The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1918-04-30

Der il now many times the size of the |
British army in the early months of |
the war. Attention is being called by |
those in congress who are complain |
ing against the present system that the |
part played by the British troops even |
when their number was small was the |
subject of official reports by the Brit |
ish war office.
But with part of the American army
holding o sector of the front and Amer ,
lean forces actually taking part in the
battle around Amiens. the American
people have as yet no official reports
to inform them as to what is happening
or to disprove the claims made by the
German official statements as in the
case of Seicheprey.
1t was the Seicheprey fight more than
anything that has happened so far
which has brought murmurs from con
gress over the policy of silence main
tanned BY Secretary Baker. Comment
among members of the military commit
tees has been to the effect that not
only have the German claims been off
set by some official statements of Gen
Pershing, but that the gallantry dis
played by the American forces en-
gagged emphasized in the correspond
ents' mcagre dispatches should have
received recognition in an official state
ment even if it consisted of only few
lines.
| An opportunity to hearten and stimu
late the American people such as would
| be afforded only through official state
ments of this kind emanating from the
war department is being sadly neglect
ed, according to the opinion of those
in congress who are hoping to impress
their views on Secretary Baker.
Another incident of the last week
which helped to stir up the criticism
now being heard was the publication
of the casualties suffered by the ma
rines. amounting to more than 60 per
cent in the case Of one company.
The marine corps has friends with
out number in congress, who feel that
its record has fully justified its re.
cruiting slogan first to fight. One
member of congress. who has taken
special pride in the marines, went tc
the war department and inquired il
the casualties were all the mention the
marine corps was to have. He was TOLD
that under the rule of Gen. Pershing
under whom the marines are serving
nothing else could be said
Officers of the marine corps are re
ported to feel dissatisfied. though Of
course they recognize that the marine
are not Disseminated against any NOR,
than the other units attached TO Gen
Pershing's command. The fact. how
ever, that the navy department is con
stantly giving recognition to the act
of its members has not helped much t,
. allay the feeling which the war depart
ment 9 silence is provoking.
Secretary Baker has emphasized OF
more than one occasion that Gen Perish
ing should be the sole Judge of wha
course to pursue regarding an ofTlcfa
communication. and Gen. Pershing evi
IDENTIFY made it plain to Secretar
Baker when the latter was in Franc
that in his Judgment the time had no
come for bulletins from the field. Al
parently Gen. Pershing's reason wa
that the American forces were not &c
operating In large enough force as a
independent command to Justify it.
1t has also been pointed out at tn
war department that care should b
taken to avoid duplication of I.
French and British reports whic
might cover the same troops. On Ii
other hand, as several senators HAY
already remarked, such duplication OF
ours every day in connection with til
British and French troops now tn;
they are operating together.
There have been some signs since IL
uncertainty caused by the German r
ports of the fight at Seicheprey tn;
Secretary Baker might decide to owe
rule Gen. Pershing. Many members
congress believe that Gen Pershing Ii;
not given sufficient consideration
the effect of such enemy reports on II
American people and that it is tin
the present system should be changed