DOCSLIB.ORG

From a Report on the Employment of Federal Troops

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From a Report on the Employment of Federal Troops from A R E P O R T O N T H E E M P L O Y M E N T O F F E D E R A L T R O O P S 1 9 3 2 ––––––––––––––––– General Douglas MacArthur –––––––––––––––– In June 1932, economic hardships caused by the Great Depression led 15,000 World War I veterans to form as the Bonus Expeditionary Force and march on Washington. Their goal was a “bonus bill” providing $2.5 billion to immediately pay veterans a bonus originally slated for 1945. After the Senate blocked the bill, 10,000 veterans remained camped in Washington to publicize their plight. President Herbert Hoover called in the army to force their removal, and on July 28, General Douglas MacArthur (1880–1964) led an infantry battalion, a cavalry squadron, and a tank platoon in an attack that injured dozens of veterans and resulted in one death. Below is an excerpt of MacArthur’s official report. T H I N K T H R O U G H H I S T O R Y : Recognizing Bias Do you think this account is accurate and unbiased, or would you, as a historian, seek to corroborate (verify) this report with other accounts? Why or why not? –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– August 15, 1932 Dear Mr. Secretary, On the afternoon of July 28, 1932, in response to your instructions, Federal troops entered the District of Columbia for the purpose of assisting civil officials in restoring order in certain sections of this city where considerable bodies of persons had successfully defied police authority and were then engaged in riotous activity. Within a few hours this mission was substantially accomplished and with no loss of life or serious casualty, after the arrival of the troops, among either the civilian or military elements involved. By July 30th all Federal troops were withdrawn to their proper stations and the local situation was under the complete control of the civil authorities. I am giving below a comprehensive account of this incident, to include the sequence of events leading up to the employment of Federal forces, the authority under which the troops acted, the principal troop movements involved, and the results accomplished. Attached as appendices are copies of official communications having an immediate bearing upon the incident: a 1 The Americans © McDougal Littell Inc. FROM A REPORT ON THE EMPLOYMENT OF FEDERAL TROOPS detailed report of Brigadier General Perry Miles, who was in direct command of the Federal troops; a photographic record of particular phases of the operation, and typical newspaper articles and editorials dealing with the affair. The purpose of this report is to make of permanent record in the War Department an accurate and complete description of a particular employment of Federal troops on a type of activity in which elements of the Army have often been engaged since the founding of the Republic. G R O W T H A N D A C T I V I T I E S O F S O - C A L L E D B O N U S A R M Y During late May, 1932, large groups of practically destitute World War veterans, self-styled the “Bonus Army,” or “Bonus Marchers,” began arriving in the City of Washington with the announced intention of conducting an aggressive lobby in favor of the immediate payment of Veterans’ Adjusted Compensation Certificates, commonly called the bonus. With no normal means of support they established themselves, with the consent of local authorities, in vacant areas and abandoned buildings, principally governmentally-owned. Subsistence and supplies were obtained through donations from local and outside sources and for the large majority the only protection from the elements were rude huts constructed from scrap material. The largest of these encampments was named CAMP MARKS, situated on an alluvial flat on the left bank of the Anacostia River, northeast of the Bolling Field area. In the same vicinity was CAMP BARTLETT, on privately- owned ground. A portion of the Bonus Army took possession of an area southwest of the Capitol where demolition activities incident to the Federal Government’s building program had already begun. Smaller detachments were located in other parts of the city. The aggregate strength of the Bonus Army gradually increased until it reached an estimated maximum of some ten to twelve thousand persons, including in some cases families and dependents of the veterans. Speaking generally, all their early activities in the city were peaceably and lawfully conducted. They organized themselves under leaders of their own choosing, and these cooperated reasonably well with the civil authorities in the preservation of order. Manifestly, however, in a large body recruited as was this one, the inclusion of a lawless element was inevitable. As the Bonus Army’s increasing size gave to the members thereof a growing consciousness of their collective power and importance in the community, efforts to solve acute problems of existence often went beyond the limits of legality. Individual solicitation for material assistance was frequently couched in terms of demand rather than of request. In some cases merchants and others, when called upon for contributions, were confronted with covert threats which amounted to nothing less than a system of extortion or forced levy. But the principal and most weighty objection to the concentration of such a force in the District of 2 The Americans © McDougal Littell Inc. FROM A REPORT ON THE EMPLOYMENT OF FEDERAL TROOPS Columbia was occasioned by the deplorable conditions under which these people were compelled to live, entailing an ever-present danger of disease and epidemic. Until the end of the Congressional session the marchers used every possible influence to secure support for their project among members of Congress. Even after the proposal was decisively defeated in the Senate on June 17th, these efforts were continued, and recruits for their cause were sought throughout the United States. Meanwhile the sanitary conditions under which they lived, with the arrival of the summer heat and rains and the further crowding of the occupied areas rapidly grew from bad to worse. After it became apparent that Congress would not favorably consider the bonus project there was of course no longer any legitimate excuse for the marchers to continue endangering the health of the whole District population by the continued occupation of these areas. From another viewpoint also the concentration in one city of so many destitute persons normally residing in other sections of the country was exceedingly unwise and undesirable. The natural outlets through which they could benefit from the resources heretofore made available for the care of the needy by the charitable instincts of the American people were the local institutions of their respective communities. In their own communities they and their relative needs were known or could be investigated, and each could receive assistance accordingly. By coming to Washington they deprived themselves individually of this assistance, while collectively they presented to the charitable resources of the District a problem of insurmountable proportions. But though the necessity for the dispersion of the Bonus Marchers daily became more evident, its accomplishment was plainly to be accompanied by many difficulties because of the destitute circumstances of the great majority. In appreciation of this fact Congress, just preceding its adjournment on July 16th, provided funds for transporting them to their homes, and some fifty-five hundred took advantage of this provision of law. As this partial evacuation took place an influx of newcomers occurred, in many instances later arrivals being of radical tendencies and intent upon capitalizing the situation to embarrass the Government. Former leaders of the Bonus Army lost, to a considerable degree, the authority they had so far exercised over the mass, and the subversive element gradually gained in influence. During the whole period of its stay in the city the Bonus Marchers were assisted in various ways by the local police force. Help rendered included the collection of clothing, food, and utensils; permitting the use of vacant areas and abandoned buildings; providing some medical service, and securing the loan of tentage and rolling kitchens from the District National Guard. In this matter the efforts of the police were humanitarian and more than praiseworthy. In the light of later events, however, it is likely that a portion of the marchers interpreted 3 The Americans © McDougal Littell Inc. FROM A REPORT ON THE EMPLOYMENT OF FEDERAL TROOPS this attitude as an indication of timidity rather than of sympathy, and were ready to take advantage of this supposed weakness whenever it might become expedient to do so. I M M E D I A T E C A U S E O F R I O T S In late July the evacuation of certain of the occupied areas in the vicinity of the Capitol became necessary in order that the Government’s parking and building program might proceed. On July 21st the Bonus leaders were formally notified by the police of this situation and requested to make prompt arrangements for the removal of occupants from the affected areas. Although there still remained ample time for veterans to apply for Government transportation to their homes, these requests were largely ignored. Prolonged negotiations were productive of no real results. Since the projected operations were part of the program for unemployment relief they could not be indefinitely delayed, and finally the District Commissioners directed the police to clear these areas, using force if necessary. Accordingly, on the morning of July 28th a considerable body of police went to the encampment near Pennsylvania Avenue and 4 1/2 Street and compelled the trespassers to evacuate.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • George Washington and George Marshall: Some Reflections on the American Military Tradition” Don Higginbotham, 1984
    'The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US Air Force, Department of Defense or the US Government.'" USAFA Harmon Memorial Lecture #26 “George Washington and George Marshall: Some Reflections on the American Military Tradition” Don Higginbotham, 1984 Though this is my second visit to the Air Force Academy, it is my first opportunity to present an address. I have had more exposure in this regard to one of your sister institutions: West Point. I must be careful not to speak of you as army men and women; but if I forget it will not be out of partiality. Gen. George Marshall at times was amused and at other times irritated by the partiality shown for the Navy by President Franklin Roosevelt, whom you may recall loved the sea and had been assistant secretary of the navy in the Wilson administration. On one occasion Marshall had had enough and pleaded good humoredly, "At least, Mr. President, stop speaking of the Army as 'they' and the Navy as ‘us’!” The title of this lecture suggests the obvious: that I consider it informative and instructive to look at certain similarities of experience and attitude shared by George Washington and George Marshall. In so doing, I want to speculate on their place in the American military tradition. These introductory remarks sound as though I am searching for relevance, and that is the case. No doubt at times historians, to say nothing of their readers, wish that the contemporary world would get lost so as to leave them unfettered to delve into the past for its own sake.
    [Show full text]
  • General Douglas Macarthur S Private Correspondence, 1848-1964
    Guide to the Microfilm Edition RG-10: GENERAL DOUGLAS MACARTHUR S PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE, 1848-1964 Filmed from the holdings of the MacArthur Memorial Archives Norfolk, Virginia A Microfilm Publication by Scholarly Resources Inc. An Imprint of Thomson Gale Scholarly Resources Inc. An Imprint of Thomson Gale 12 Lunar Drive, Woodbridge, CT 06525 Tel: (800) 444-0799 and (203) 397-2600 Fax: (203) 397-3893 P.O. Box 45, Reading, England Tel: (+44) 1734-583247 Fax: (+44) 1734-394334 ISBN: 0-8420-4358-6 All rights reserved, including those to reproduce this microfilm guide or any parts thereof in any form Printed and bound in the United States of America 2006 Table of Contents Biographical Essay Douglas MacArthur, iv Introduction to the Collection, vii Reel Contents to RG-10: General Douglas MacArthur s Private Correspondence, 1848-1964, 1 Biographical Essay Douglas MacArthur Douglas MacArthur was born in Little Rock, Arkansas, on January 26, 1880, to Captain (later Lieutenant General) Arthur MacArthur and Mary Pinkney Hardy MacArthur of Norfolk, Virginia. Douglas was the youngest of three sons. The eldest, Arthur, went to the U.S. Naval Academy and died in 1923, a captain in the Navy; Malcolm died in childhood in 1883 and is buried in Norfolk. Douglas and his family lived on various military posts from New Mexico to Fort Leavenworth to Washington, DC. In 1899 he was appointed to the U.S. Military Academy from Milwaukee, Wisconsin. After graduating first in his class from West Point, where he held the highest rank in the Corps of Cadets, MacArthur was commissioned second lieutenant, Corps of Engineers, on June 11, 1903.
    [Show full text]
  • Macarthur, DOUGLAS: Papers, 1930-41
    DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER LIBRARY ABILENE, KANSAS MacARTHUR, DOUGLAS: Papers, 1930-41 Accession: 03-17 Processed by: TB Date Completed: June 24, 2003 The microfilm copy of the papers of Douglas MacArthur, 1935-41 were deposited in the Eisenhower Library by the General Douglas MacArthur Memorial Archives and Library in June, 2003. Approximate number of items: 3 reels of microfilm The original documents remain with the General Douglas MacArthur Memorial Archives and Library of Norfolk, Virginia as RG-1 Records of the U.S. Military Advisor to the Philippine Commonwealth, 1935-1941. Researchers should contact that repository directly regarding copyright restrictions. SCOPE AND CONTENT NOTE This collection consists of microfilm copies of correspondence, orders, speeches, reports, newspaper clippings and other printed material relating to MacArthur’s work as military adviser to the Philippine Commonwealth during 1935-41. This collection contains materials relating to the creation of a Philippine Army, Philippine Defense, Philippine politics, and general correspondence with MacArthur’s contemporaries. This collection is described at the document or case file level; each folder description contains many individual entries. Reels 1 and 2 contain documents within the MacArthur papers; some of these letters and telegrams are authenticated copies, and not originals. Reel 3 contains photocopies of selected documents from the Official Military Personnel File of Douglas MacArthur, also known as a “201” file. The original documents currently are held by the National Archives and Records Administration at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri, but the documents contained in this microfilm were copied when the file was housed at the Washington National Record Center in Suitland, Maryland.
    [Show full text]
  • George C. Marshall: the Last Great American?
    Reprinted, with permission, from Followed by bis dog.,F1eet, the· Army SMITHSONIAN Magbine, August 1997 ChiefofstQ,ffbritJIy escapes his military issue. @ 1997, Smithsonian Institution. cares by riding at Fort Myer in 1941. GEORGE C. MARSHALL THE LAST GREAT MERICAN? BY LANCE MORROW be true. But when I put Washington and Marshall side by side, and look at them against the background of the NO SOLDIER SINCE WASHINGTON HAS HAD HIS ROMAN national leadership now in office, it is VIRTUES, AND SO SIGNIFICANTLY SHAPED A PEACE easy to think that I am looking at the first American grown-up-and the last. As much as any man, Marshall saved IN MY MIND, A DIAGRAM OF AMERICAN is unfair, perhaps. Custer's curtain call world democracy at the moment of its military history might begin with a was an act ofself-immolating folly; Pat­ greatest danger. He took up his duties parallelogram of Georges-George ton, by contrast, was a brilliant tacti­ as U.S. Army Chief of Staff on Sep­ Washington and George Marshall; cian and a superb combat leader who tember 1, 1939, the day that Hitler George Armstrong Custer and George redeemed his excesses when he marched into Poland. He began with Patton. A geometry of paired oppo­ brought the Third Army slashing an absurdly ill-equipped army of sites. In some ways, George Marshall is across Europe toward Hitler's throat. 174,000 men, ranking 17th in the world the best of them all. The other two sides of the parallelo­ behind such nations as Bulgaria and Custer and Patton are the Hotspur gram, the Stoic Georges, shaped larger Portugal, and turned it into a global sides-martial peacocks, brave, vain­ American business.
    [Show full text]
  • 10, George C. Marshall
    'The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US Air Force, Department of Defense or the US Government.'" USAFA Harmon Memorial Lecture #10 “George C. Marshall: Global Commander” Forrest C. Pogue, 1968 It is a privilege to be invited to give the tenth lecture in a series which has become widely-known among teachers and students of military history. I am, of course, delighted to talk with you about Gen. George C. Marshall with whose career I have spent most of my waking hours since1956. Douglas Freeman, biographer of two great Americans, liked to say that he had spent twenty years in the company of Gen. Lee. After devoting nearly twelve years to collecting the papers of General Marshall and to interviewing him and more than 300 of his contemporaries, I can fully appreciate his point. In fact, my wife complains that nearly any subject from food to favorite books reminds me of a story about General Marshall. If someone serves seafood, I am likely to recall that General Marshall was allergic to shrimp. When I saw here in the audience Jim Cate, professor at the University of Chicago and one of the authors of the official history of the U.S. Army Air Forces in World War II, I recalled his fondness for the works of G.A. Henty and at once there came back to me that Marshall once said that his main knowledge of Hannibal came from Henty's The Young Carthaginian. If someone asks about the General and Winston Churchill, I am likely to say, "Did you know that they first met in London in 1919 when Marshall served as Churchill's aide one afternoon when the latter reviewed an American regiment in Hyde Park?" Thus, when I mentioned to a friend that I was coming to the Air Force Academy to speak about Marshall, he asked if there was much to say about the General's connection with the Air Force.
    [Show full text]
  • Handout #4: Eisenhower and His Times
    Handout #4: Eisenhower and His Times 1890 Dwight David Eisenhower is born on October 14 in Denison, Texas, the third son of Ida and David Eisenhower. “If we were poor-and I’m not sure that we were by the standards of the day- we were unaware of it. All in all, we were a cheerful family. We would have been insulted had anyone offered us charity: instead my mother was always ready to take home remedies or food and start out to help the sick.” --Dwight D. Eisenhower, In Review: Pictures I’ve Kept, 1969 1891 Eisenhower family moves to Abilene, Kansas, a small farm town. Dwight grows up as the third of six brothers. “You get to meet anyone face to face with whom you disagree.” --Dwight D. Eisenhower, quoted in Relman Morin, Dwight D. Eisenhower, A Gauge of Greatness, 1969 1907 Eisenhower is an outstanding high school athlete, playing football and baseball. “I believe that football…tends to instill in men the feeling that victory comes through hard—almost slavish—work.” --Eisenhower, At Ease: Stories I Tell to Friends, 1967 1909 Eisenhower graduates from high school. He does not have the money to go to college. “[My father’s]…sterling honesty, his insistence upon the immediate payment of all debts, his pride in his independence earned for him a reputation that has profited all of us boys. Because of it, all central Kansas helped me to secure an appointment to West Point in 1911.” --Eisenhower, Diaries, March 12, 1942, the day his father is buried 17 1911-1915 Eisenhower wins an appointment to West Point and takes the oath as a plebe.
    [Show full text]
  • WHEREAS, on February 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt 1
    SENATE RESOLUTION 8617 By Senators Hasegawa, Hobbs, Brown, Dammeier, Roach, and Chase 1 WHEREAS, On February 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt 2 issued Executive Order 9066 which authorized the military to forcibly 3 remove and incarcerate more than 120,000 persons of Japanese ancestry 4 from the West Coast, including 12,000 Japanese-American residents of 5 Washington State; and 6 WHEREAS, The first Civilian Evacuation Order gave Japanese- 7 Americans from Bainbridge Island less than one week to leave behind 8 homes, farms, businesses, friends, and family and to report to 9 hastily constructed detention centers like Camp Harmony on the 10 grounds of the Western Washington Fair in Puyallup; and 11 WHEREAS, This drastic course of action allegedly aimed to prevent 12 acts of espionage and sabotage by Japanese-Americans who were deemed 13 untrustworthy and disloyal to the United States; and 14 WHEREAS, On March 23, 1943, the War Department organized a 15 segregated unit of Japanese-Americans, many of whom reported for 16 military duty from concentration camps surrounded by barbed wire in 17 which they and their families were detained; and 18 WHEREAS, More than 12,000 volunteers responded to unfounded 19 questions of their loyalty and patriotism by amassing a battle record 20 unparalleled in United States military history that, according to 21 General Douglas MacArthur's chief of intelligence, "saved a million 22 lives and shortened the war by two years"; and p. 1 8617 1 WHEREAS, Equally loyal and patriotic Japanese-Americans fought
    [Show full text]
  • The Bastards of Bataan: General Douglas Macarthur's Role
    The Bastards of Bataan: General Douglas MacArthur’s Role in the Fall of the Philippines during World War II By: Lahia Marie Ellingson Senior Seminar: History 499 Professor Bau-Hwa Hsieh Western Oregon University June 8, 2007 Readers Professor Kimberly Jensen Professor John L. Rector Copyright © Lahia Ellingson, 2007 On December 8, 1941, just hours after having attacked the United States’ fleet on Pearl Harbor, the Japanese army turned their attention toward another American stronghold, the forces stationed on the Philippines. Here the Japanese attacked Clark Field, an American airbase on the island of Luzon.1 The subsequent battle and surrender that ensued has become known as “…the worst defeat yet suffered by the United States, a source of national humiliation.”2 With all of the confusion and horror that happened to the men in the Philippines it is hard to understand where blame should be placed. Was it General Douglas MacArthur, the Commanding General in the Philippines at the time? Or were there other factors such as war in Europe and conflicting beliefs on how best to defend the Philippines that led to the defeat? Historians have debated MacArthur’s role in the Philippines for some time. There are those who believe that MacArthur should be held accountable for the fall of the Philippines and those who see him as a commanding general who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. In this paper it will be argued that MacArthur’s actions in the Philippines prior to his escape to Australia hastened the fall of the Philippines, which led to more death and brutality at the hands of the Japanese.
    [Show full text]
  • Ranking Us Army Generals of the Twentieth Century
    ABSTRACT Title of thesis: RANKING U.S. ARMY GENERALS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY USING THE GROUP ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS. Todd Philip Retchless, Master of Science 2005 Directed By: Professor Bruce Golden Department of Decision and Informatio n Technologies The group analytic hierarchy process (GAHP) is a mathematically based decision making tool that allows groups of individuals to participate in the decision making process. In this thesis, we use the GAHP and the expert opinions of 10 pro fessional and amateur military historians to rank seven U.S. Army generals of the 20th Century. We use two methods to determine the priority vectors: the traditional eigenvector method and the recently introduced interval linear programming method. We co nsider the effects of removing outlier data and compare the rankings obtained by each method. RANKING U.S. ARMY GENERALS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY USING THE GROUP ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS. By Todd Philip Retchless Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science 2005 Advisory Committee: Professor Bruce Golden, Chair Professor Edward Wasil Pr ofessor Charles D. Levermore © Copyright by Todd Philip Retchless 2005 Table of Contents List of Tables ............................................................................................................... iv List of Figures ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Purple Heart
    The Purple Heart It is one of the most recognized and respected medals awarded to members of the U.S. armed forces. Introduced as the “Badge of Military Merit” by General George Washington in 1782, the Purple Heart is also the nation’s oldest military award. In military terms, the award had “broken service,” as it was ignored for nearly 150 years until it was re-introduced on February 22, 1932, on the 200th anniversary of George Washington’s birth. The medal’s plain inscription “FOR MILITARY MERIT” barely expresses its significance. --------------------------------- On August 7, 1782, from his headquarters in Newburgh, New York, General George Washington wrote: “The General ever desirous to cherish virtuous ambition in his soldiers, as well as to foster and encourage every species of Military merit, directs that whenever any singularly meritorious action is performed, the author of it shall be permitted to wear on his facings over the left breast, the figure of a heart in purple cloth, or silk, edged with narrow lace or binding. Not only instances of unusual gallantry, but also of extraordinary fidelity and essential Gen. George Washington’s instructions for service in any way shall meet with a due the Badge of Military Merit reward. Before this favour can be conferred on any man, the particular fact, or facts, on which it is to be grounded must be set forth to the Commander in chief accompanied with certificates from the Commanding officers of the regiment and brigade to which the Candidate for reward belonged, or other incontestable proofs, and upon granting it, the name and regiment of the person with the action so certified are to be enrolled in the book of merit which will be kept at the orderly office.
    [Show full text]
  • Usma Medal of Honor Recipients
    USMA MEDAL OF HONOR RECIPIENTS This is a list of graduates who have received the Medal of Honor. Each entry provides the graduate’s Cullum Number, name, year of graduation, unit of service and the place and date of the conflict for which the graduate received his medal. For full citation, please visit www.cmohs.org. 1247—BG John P. Hatch, Class of 1845 Civil War U.S. Volunteers, South Mountain, MD, September 14, 1862 1338—COL Orlando B. Wilcox, Class of 1847 Civil War 1st Michigan Infantry, Bull Run, VA, July 21, 1861 1415—BG Absalom Baird, Class of 1849 Civil War U.S. Volunteers, Jonesboro, GA, September 1, 1864 1424—BG Rufus Saxton Jr., Class of 1849 Civil War U.S. Volunteers, Harpers Ferry, VA, May 26-30, 1862 1468—COL Eugene A. Carr, Class of 1850 Civil War 3rd Illinois Cavalry, Pea Ridge, AR, March 7, 1862 1544—MG David S. Stanley, Class of 1852 Civil War U.S. Volunteers, Franklin, TN, November 30, 1864 1585—MAJ John M. Schofield, Class of 1853 Civil War 1st Missouri Infantry, Wilson’s Creek, MO, August 10, 1861 1634—BG Oliver O. Howard, Class of 1854 Civil War U.S. Volunteers, Fair Oaks, VA, June 1, 1862 1656—MAJ Oliver D. Greene, Class of 1854 Civil War Assistant Adjutant General, Antietam, MD, September 17, 1862 1672—COL Zenas R. Bliss, Class of 1854 Civil War 7th Rhode Island Infantry, Fredericksburg, VA, December 13, 1862 1689—BG Alexander S. Webb, Class of 1855 Civil War U.S. Volunteers, Gettysburg, PA, July 3, 1863 1845—CPT Abraham K.
    [Show full text]
  • General Douglas Macarthur's Farewell Speech Given to the Corps of Cadets at West Point May 12, 1962
    General Douglas MacArthur's Farewell Speech Given to the Corps of Cadets at West Point May 12, 1962 General Westmoreland, General Groves, distinguished guests, and gentlemen of the Corps. As I was leaving the hotel this morning, a doorman asked me, "Where are you bound for, General?" and when I replied, "West Point," he remarked, "Beautiful place, have you ever been there before?" No human being could fail to be deeply moved by such a tribute as this, coming from a profession I have served so long and a people I have loved so well. It fills me with an emotion I cannot express. But this award is not intended primarily for a personality, but to symbolize a great moral code - the code of conduct and chivalry of those who guard this beloved land of culture and ancient descent. That is the meaning of this medallion. For all eyes and for all time, it is an expression of the ethics of the American soldier. That I should be integrated in this way with so noble an ideal arouses a sense of pride and yet of humility which will be with me always. Duty, Honor, Country: Those three hallowed words reverently dictate what you ought to be, what you can be, what you will be. They are your rallying points: to build courage when courage seems to fail; to regain faith when there seems to be little cause for faith; to create hope when hope becomes forlorn. Unhappily, I possess neither that eloquence of diction, that poetry of imagination, nor that brilliance of metaphor to tell you all that they mean.
    [Show full text]