Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1916-02-18


charge that under the previous adtu
tant-generaI the guard was politics
ridden, and the allegation that under
the present regime many officers
have been removed who belonged 70
his own (Johnson's) political party.
This affidavit takes up the charges
in detail, with particular reference to
the political phase, and after quoting
from the report declares that the state
r1ents are untrue and defamatory and
intended to reflect on the former ad-
jutant-general and the officers and en-
listed men of the guard. many Of
whom" it points out, have devoted
many years service to the guard from
purely patriotic motives and pride in
their organization. -. ~. There was no
politics in the National Guard during
the time mentioned, nor has there
been since the 1911 appropriation BY
the legislature of 100000 for an
armory in Honolulu"
BY this reference to the 1911 appro-
priation it is meant that prior TO that
time the National Guard worked
through legislators to secure much
needed home, in which work 1t was
helped by many entirely outside the
guard, end that with the new armory
assured, all such political activities
we're eliminated. ... -.
Relationship Cuts No Figure. I
Ii is fatty denied that relationship
between members of the legislature
and guard officers, or other similar in.
fluence, made il almost impossible to
secure the removal of Inefficient off,
GERS. One affidavit states that only
one of the officers was, so related and
he had been appointed after passing
the examination for second lieutenant.
One by one the charges Of political
domination of the guard are taken up
and denounced. Finally the affidavit
takes up the statement that Adiutant-
general Johnson has removed many OF
fiiers for inefficiency who are men,
bers of his own political party
mo officer was removed" the aft
davit declares, for inefficiency or any
other reason, and but one officer re-
signed up to date of the writing, of
said report, to wit November IL, 1915,
and that officer was not Hawaiian
officer. Ee
Hawaiian Officers Retained.
'AlI of the Hawaiian officers of the
End Battalion of the regiment referred
to, and all of the Hawaiian officers of
the National Guard who were officers
Of the National Guard at the time the
present incumbent as Acknowledgement
assumed the duties of his office, on or
about August 10, 1916 now are, to wit,
on February Is, 1915, officers of the
National Guard ofT.Hawaii, although |
said Lieut.. Whitener apparently in !
tended to convey the erroneous i'm |
preston by the statement quoted from
OF said report, that some |
Of the Hawaiian officers had been re-
moved"
The affidavit further declares that |
up to November II. 1915. all but one
Of the officers were retained as Off
GERS by the new administration, that |
since that date bdt,three officers have |
gone out of the guard-one by re- |
luested resignation and two by volun
AIRY resignations-that of these three |
officers two are white and one Chi |
lese, and that the requested resigna-
ion was that of white officer.
Other affidavits contain denials of /
he charges of politics just as strongly
vorded, and declare, too, that under
he new administration there has not
,een any such dismissal of officers for
political reasons as would be inferred |
rom Lieut. Whitener's report