The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1919-07-24

Lers, ana the Prison de la Roquette as having been investigated. Col. Donaldson stated that the most brutal guard at No. 10 Rue St. Anne was a marine sergeant named Anthony, whom Colonel Donaldson character ized as a thug" Anthony returned to the United States without being punished, but was taken back to France and sentenced.
 One of the striking features of the hearing was the appearance of for mer Lieut.. Col. Samuel T. Ansell, once Acting Judge Advocate General of the army, in citizens clothes, as counsel for Mir. Johnson and other committee members.
 He asked General March questions concerning the opportunity of enlist cd men to reach superior officers with complaints of i'll treatment. The Chief of Staff denied emphatically that en- listed men would not have the chance to communicate their grievances. He said that such a bar in the way of the enlisted man would be directly op- posed to the policy of Secretary Bak- CT.
 General Pershings cablegram fol- lows:
 "Cablegram received at the War De-
 partment.
 Paris, July 19, 1919. From the Adjutant General, Wash
 ington, D. C., No. 2,S37, July 19,
 Confldential)
 For the Secretary of War, Refer
 enoe A3,739
 Prison Farm No. 2, together with the prison stockade, was established d in the vicinity of Chelles, suburb of Paris. during the fall of 1918 as Corps Rnn1a Cp rrf lo Ia ho talion continued to function until De- cember 15, 1918. when the 1st Army Replacement Battalion took over the detachment of the Sd Corps Replace ment Battalion. The 1st Army Re- judgement Battalion came under con trol of the Commanding General, Service of Supply, on Dec. 20, 1918, and was placed finder the Jurisdiction of the Commanding General, District of Paris, on Dec. 23, 1918.
 This prison farm and stockade formed mainly for the purpose of collecting absentees without leave who were picked up in Paris. A number of hundreds of these absen- tees were so picked up during the course of 1918 and sent to the place referred to. Most of these men had drifted to Paris from combat units in the front, but a few came from other places. Some of those men were among the hardest characters in the American Expeditionary Forces
 The plan was to use Prison Farm No. and the Chelles stockade as places where these absentees might be received. tried. where their sen tcnces might be executed, where they might be reclass1ed at end of their sentences and returned to the proper combat unit. Meanwhile 1t was in tended to furnish facilities for em- ployinE them at useful labor and for increasing their military instruction.
 Sub Paragraph A Lieutenants Smith, Mason, Helph enstein and Ser Feant Ball were among the subordi- mates on duty at the Chelles stockade and at Prison Farm No. 2. In the latter part of December it became apparent that various abuses of con fined prisoners had taken place. Elaborate and thorough investigation was instituted and carried out. Masses of testimony were taken and transcribed, the gist of which was finally transformed into charges which 1t appeared prima facie could be sustained.
 The result of the investigation can best be set forth by giving the gist of the charges for which these men were | tried. They were the principal if not the only offenders. The offenses were all committed during November and December. 1918. Trials were had in all i four cases.
 | Charges Against lieutenant Smith. 1 First Lieutenant Frank Smith. Hist Infantry, was tried on the following charges and specifications: Charge | S0th Article of War, eight specified tons alleging various provoking speeches against enlisted men, prison | CTS under his charge. Found guilty of man only. Charge 2, 93d Article of War. eight specifications alleging the fraudulent conversion of money and private property of prisoners under | his charge. Found not guilty. Charge i3, S5th Article of War, four specified tons alleging the striking of prison CTS. two specifications alleging pro- vol1ing speeches and vile language against prisoners. Found not guilty Charge 4, 0sth Article of War, six specifications alleging the giving ot unlawful orders to his assistants re- quiring the brutal treatment of pris- oners, specifications alleging striking shaping and beating prisoners; two specifications alleging the taking of the private property Of prisoners and failing to return the same, also the. or tder1ng of the burning of the private property of prisoners; one specifica- ton alleging gross neglect to furnish | proper food to prisoners. Found guilty of four specifications alleging the issue of unlawful orders, four specifications alleging the striking and threatening of prisoners, one specification osusins the private prop erty of prisoners to be taken and fail- ling to return the same and guilty o1 failing to furnish proper food to pris- l oners.
 Ills sentence, as approved by tho | reviewing authorities, was to be dis
 missed from the service and to D,
 confined at hard labor for three
 ycara It was reduced to confine ment at hard labor for eighteen
 months by the confirming authoritie
 and is published in General Cour
 Martial Order No. 324, O. R. O.. Ma.
 20. 1919:
 Second It. Charles Mason, 16stl
 Infantry, Charge l, s0th Article O | War i specification allesin9 prOvok