788 ESTABLISHMENT OF MILITARY JUSTICE .

Chief of Staff, say that there had been no change in the substance. The con-
ersation between us terminated about that point. It was late in the after-
noon. The next morning when I returned to the office I dictated a memorandu m
order to Gen . Ansell asking him to put in writing what he had said to me th e
evening before, and, as I remember, said with respect to the order having been .
issued unwittingly by the War Department . In the early morning hours h e
came to me with my order in his hand and said he did not quite understan d
why I asked him to put that conversation in writing ; that I ought to under-
stand that it would be embarrassing for him to do so . He seemed wrought up
and to some extent agitated. It was evident that he desired to avoid com-
pliance with order, and I said to him, " All right, Ansell, just so you and I .
have the same recollection of the conversation ." He left, carrying the order
with him, and it must be in his possession . I think he had both the original
order and the copy . I have no copy in my office. I expected him to leav' th e
order with me, but he carried it away with him and I never called upon him to
return it .
Q . Did you have any conversation with the Secretary of War relative to th e
issuing of that order?A . I heard a conversation between the Secretary of Wa r
and Gen . Ansell on the subject .
Q . What was its purport?A . His statement differed in some respects fro m
the statement that I have made. The point was not pursued because during the
conversation the Secretary of War stated that he was not particularly con-
cerned with words used, but had sought the interview with Gen . Ansell for th e
purpose of ascertaining his real state of mind and that he would not indulge in .
any controversy about words . Gen . March was present at that interview.
Q . Was that order allowed to stand after the Secretary of War and Gen .
March learned of it?A. No immediate action was taken for a few days, per-
haps three or four ; the matter was left undecided, and the next informatio n
I had came from the Secretary of War himself when we were leaving th e
War Department Building one afternoon. He said to me at that time, " I
think the best thing to do is to discontinue the branch office in France an d
that will automatically repeal General Order No . 84 ." I said to him, " That
will require serious consideration." The next information I had was from a
telegram which had gone to Gen. Pershing discontinuing the office in France
and revoking all orders and instructions relative thereto . That order wa s
not issued upon my recommendation. A proposition is now pending to reviv e
the office in France, but with the jurisdiction similar to the jurisdiction of the
office here, minus this extraordinary power to control the action of the re-
viewing authorities, respecting their action upon sentences .
Q . Referring to the statement that this order is now being opposed by th e
Commanding General in France you state, " But it is not true to a certai n
extent that the order is being opposed by the Commanding General, America n
Expeditionary Forces . On the contrary no word of opposition is on recor d
nor can any trace be found ." In the files which you handed me to-day I
found some cablegrams which refer to that matter . I have not been able to
digest them and am not able to question you very intelligently on that subject ,
but in looking it over it occurred to me there were cablegrams which appeared
to be a protest to the Judge Advocate General .A . The protest you foun d
in that bunch of papers, if you could call it a protest, was against the estab -
lishment of the office in the first instance, and refers to a prior date and no t
to this action at all: Our first orders over there were misunderstood and for
more than a month action was delayed in establishing the branch office i n
France, and some inquiries came up which indicated that Gen. Pershing
thought it was unnecessary for an army operating in the theater of war . In
respect of this last incident, which was a recent incident, the Commandin g
General of the Expeditionary Forces was not brought into the controversy
between Gen . Bethel and Gen . Kreger, in any way that I noticed . It seemed
to be a difference between two lawyers and two Judge Advocates General ,
which had been certified for the opinion of the Judge Advocate General of th e
Army. I am not aware that Gen . Pershing had the matter brought to his
attention and in that sense I made this statement .
Q. Will you state briefly the sequence of events in connection with the four
soldiers who were sentenced to death in France? A . You are entitled, in
answer to that question, to an exact chronology of executive administrative
action on those four cases, which I am not in a position to give, not havin g
recently revived my recollection by recourse to documents, but can state wit h
substantial accuracy .