Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1912-02-22
OUTCOME OF THE STRUGGLE
BETWEEN LINE AND STAFF
General Wood Leads Contingent Which Believes
Control of Army Should Be Delegated to
Officers in Actual Touch with Fighting
Strength-Has Criticised Associates

Washington. Feb. 15.-Major-General
Frederick c. Ainsworth Acknowledgement
of the army, was stripped OF his office
to-day by order of President Taft and
will appear before a court martial on
charges said to embrace conduct pre-
judicial to good order and discipline. and
INSTRUMENTATION. His relief from duty
was brought about in a letter to him
from the secretary of war, which bristled
with sharp criticism.
General Ainsworth's removal Is con-
sdored to be the outcome Of many years
Of struggle for control between the line
nnd the staff of the army. Major-General
Leonard Wood. chief of STAFF, leads a
contingent which believes control should
he delegated to those officers. actually in
touch with the fighting strength. Others.
among whom General Ainsworth was a
leading figure, have contended that
supervision should be vested with the
heads of powerful bureaus.
The suspension OF General Ainsworth,
the first that ever has occurred In the
office of the acknowledgements. caused
profound sensation. 1t was made the
subject of a heated exchange on the floor
Of the House. where the army appropria-
General Answorth nor other army or de-
partment officers or officials would dis
cuss 1t.
ELIMINATION OF FRICTION.
The action OF the President was
taken after several conferences with
Secretary Stmson. For some time
there had been friction between the
acknowledgements office and that OF
the chief of staff. Clashes were not
uncommon and there was almost a to-
tai lack OF cooperation. The bad
feeling eliminated when General Aims
worth, In reply to Secretary Stimson's
request for some statistical informa-
ton, made such an answer that the
secretary felt constrained to accept 1t
as a reflection upon his own integrity
and upon that OF other high officers
OF the department.
Secretary Stimson's letter Of sus-
pension took up incidents as far back
rs October, 1909, in which the secre-
tary held the adjutant- general had
been unduly caustic in dealing VITA
his superiors and in criticising them.
Beginning with last December thu
secretary refers to his order to the
adjutant-general to submit to the
tHlet OI StdII OF tne army his opinion
on a proposal to abolish the present
roll and to modify certain other rolls.
I'm reply to this order" says the
secretary. you submitted to the chief
Of STAFF on February a memorandum
dated February 3. In this paper you
iinpugn the fairness and intelligence
of the secretary af war. under whose
authority the proposition in question
cd % -Ic
icise and impugn the military capacity
and experience, the Intelligence and
fair mindedness and, finally question
the honor and good faith Of the Of.
hcers of the general staff and the war
College, whose plan you were directed
10 discuss"
HAD sTIMsON IN MIND.
MIR. Stimson then quotes from General
Ainsworth's memorandum to show that
the latter had him in mind in writing:
I'm compliance with the second part of
the accompanying call the following
statement is submitted. although 1t is re-
cognized that It will be difficult, IL not
impossible. to formulate any statement
that will carry conviction to any one
who is so unmindful OF consequences. or
70 uninforme1 as to the needs Of the gov
eminent and the public with regard to
the matter in question as seriously to
propose to abolish one of the most i'm
portant. if not the most important. OF
all the records of the war department"
The secretary then quotes the adjutant-
general as having added that the state
ment was submitted with the confident
expectation that when other. II not wiser
rounsels shall prevail the statement
etI 4sa ttD,. A.
may not be given 1t now"
In his letter the secretary calls atten-
ton to an attack made upon the chief
of staff in the same statement. After
referring to IA proposal to change the
dating OF some of the rolls, the adjutant-
general continues:
But the adoption OF this proposal could
hardly fail to be regarded generally as
a mere subterfuge Of a kind that would
be scorned by honorable men in any OF
the relations OF private life and that
would be most discreditable to a great
department Of tho government In Its
management Of the affairs Of the nation. y
CALLED ASSOCIATES IGNORANT
In this connection General Ainsworth
Is charged with having declared that the
proponents of the plan displayed q
'lamentable lack Of knowledge" adding
that III they had had. or had profited
by even little service as company
commanders" they would have know
better
Quoting General Ainsworth's memoran.
dunn, the secretary reviews in his letter
he following:
There are other grave objections tc
the proposed plan that might be stated
but If those that have been pointed ou,