The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1915-12-19
CADET M'GILL'S CASE
SET OUT BY FATHER
Had Nothing To Do With Sweet Case
As He Left v. NJ. l. Before Sweet
Entered Institution.
GUILTY OF MINOR oFFENsE
Told BY Honor Committee To Leave
Because He Told New Man To Hold
Himself Straight. and Punched
Him In the Rack When He Didn't

The following open letter has been
written by Mr.. William l.. McGil 10
correct statement appearing In an
other newspaper in regard to his son,
a former cadet at the Virginia Milf
tary Institute. The VirEinian prints
II that the young man may not suffer
IN injustice. The communication Is
entirely explanatory:
Petersburg Va, Dec II. 1916.
General T. " Nichols.
Superintendent Virginia Military
Institute. Lexington, Va:
Dear Sir.-The Richmond News
Leader OF the l4th instant, i'm It's ac-
count OF the sad and unfortunate at
fair Of Cadet Sweet. published what
purported To- be a1l interview given
by YOU 20 It's staff correspondent.
in his interview the name of my
son. former Cadet William NJ. McGnt.
Of the third class was mentioned iu
such manner that TO tho casual
reader u would appear that he was iG
som" way connected with the Sweet
case and I know that as result Of
the said interview this impression now
prevail.
Tho connection of McGtus name
with he Sweet case Was absolutely
uuwarrauted NcGilE left tho iustl-
tute on the morning of Septc mber IS.
whereas. Cadet Sweet did not enter
the institute until October &. But,
since tho fact OF my sons Dismissal
from the institute has been Published.
! desire the circumstances 1T conpec-
ton herewith stated, so that It may be
known that his only offense was a
technical violation of a new rule
adopted by the first class just few
DAYS before the offeuSe occurred.
The Facts of the Case.
The facts brought out in the pro-
ceedines of the official inquiry APP
pointed bv YOU show that the offense,
for which he was told to leave the In
stitute. consisted IN telling a new ca
DIET to carry himself straight and Civ
ing the new cadet punch in the bacl,
with his open hand when this inJunc-
ton was not needed. Furthermore it
appeared that this happened while
both We're in ranks and as the class
waa marching into the section room
under the eve of the sub-professor in
charge
You Informed me that, although
you had before you the report of the
cadet honor committee, which mad
acted in my sons case. and forced
Linn to leave the institute, without
your knowledge or that of the com
mandant. You could do nothing, as
charge against him. and that, If no
further action were taken, cadet Nc
Gills name would te dropped from
tha rolls Of the institute as Il deserter
Asked Court of inquiry
therefore asked for 81 court Of
inquiry, In order that the cause of my
SONS leaving The institute might APP
pear In the tiles OF the institute anc
the record be kept clear.
In your letter to me, dated October
II. 1915. enclosing the finding Of the
/ court of inquiry YOU stated;
f Permit me To say that ! am very
sure the court, though their finding:
believe that you son was guilty of any
] intentional breach OF the honor sys
tenn of the institution. Certainly dt
not think So
And on a former occasion you haC
stated to me verbally that you consid
! cred his conduct as that Of thought
less boy only
do not question the fact that thu
cadet honor committee acted in BooC
+ faith but / understand that never be
/ fore in the history of the institute ha
t such summary and unsupervised &c
/ ton been taken In ii matter whore thu
4 charge was no more serious than tina
4 preferred against Cadet McGill.
/ In view of the above facts and o
the erroneous impression that ha
been created, l feel justified in askin!
you to correct the injustice to which
/ my son has been subjected by TIT
y interview as reported.
|. Yours truly.
VIM l.. McGILL.