Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-07-06

/ WOr1exS Appeared IN support "a Duu0-
Ing. but no report has been made; It
made In time for Its presentation to the
coming Congress.
For practically all of the individual
companies Of the local Guard the
inspecting officers found fault with the
fact that men were compelled to wear
uniforms and shoes which had been
previously worn by others. This, 1t
was pointed out, is no direct reflection
on the Guard management, as the funds
available make 1t impossible to serve
out new equipment to every recruit.
When man completes his enlistment
In the Guard and provided he does not
re-enliSt. he is required to turn in his
equipment. 1t Is then cleaned and
repaired and the shoes resoled and put
back in the quartermaster stock for
reissue. The only way that such an
Improvement as in this respect was
indicated as desirable by the inspect
Ing oh1cers can be effected is to pro-
vide very large sum for the provision
OF new uniforms and shoes when man
enlists.
The ratings received by the various
units are here given, and the figure
appearing after each is the percentage
Of readiness of equipment and mate
rial for field service as noted by the
inspectors:
Company A, 121st Engineers, salts
factory, 80; Company B, 121st Engi-
neers, satisfactory, IS; Company C,
121st Engineers, very satisfactory, rs;
Company D. l2lst Engineers, very salts
factory, rs; Company E, 121st Engi-
neers, satisfactory, II: Company p,
12lst Engineers, satisfactory IS; Head
quarters and Service Company, 121st
Engineers, satisfactory, 50; Medical De-
partment Detachment, l21st Engineers,
satisfactory, 90.
The Regimental Headquarters was
given rating of very satisfactory. and
the LIST and End Battalion Headquar-
tiers, each satisfactory.
Considerable interest is being mani
tested In military circles in the decision
| of Justice Stafford in the District
Of Columbia Supreme Court last
week in the case instituted by Lieut..
Col. Harry Z. Gladman against on
cials Of the War Department and
Of the National Guard of the Dis
trict of Columbia to compel q re-
storation Of his status as an ofncer of
the Guard, which he alleged the mill
tary authorities sought to divorce him
from without hearing. The Govern
ment, 1t was learned, has decided to ap-
peal to the District Of Columbia Court
OF Appeals from Justice Staffords opin-
Ion overruling a demurrer filed by the
Government to Gladman's petition,
which was presented for the oficer by
Attorney H. WinShip Wheatley.
The matter is attracting attention,
1t was said, because of the fact that it
will result IN q decision as to whether
the military authorities can summarily
revoke the commission of q National
Guard officer without giving MIN the
| opportunity OF being heard and to cross
examine witnesses against him.
Justice Stafford points out in his
opinion that the argument Of the Gov
eminent in support of Its demurrer in
brief is that Section 80. of the National
Defense Act gives the Secretary of War
an absolute discretion to grant, with
hold or withdraw Federal recognition to
any member of the National Guard and
that such individual Is not entitled to
invoke the provisions of Section II Of
the same act, either before the grant Of
Federal recognition or after its with
drawal. The argument also is made
that the Secretary of War and Chief
| or responsible for the formal order
of discharge of the relator as an officer
| of the National Guard; that the major
general and adjutant general of the
District of Columbia Guard had
nothing to do with the action taken
under section SO. 1t is further said ac-
cording to Justice Stafford, that the
withdrawal of Federal recognition had
the effect Of placing Gladman in the
status wherein further participation by
him in the activities, administration or
| affairs of the National Guard was pre-
| cluded by reason of TIE fact that such
withdrawal of recognition must be con-
! Sidered as a discharge of his commits
sion by operation of law; i.e., that
withdrawal Of recognition from GuSrd
oflcer of State does not affect his
specting Guard ofdcer Of the District
OF Columbia operates to terminate his
connection with the Guard.
The court feels" says the opinion.
that the national defense act. as
amended March 4, 1927, is intended to
cover all the land forces of the country
Federal, State, Territory and the
District Of Columbia: If the Sec
recognition from an individual menu
Der Of the National Guard of a
State, that act has no effect on his
status within the State; /. e., he con-
ttnueS to be q commissioned officer of
the National Guard of that State His
commission Is not automatically vacated
and under section n of the act 1t may
not be vacated except by one of the four
methods therein set forth. But it is
said that in the District of Columbia q
National Guard officer occupies a differ
ent status from an of1cer in the Guard
OF State; that he Is purely Federal
ofncer and can have no recognition ex-
cept Federal. It Is claimed section 90
OF the act applies to the District and
that withdrawal of Federal recognition
terminates Federal standing, but that
section az Is not necessarily applicable
to the District. The act does not ex-
clude the District of Columbia from the
provision Of section N and the court
should not close its eyes to that section.
No criticism can be made of the in
spection in this case by any one, includ-
ing the relator (Gladman), If the only
result Is the result contemplated by
section 80, because he would not be
damaged IN any way. He would still
nave his commission. But II the result
OF this inspection operates to automat-
ically vacate his commission, then he
has right to a full hearing.
II the status OF the National Guard |
OF the District Is the same as that Of q
state, then the inspection under section
80 can only result in withdrawal of
FEDERAL recognition. It will have no
erect on the REALTORS commission. He
VIII sttll be an oficer In the District |
could be vacated only under the nrovi-
Sions Of section n.
IF the status Of the District National
Guard differs from that of q state. |
there Is nothing to indicate that CON-
gress intended to exclude the officers of |
the District National Guard from the
Dement'S and restrictions Of section ~, |
and the court feels that the District Ma
tional Guard as an organization is gov |
erned by the national defense act as |
long as Federal recognition is extended
to the Guard Is an organization and |
accepted BY 1t. To withdraw Federal