OCR Text |
Show iCOUHTS MARTIAL are mm ! General Crowder Answers Ansell's Criticisms in Letter Let-ter to Secretary Baker. Investigation of Matters Under Controversy Or- dered by Department. WASHINGTON, March 9. Differences between Major General Enoch H. Crowder, Crow-der, judge advocate general, and Brigadier Briga-dier General Samuel T. Anscll, formertact-ing formertact-ing judge advocate general, were explained ex-plained and tiie ordering of a thorough Investigation In-vestigation by the Inspector general of the army into the whole subject of the administration of military justice during the war was disclosed in a letter from General Crowder to Secretary Baker, made public today at the war department. Accompanying Genctal Crowder's letter was one from Mr. Baker asking the judge advocate general lor a complete statement as to the operation Of military Justice. Tho secretary wrote that his own acquaintance ac-quaintance with the facts convinced him that the conditions implied by recent complaints com-plaints "do not exist and had not existed," ex-isted," but that It was "essential that the families of all those young men who had a place in our magnificent army should be reassured." In reply General Crowder made a general gen-eral defense against recent criticisms in congress and elsewhere concerning courts martial cases and charged that General Ansell, without his knowledge and consent, con-sent, had submitted a brief to Secretary Baker early in the war urging a revolution revolu-tion lit the military justice system. Order Revoked by Baker. OenorM Crowder also said that at about the same time that this hrief was submitted. sub-mitted. General Anseil; without consulting the secretary of war, obtained an order from the chief of staff appointing Anseil acting judge, advocate general. This was after General Anseil had requested General Gen-eral Crowder's aid in getting such an order or-der and ban been told by the latter to take the matter up with Mr. Baker. The order was revoked by Secretary Baker before it was published after General Crowder had called k to Mr. Baker':; attention. at-tention. The judge advocate general raid the "supposed controversy" between himself and General Anseil as to military justice had been magnified "since the real issues and the only ones" were in differences of opinion as to whether the power to review re-view and overturn executed verdicts of general courts martial existed and whether that power should be exercised by the judge advocate gtneral or the president. Answers to Criticisms. Turning to criticisms that the sentences of courts martial during the war have been atrociously severe, General Crowder Crow-der wrote that this was not a criticism of the system of military Justice and not a criticism of his administration of that system. "It is a criticism." he said, "of the officers offi-cers who Imposed, for instance, sentences of death for sentinels convicted of sleep- (Continued on Page 2, Column 6.) COURTS MARTIAL M. DEFENDED (Continued from Page One.) ing on post, for soldiers wilfully and contumaciously con-tumaciously refusing to obey the direct orders of their commanding offlcei'3, and for desertion in tiue of war, and it is a criticism of the coneress which -authorized a death penalty in plain statutory terms to be assessed on conviction for these offenses. I do not mean :o say that, if criticism in the connection is due I am Immune. I am not. I agree with the statute, and shall defend it, but I am not responsible for it. "Considering the charges from the standpoint of the officers who assessed the sentences, let us see who they arc. They ere men taken In a general dragnet through the nation. They come from every walk of life. There are 200,000 -of them. They comprise a faithful cross-section of our whole people and our national life. Difference "of Opinion. ""VVhnt is this charge 01 severity by them? We have seen that it can not be an indictment of the system. It is simply sim-ply a difference between the opinions of well-meaning and humenc critics far removed lrcm the scene 01 the offenses punished and with only a partisan, inadequate inade-quate and high'y colored statement of that case to guide them, and the opinions of men who considered tne tacts unoer tne solemn obligation of an oath to be .:on-cst, .:on-cst, impartial and fair, who lived in the environment of the offense and were steeped in the reasons making it grave and who assessed the sentence on the performance of the highest civic duty of man the defense of home am! country. "These men cannot merit the Indictment Indict-ment and diatribe that lias been heaped upon their action. To us at home, in comfort and in present peace, it is next to impossible to reconcile the almost unanimous view of soldiers in the field or thenter of war on the gravity of these and many other lesser offenses by their comrades. No Sentences Executed. "Therefore, the execution of not one sentence has been executed. Also heavy sentences have been reduced comprehensively comprehen-sively and uniformiy. But even witll that said, I can neither condemn the 100, joO officers who assessed the sentences nor the law of coneress, nor the system under un-der that law that made them possible. "I come now, with the utmost reluctance, reluct-ance, to a few distasteful paragraphs of personal vindication. My motives and my actions have been attached, and I have been advertised as having hampered the efforts of fleneral Ansoll. I have been set off against him as reactionary." Reviewing his eflorls to obtain a complete com-plete revision of the old military code which finally were successful In 1916, General Gen-eral Crcwder said: "During much of this time Oeneral An-sell An-sell was one of the most promising and trusted officers in my office. During all the time that the code was in ro!sion he never sugge'ted to me nor, so far as I can Irani, to ary one else, any of the chances he is suergesting now. Ho participated partici-pated In preparing the manual for courts mnrth'l, which was based upon the new code, but he ndanced none of these' new-view new-view s. When First Advised. "Indeed the first time that I was advised ad-vised of such a view was in November 1?17, on the occasion ot his presenting to you not through me and intlre y without with-out consulting mc ihr- first of the elaborate elab-orate briefs about v.hi.-lt to much has been made. "It has hcen cnargrd thai, as a result of that brief, an order des.gnatmg him as noting Judge advccnte general was revoked, re-voked, and futther. thai he was relieved lrom his dvit'.es of supervising Ihe administration admin-istration of military ju.-.llce. .Nothing could be farther from the tr.nh. 11,. was never relieved from his dutlt-s sup, rvisoic the administration of miliiarv Justice cNccp- I to take a trip to France, which t- " eager to do. 1 "But I deem it unnecessary to infield in-field of accusation further ana (lis:-; n.anv issues of fact which n.o : raised, as I am informed that It- spector-general of the army lias V. ignated to conduct a thorough i"--iion and make all the aseeiuu-: fact that are necessary to eluciu . administration of military justice the war period." |