The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1925-03-04
Large Quantity of Booze Is
Found on U.- S,
Transport. z
BY CHARLES p. STEWART
NEA Service Writer

WASHINGTON, March 4.-The
/ NX/l Beaufort liquor scandal Gre
Wv ates orc of the most difficult
situations the Army and Navy eyer
had to deal with.
That a large quantity Of whisky
+, was found by raiders who searched
the transport on her arrival at Nor
folk from the West Indies. there is
no question.
AT least forty cases are accounted
for definitely, not TO mention some
which is believed to have been
struggled ashore during the excite
ment and still more which the own
ers managed to heave overheard.
What makes the case so hard to
handle is that the intoxicants were
found in the staterooms of Army
and perhaps Navy officers who were
returning on the transport from
duty In the West Indies. SO that the
board of inquiry cannot very con-
vincingly report inability to deter
mine responsibility.
This was what happened when a
similar discovery was made on the
Beaufort once before and several
months earlier on the naval collier
Kittery.
The authorities also managed to
hush these two previous affairs up
at the time. as many. have been done
on still other occasions which have
not even yet come to light.
Court-Martial Unlikely
In the present instance publicity
forces action anS a whitewash, II
one is attempted. will be, SC Obvious
that a tremendous outcry is sure to
be raised.
On the other hand. it promises to
be almost impossible to get a court
martial together which will penalize
an offense recognized as almost uni
versal in both the army and navy
commissioned personnels.
The board of Inquiry appointed by
Rear Admiral Roger Welles, COM
mandant of the Fifth Naval District.
to investigate the Beaufort case, Is
mixed body composed OF both
Army and Navy officers, since both
services are involved. It will impose
no pInishments but simply return a
finding of facts.
Then 1t will be the business OF
the Army and Navy respectively to
take up the individual cases Of such
officers Of each service as the report
points to.
II me consequences of conviction
were trifiing the matter would not
be the subject OF so much of
fiutter in military circles, but they
may be very serious professionally.
The unauthorized presence of
liquor on naval vessel is prohib-
tied by definite regulations and
Navy officers who disregard It auto
matically subject themselves to dis
cipline. ..-.,..-..
II Army Man Different
An Army officers position is diff
ferent. Not being subject to naval
rules, he can take liquor from a
wet, foreign port on board trans
port without laying himself open to
any specific accusation, though the
transports officers would be bound
to prevent 1t IL aware he was do
ing so.
In the Beaufort case. however, all
appearances are that an attempt at
smuggling the wet goods ashore was
being made.
This. If proved, viii be q civil not
military offense. but the military
authorities certainly will have to
take measures against any officer
who may be civilly convicted Of rum
smuggling, as guilty Of conduct TN
becoming his uniform.
The cashiering OF anybody con-
victed thus is not beyond the bounds
Of possibility.
In Army and Navy circles interest
in the fate OF those caught in the
raid is at least equaled by curiosity
concerning the identity Of the
''squealer" who furnished the infor-
nation which led to It.
If discovered. and a member OF
either service, his relations with his
fellow officers Will be far from
pleasant henceforth.