The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1919-03-24
OUR OFFICERS DEFENDED.
Their Record Cited in Reply to Pres
dents LowelPs Criticism.

To THE EDITOR OF THE SuN--Sir: In
his annual report President Lowell Of
Harvard, arguing in favor Of military
training IN the university. asserts that:
War has shown the need of q broader
preparation for modern war than most
OF our officers received. There seems
to be no doubt that our losses In bat
tie were much larger than they need
have been II the orncers had been more
familiar with the conditions they were
called upon to meet.
This statement contains a serious re-
Election upon our officers in the war.
In the first place were our losses
greater in proportion than those of our
allies? What makes this point raised
by President Lowell peculiarly interest
ing at this time is that lately there have
been whispered vague hints of adverse
criticism of the officers OF the United
States Army as distinguished from the
high praise of the enlisted men.
In the second place, is It true that
our officers as class were 80 I'M
| trained?
Let us consider the material for off,
GERS the United States drew on in 1917
and 1918.
We had first the officers in active ser
vico who. together with those on the
retired list and those who had resigned,
must have made a force of several thou
sand highly trained military officers,
with experience In the Indian and Span
ish wars. in the Philippines and in the
Mexican border warfare.
Second, the National Guard, compris-
ing both officers and men who might
be said to be at least familiar with
military affairs from service of sew
ell al years.
Third, the veteran volunteers OF the
Spanish American war.
Fourth, the intensively trained young
officers of the special United States
training camps of 1s17-1S.
Fifth, the university men from the
colleges and the scientific schools.
Sixth, We had the undrilled and I'M
disciplined young American, the prod
uct of the free institutions of demo-
cratic nation, eager to learn to be either
an officer or a private. as occasion might
require, for the sake Of his country.
Carl Schurz. who was familiar with
the armies OF Germany and of the United
States, describes the superiority of the
American soldier in the following words:
Here Is the secret of IL. which the
European mind. unacquainted with tho
genius of this country, finds It dificult
to understand. Owing to the educa-
tional power of free Institutions many
things are accomplished In America
without much drill and discipline FOR
which In Europe very much drill and
discipline are required.
Such was the stuff of which our off,
GERS were made in this war. Did Eng
land. France or Germany have better?
But 1.-THE proof OF the pudding Is in
the eating" How did these officers
acquit themselves? The English and
French Generals and General Pershing
have had only praise for them. Whence,
then. this after war gossip OF our after
dinner Generals. "damning with faint
praise General Pershing. his stan and
all our officers as a class, and then with
great emphasis coating the pill by en-
larging upon the magnificent bravery,
and especially on the physical freshness
and activity. of our enlisted men, omit
ting always such qualities as their SUI
perior intelligence. ingenuity resource
fulness. adaptability. self-sacrifce and
good character?
So great Is the emphasis on this BRAY
cry OF the American enlisted man as
to arouse the suspicion that it is not
so much the praise OF the enlisted man
that is intended as the implied slur at
the ability OF the American officer. But
results have spoken louder than words.
NEW YORK, March 20. 7. H.