816 ESTABLISHMENT OF MILITARY JUSTICE .

I can not say this with reference to Gen Ansell, because, as I say, wheneve r
a case came up involving an application of General Order 7, he would call m e
into his office and rehash the whole controversy time and time again . He woul d
defend his views and criticize the views which Gen . Crowder had adopted, and
it was an unending controversy until some time in, perhaps, March, 1918, whe n
it reached a sort of climax and Gen . Ansell and I had some discussion abou t
the matter, and he told me he was tired of hearing my views on the matter ,
and I said I was only answering his own questions ; and after that he never
discussed ally of his opinions with me, but frequently thereafter he discusse d
them with Col. Clarke, my senior assistant .
Q. I am speaking as to whether or not there were any criticisms of a persona l
nature about the office of such character that they would create or tend to creat e
discord in the office ; interfere with cooperation and teamwork?A. Well, I
will answer that question byI don't think there was . I think Gen. Ansell
criticized Gen . Crowder for wanting to hang on to the office of Judge Advocat e
Generalas he termed itbut that was a criticism which, so far as I know ,
was expressed only to myself and to two or three other officers .
Q . Have you any knowledge relative to the procedure of Gen . Ansell i n
securing the issuance of the order relieving Gen . Crowder and appointing him .
I speak now of anything beyond the memoranda which are of official record?
A. Yes, sir ; I have. Gen . Ansell consulted me before asking Gen . Crowder i n
writing to concur with him in a request that he (Gen . Ansell) be designated
in orders as Acting Judge Advocate General . He showed me before he sub-
mitted it, and read to me a memorandum which he was sending to Gen .
Crowder, in which this request was embodied, and a day or two later he showe d
me and discussed with me Gen . Crowder's reply . Gen . Ausell was very much
disappointed and seemed a little bitter over the fact that Gen . Crowder had
refused to join him in that request. I do not know what Gen . Ansell did after
that to secure the issuance of the order, inasmuch as he did not thereafter sho w
me or consult with me about its issuance . I only know what I have stated ;
that he proposed first to get Gen . Crowder ' s concurrence, and that he failed
to get that. What he did after that I am unable to state .
Q . The order relieving Gen . Crowder and appointing Gen . Ansell is dated
November 8, and according to the records a copy of that was delivered t o
Gen . Ansell on that date, or possibly the following day .
The memorandum review of the Texas mutineer cases, as I recall it, war s
dated October 30 . This case was submitted or received in the office of th e
Chief of Staff on the 8th, the date of the issuance of the order and eight day s
later than the date of the memorandum . Has this any significance so far a s
your knowledge gaes?A . I don't know that it has any. My recollection of the
delay in submitting the memorandum in the mutiny case was due to the fac t
that after it was prepared it was held up with the idea that it would go at the
time that this supporting brief that Gen . Ansell prepared was submitted .
Whether it had any relation to the order designating Gen . Ansell as Acting
Judge Advocate General I am not prepared to state .
Q. During the period that you were in the office after November, 1917, di d
you observe any bad effects upon the morale or upon the efficiency of the offic e
resulting from this controversy?A . I do not think it did so long as I was
in charge of the disciplinary division . Upon my relief from the disciplinar y
division that whole office went to pieces for a time, in that nobody knew wher e
he was at or what action to take, and the whole procedure was made ove r
again under the views of Col . Mayes, and there was very much disorganizatio n
and very much confusion . I don't think it affected the morale of the offic e
particularly, because all the officers were anxious to serve efficiently .
Q . What officers who were on duty in the office at the time of that chang e
would be cognizant of the changed conditions?A . The officers who were there
could tell more than anyone else . Reedy and Millar were there. Col . Clarke
continued in the office while I was on a trip of inspection during the time th e
change was inaugurated, and could tell of the upset condition in the office whic h
resulted .
Recall of Col . E. G . Davis .
Q. State the circumstances which led to the establishment in France of a
branch of the Judge Advocate General ' s office.A. The branch office of th e
Judge Advocate General in France was established by General Order No . 7 ,
War Department, 1918 . Some time prior to the publishing of this order th e
establishment of a branch office in France had been suggested . If I remember