Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1919-04-08

shall there be such reform in military
court procedure as will permit the
Justification of such alleged offenses as
ought to be justified? 1t has been
made clear that under existing condi-
possess to spirit crushing injustice, or
tions the common soldier who has the
misfortune to incur the displeasure of
an unreasonable or unjust superior
officer, has no more show than a dog.
It has been made clear that so far as
the possibilities Of the court machin-
cry. or rather procedure, goes, there
is as little democracy in the American
army as there is in any other army on
earth. A common soldier who may
have incurred the displeasure Of an
unjust and unreasonable superior, even
though it be through no fault Of his
own, has not as much chance for JUS
tice as has a really guilty offender in
civil life before q packed and preju-
diced petit jury. The case Of a COM
missioned officer who does not stand
in with his fellow officers is hardly
any better. The dominant judicial
spirit of the army seems to be that
just as a brave and heroic regiment
might rightly. be ordered to hold a
desperate position to the last man for
the purpose Of holding a vital opera
ton, any man who might have unwit-
tingly run counter to the fleeting whim
of a hard boiled" superior, can. be
to the penitentiary without
possible hope Of rescue. OF course it
is not to be understood that in actual
practice such occurrences constitute
the rule. All officers Of the army are
not so tyrannical and repraved as that.
Indeed, a great majority Of army off,
GERS represent the highest type OF
courage, honesty and justice that we
have. But in the army there have
been hundreds Of cases Of summary
outrage against helpless private SOL
diers that would not be tolerated even
by an old-time pirate chief. The let
ter from Lieutenant Colonel Ansell to
Baker that has just been
made public, makes it clear that the
army is opposed to the reforms that
Col. Ansell proposes, for reasons which
though maybe satisfactory to the army,
could not possibly have the approval
of enlightened civilians. Col. Ansell
states that at first Crowder and Baker
were convinced to the righteousness of
his proposed reforms and the reader Is
left with the impression that both re-
yersed themselves after having given
their approval solely because they be-
gan to fear that their own personal
ambitions would suffer. Crowder Is
quoted as having told AnseH that he
would have to go back on him in or
der to save his own official reputation
and career. AS to what Is going to-
come Of the publication Of Colonel An
sells letter has not yet fully develop
ed. It appears that there were two
copies Of the letter, one for the secre-
tary of war and one for Senator
chairman of the COM
mittee on military affairs. The Sec
retary of war. returned his copy with
the advice that no good was to come
of its publication, and it is not yet
clear as to whether it was Senator
who gave the letter to
the press. If it can be shown that
Colonel Ansell is responsible he will
be subject to court martial and severe
penalties without much hope OF pro-
lection, unless that protection comes
from the senate, and the presumption
is that in any event his connectlon
with the army will not long continue.
Just now he appears to have sacrificed
his career on the altar Of the cause
to which he has been devoting him
self.