
and Major David D Porter. assistant
adjutants and inspectors at Philadel-
phia and Washington, respectively.
PRoFANE AND IRRITABLE
The court held that General Elliott
hed been profane, irritable and iras-
cible al times, indulging moderately in
intoxicating liquors, but never intoXi-
Gated on duty, and sometimes failed TO
treat subordinates with courtesy, but
was usually polite. generous. truthful
and z plain, blunt soldier, open and
frank" General Elliott was paid
tribute by the court for telling the
whole truth, "even to his own detri-
snent." II he thought the facts had the
least bearing on the question.
He was suspicious" added the court.
tfof the adiutant and inspector, his as
sistants and some others and unjustly
believed they were trying to drive him
from Office
What added greatly TO his irritability
was disease of the right ear, which
tnfirmity does not appear to have been
generally known TO his subordinates.
He worked for the good of the service
and accomplished much, but failed to
.ynaintain discipline at headquarters and
20 enforce proper respect for himself in
ohice."
LAUSHEIAfER BLAMED, TOO
Colonel Lausheimer. according to the
court. had violated the spirit but not the
letter Of the regulations requiring subor-
6instion and loyalty, had been unmili-
tsry. disrespectful and insubordinate
and had made general instead of spe-
cilc reports against his superior officer.
But on the other hand Colonel Lau-
sheimer was declared to be a capable
and efficient officer and one who was
frequently consulted by General Elliott.
Colonel Lausheiner has been on his
present duty since December, 1904.
Among other things he was charged
with evincing a disinclination TO assist
the court in asoertsining the facts, ex-
cept in his own interests, though he an
swered specific questions.
Colonel Denny was held TO have in
tentionally evaded answering questions
on a subject of which he had full
knowledge As to Colonel, Doyen, the
court found that he showed a remark
able failure TO display the proper re-
spect and subordination due to his
mandant.
The court found generally that the
difficulties had arisen from a radical
difference of policy between General
Elliott and Colonel Lausheimer through
the formers lack Of frmness and a too
long tenure Of Office of men in the
sdiutants. inspectors and quartermas-
ters' Departments, resulting in lax ideas
Of subordination and military ethics
and lack Of professional and military
experience.
AUSHEIMER SUSPENDED
The inquiry Of which this wholesale
action was the outcome was ordered as
.he result Of the suspension by General
Elliott Of Colonel Lausheimer for five
says on a charge that he had been
keeping tab" on Elliotts personal
conduct
Colonel Lsusheimer then sought the
court Of inquiry, which sat for six
months hearing testimony. At the bot
.om Of the dissension in the corps is
said TO have been the question of the
successor to General Elliott when he
fetires in October, the fight being be-
-