Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1916-01-22
SILENCE ORDER
PAPER SAYSIS
HURTING ARMY
All Vital Discussions for Good
of Service Come Under Ban
of New Gag Rule

While it Is indicated through army
and navy papers that the officers OF
the army are not pleased with the or.
der of silence imposed BY Secretary
Garrison's order. the order itself pre-
vents them criticising Il. but no sub
ject just now. judging from army pa
pers. is Of greater interest to officers
than this In q recent article In the
Army and Navy Register some ex-
tracts give an idea OF the feeling pre-
vailing In the service.
while there may be some benefit
derived from the policy of silence I'm
posed upon army officers by the re-
quirements Of a general order from
the War Department issued last Feb
ruary, The Register says. there Is al.
so much Of no harm and, instead, OF
real value lost to the service and to
those not of the service who take an
interest In military-nayaI matters.
That order read as follows: Officers
of the army will refrain until further
orders from giving out for publication
any interview, statement, discussion
or article on the military situation In
the United States, particularly as any
expression OF their views on this sub
ject at present Is prejudicial to the
best interest OF the subject
The various journals which so ably
represent the thought and express the
views of such organizations as the In
fantry Association, the Cavalry Assoc
cation and the Field Artillery Assoc
ciaticn have lately been seriously ham.
pered in the selection of their articles
by the apprehension that the contents
of the periodicals may be considered
by the War Department as violation
of the terms OF the departmental In
junction.
Many Articles Withheld.
There is reason to believe that
many contributions, which might very
well be published and which would
not in any degree embarrass the adj
ministration or injure the service or
prove 'prejudicial to the best interests
of any military naval subject, are
withheld from publication or so modi-
fled before publication as to impair
their salient value to the readers. IL
the general order were read without
a certain amount of imagination as to
its Interpretation, editors of the peri
odicals issued by these officers asso-
Citations would be obliged to confine
themselves in their choice of materieL
to women's fashions, poetry and fairy
tales and yet are not sure that the
military bodice, hymn OF victory,
and the narrative Of that belligerent
hero of Juvenile fiction known as
Jack the Giant Killer might not be
consid Sed as within the interdicted
provision of the departmental order.
An apparent example Of the harmful
effect of General Order 10 Is afforded
by a recent issue Of the Journal OF
the U. s. Cavalry Association In an
article entitled, What Drill Regul-
lations for the Cavalry contributed
by Maj. F. c. Marshall~and Capt. Leon
B. Kroner of the 18th Cavalry, and
by Capt. Frank Parker and
Capt A. N Mcclure Of the same regi-
ment. The Marshall-Kromer paper Is
printed with the following note by the
editor of the Cavalry Journal: Al
though this article was written and
received by us before the issuance OF
General Orders No. 10, current series,
War Department, February %, 1915,
yet II Is thought that the restrictions
therein contained would apply. There
fore, the article, although containing
many valuable, important and pertin-
ent facts to illustrate the subject Of
the paper, has been denatured to fit
the requirements OF the above-mention.
ed order
Vital Discussion Stopped.
Surely there could be nothing Diet.
rimental to the interests OF the service
in permitting free exchange Of opin-
ions on technical subjects by officers
who are profoundly interested In the
questions at issue. Why should not
the infantry officer have an untram-
relled opportunity to discuss the best
method of organization or of increase!
Why should not the cavalry officers
express themselves without restric-
ton from any source in thir own pc
riodical concerning the vital matter
of the revised cavalry regulations?
Why should not the editor Of the
Field Artillery Journal say exactly
what he believes, as he recently did
to his credit and the illumination OF
the problem, on the subject OF promo
ton from single list? The same OBJ
servations apply, OF course, to the
coast artillerists in their discussion OF
any subject which interests them or
pertains to the development OF their
branch"