Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1912-04-17
president RE IS HK
SECRETARY STIMSON ALSO CRlTl'
ClZED BY COMMITTEE in
AINsWORTE CASE.
REPORT is SENSATIONAL
Says That Accusations Against the
General Were Based Upon Preju-
dice; That His Advocacy OF swear
Enlistment Plan Was the Cause. r

g
| Washington-The house COMMITTEES
on military affairs came to the de-
tense of former Adjt. Gen. Fred c.
Ainsworth in report which impugns
the motives of the president Of the
United States, challenges the veracity
of Secretary Stimson and discredits
the ability and experience OF Gen
Leonard Wood, chief Of staff, and
charges that conspiracy between
Stimson and Wood forced Ainsworth
out of office at time when his serV'
ices were most needed by his country.
Charging that the accusations
against General Ainsworth had been
bolstered up to secure his removal and
that the language used by the officer
in his communications had been tor
tured, misrepresented or suppressed
by Secretary Stimson, the report con
tinued:
1.-THE secretary of war in his letter
Of February IA, 1912, addressed to
the adjutant general Of the army, uses
language more Incorporate and less
justifiable than any which your com.
mittee has been able to find In the
Ainsworth papers, or which has been
quoted by the secretary of war"
The committee finds that "the as.
sertions Of the secretary Of war as to
the meaning and intention of General
Ainsworth or his impugning the fair.
ness and intelligence of the secretary
of war are without foundation" so far
as disclosed by papers sent the com
mittee.gs
your committee can only conclude
from the records" is the finding
"that those charges and accusations
had their origin in prejudice, If not
vindictiveness, and determination tc
drive General Ainsworth from active
service, and. have nothing to support
them but bare assertion coupled with
Misrepresentation and the suppress
sion of the truth.
Your committee. being familiar
with all the different phases OF the
Legislative features in the army ap
preparation bill can very readily &C
count for this violent assault on Gen
eral Ainsworth. On May II, 1911, In
response to summons from this com
mittee, and not at his own suggestion
General Ainsworth appeared before
! this committee for hearing on the
bill then pending to fix the term Of
enlistment in the army at five years
He expressed himself frankly and
freely in favor of the measure and his
reasons for favoring the bill were sc
cogent, so convincing and SO clearly
stated as to carry conviction of their
soundness to the mind of many II
not to those of most of the members
of the committee. :
CLEARLY it was to the interests OF
those opposing these measures to dis
credit General Ainsworth and his
views. 1t was known that the army
appropriation bill would come to a
vote on February Is, 1912. On that
date the letter of the secretary OF
war Of February Il. relieving General
Ainsworth from the duties of his Of.
flee was servedSupon him. Soon after
ward. if not; before, copy Of that
letter was in the hands of repre-
sentative and 1t was read on the floor
Of the house in the midst of an as
sault on the fiye-year enlistment pro
vision. and on the heels of a fierce
and bitter attack on General Aims
worth Thus a believable explana-
ton is afforded, which the letter itself
does not show, as to why General
Ainsworth was relieved from the
duties Of his. Office.
IF in the history of this country
there was ever more fragrant abuse
of official authority than that which
was consummated when the 'Stimson'
letter was served on General Aims
worth and copies Of it given stimuli
taneously to the world this commit
tee has never heard of 1t. And the
worst feature of it was that this off,
Ger of long and distinguished service
had no tribunal to which he could APP
peal with any hope of receiving JUS
tice or fair treatment. The letter
shows upon it's face that both the pres
ident and the secretary Of war, and
doubtless their, immediate military
advisers. had prejudged the case with
out giving General Ainsworth any
opportunity to present his side Of It"
Referring to Secretary Stimson's
claim that he was not required to
send the Ainsworth papers to the
house, the committee observes:
1.-THE secretary of war has a very
erroneous idea as to what, his relation
is to the congress of the United
States. His Office is not constitu-
tional. one. He derives no power
from the executive. He is the crea-
ture of the congress of the United
States and as such Is amenable to 1t.
He has no power which the congress
does not confer" @-
Man Roasted to Death. ~