29th Infantry Celebrates O N March 2 the 29th Infantry held its Annual Field Day and Horse Show at Fort Benning. The ceremonies of Organization Day, celebrating the twenty-second birthday of the Regiment since it was formed at Fort Sheridan in 1901 followed on March 3. A magnifiicent banquet by the officers of the regiment and a cotillion ball closed the Organization Day social affairs. Col. George S. Goodale, the Commanding Officer of the regiment, was particularly pleased at the splendid spirit shown in the field day and horse show events. The Executive Officer of the regiment, Lieut. Col. Horace P. Hobbs, supervised the Athletic Meet, and it was declared to have been one of the most successful staged at a military post. The various events, numbering to a total of twenty-five, were staged on schedule. Each company had entries manding Officer of the regiment, was keen. Company B, scoring a total of 26 points, led in the field among the individual organizations. In the unit. point getting, in field, track and horse show, the First Battalion, commanded by Capt. Floyd Hatfield, ran up 85 points to 85 points by the Second Battalion, commanded by Maj. Alfred E. Sawkins, and 55 points by the special units, commanded by Maj. James C. Williams. The mounted events followed the athletics. These attracted a large gathering, and the mounted tug-o-war between the various teams of enlisted personnel was repeatedly cheered, as was the spirited style in which the saddling contest was staged. The jumping events also thrilled. In the events for the officers and ladies, which closed the Horse Show, some very excellent riding was scored. Capt. Robert A. McClure and Mrs. McClure won first, and Capt. Edward C. Betts and Mrs. Betts were second in the jumping events. Captain Betts scored a first in the polo pony class with Captain McClure second. Following the athletic and horse show events, the First and Second Battalions staged a championship basketball game, which was won by the Second Battalion. Then followed the annual ball of the enlisted personnel of the regiment at the Service Club. The next morning came Organization Day proper. The regiment formed and heard the address of Colonel Goodale. This was followed by a special Organization Day dinner in all the mess-halls. The day closed with the officers' banquet and the cotillion ball to which all of the commissioned personnel at Fort Benning, were invited. Army Regulations HE Infantry Association edition Tof the Army Regulations is progressing satisfactorily and we are assured by the printer that it will be out and ready for distribution by May 1. From the number of pre-publication orders that have come in for this book we are convinced that we have added a valuable contribution to the military literature of the country. The book contains those pamphlets of the new style Army Regulations that are of interest to the officer in a personal way and that will be necessary in the administration of a unit. All the live paragraphs of the old Regulations that cover the ground as indicated have been brought up to date and are in- The book will contain over 600 pages If you desire a copy-and you will eventually-and will get your order in right away it will help us a lot to estimate on the size of our edition. This is a most expensive proposition and involves a lot of money hence we do not want to go into it any deeper than may be necessary to supply the demand. Work on the trophy is progressing as rapidly as is consistent with thoroughness and we are assured that it will be completed by the time specified -the latter part of May. The Chief of Infantry desires to express his appreciation for the fine spirit in which the officers and men of the Infantry have supported this proposition. Everybody has come to the front in the Infantry way and ours will be the handsomest marksmanship trophy that has ever been produced. It has been suggested that the Infantry Association take up the proposition of reproducing the Infantry Trophy in miniature for desk ornaments and as soon as it is completed the project will be given due consideration. If it can be reproduced and sold at a reasonable price to officers and organizations we shall be pleased to take care of the matter. The following shows the status of the Fund as we close our forms for the April number of the INFANTRY JOURNAL: Previously acknowledged Eighth Infantry (additional) $3,664.07 100.00 al) 50.65 47.86 113.00 138.73 15.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 $4,264.99 Lt. Col. W. R. Standiford..... I B What Is a Pacifist? age. Too often it implies a lack of EFORE the war the term "paci- physical courage, but when the bullets fist" was not in common use in this country. It is not defined in the Century Dictory, copyrighted 1889, nor in the smaller dictionaries printed much later. And yet one can now hardly open a newspaper without seeing the word. It must, therefore, be regarded as an inheritance of the war, along with "bonus," "bloc," "sanction" (in the sense of penalty), "observer" (in the sense of super correspondent), "buddy," and a few others. To the United States the word appears to have come on the wings of the war propaganda. Before our armed. intervention the entire country was frequently labeled "pacifist" by those who despaired of our aid. But, unlike many other war terms, the word is still with us. Will it remain? The "100 per cent" Americans have been overdoing their job. At least we do not hear so many politicians seeking votes on that ground. "Hyphenate" itself is almost obsolete. But though in time. of war "pacifist" may have had its uses, expressing incurable neutrality, or opposition to the war on hand, why should it be used as a term of reproach in time of peace? Some military leaders, advocating continued preparedness and everincreasing appropriations for them or their friends to spend, use the word as an equivalent of "tight-wad" or "striking taxpayer." The jingoes among civilians apply it with the inference that it means "anti-patriotic." The "irreconcilables" seem to think it means the same thing as "advocate of the League of Nations'; the "isolationists' regard it as a synonym for internationalist." It should not be confused with "conscientious objector," a person who as a rule gets some credit for moral cour hail not all "patriots" are brave. Many persons labeled "pacifists" are, on the contrary, rather pugnacious. Once their dander is up they are apt to be as ferocious as any super-patriot. If the word really means one who is theoretically opposed to war as a means of settling international disputes, it is time the dictionaries made that definition, and those who really feel that way should bear the epithet gladly. The above is an editorial which appeared recently in the Boston Herald. It has all the earmarks of the mass of insidious propaganda that has found its way into the press of late and which emanates from well-known sources of radicalism and which may always be recognized by 1. Senseless attacks on all things military. 2. Tolerance and, in many instances, admiration for conscientious objectors and other obstructionists. 3. The effort to present pacifism as a noble, patriotic and manly belief. The following sentence is quoted in order to draw attention to a direct attack made upon the military, which is characteristic of the pacifist tribe: Some military leaders, advocating continued preparedness and ever-increasing appropriations for them or their friends to spend, use the word (i. e., pacifist) as an equivalent of tightwad" or "striking taxpayer." The phrase describing "some military leaders" contains a gratuitous accusation against them. The phrase is so worded as to give the casual reader the impression that appropriations for national defense are for individual use and benefit to military leaders and their friends, and that they are wrung out of the taxpayers. The phrase is entirely irrelevant to the subject-matter and unnecessary to an understanding of the idea which the sentence as a whole purports to convey-namely, that "some military leaders use the word as an equivalent of tightwad or striking taxpayer." This sentence (without the phrase) contains a much more vicious reflection upon military leaders in that it implies that military leaders make use of derogatory terms to refer to taxpayers as a class. The effect of reading such a statement is similar to hearing the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?” The implication conveyed by the statement is more damaging than the statement. That the Boston Herald should give its editorial columns voluntarily to such contemptible and obviously ridiculous attacks upon Secretary Weeks, General Pershing, General Hines and our other military leaders under whose direction appropriations for the Army are solicited and expended is inconceivable. There must have been some reason why such an attack was made at the particular time. The object evidently was to cast doubt upon the sincerity and trustworthiness of military leaders so as to discredit them in the public. eye. It may be a coincidence, but the Army Appropriation Bill was then before Congress and had to be disposed of by March 4. An organized lobby of pacifists, internationalists, sentimentalists and radicals under the direction of a professional pacifist lobby group was fighting, with any weapons it could reach, to curtail the Army Bill. The sentiments expressed in praising the "moral courage" of the conscientious objector are bound to be sinister in their effect upon the average reader who is careless in analyzing what is written. The constant effort to picture himself as one who is opposed theoretically to war is typical of the attitude of the true "peace-at-any-price" advocate, who is extremely thin-skinned over the fact that the term "pacifist," like the word "traitor," is a "term of reproach" equally applicable in times of peace as in times of war, and who would fain change the common significance of that repugnant "epithet" which the Herald cheerfully glorifies, and recommends that he "gladly bear. We feel that the practice of condoning the acts of those who were opposed to our efforts during the war ought to be condemned. When indulged in by a newspaper of the character of the Boston Herald, it is too pernicious in its effects to be passed by without indignant protest and severe condemnation. I America Owes Nothing orator of these days to put over T is easy for the "soap box" the old stuff on the subject of "What America Owes Him," and he is working it overtime before groups of eager-eyed men of foreign birth, up and down the land. It is foolish talk and worse. America owes nothing to any individual, class, creed or race that has not been paid, in many cases a thousand fold. We believe that it may be safely said that no immigrant of recent years has set out for America with the predominant idea in his head that he was coming here to benefit this country. It is just the other way around. The country is going to benefit him-increase his personal fortunes-and he means to get all out of it he can. And so it has been always. From the Pilgrim Fathers to the immigrant that came ashore at the Battery yesterday, everyone has come primarily to receive and not to give. What are the gifts of America to those who come here? A constitutional representative government. Free public education. No mingling of church and state. Equal opportunity for all. Freedom and liberty. These are the beacons of America which shine today to the ends of the earth. These are the gifts which every race has come here to receive and they may not be denied to any ambitious, conscientious, law-abiding person. When a member of any race or class or nationality rises to declare and to lead others to believe that America owes them anything that is not theirs for the honest effort necessary to attain it, it is to laugh. six inches high. It was front-page stuff for days and days, especially with a certain class of papers of which the less said the better. These dastardly charges have been fully investigated by a committee of the Senate and, in the words of the report of Senator Brandegee and the other members of the committee, all of whom signed the report, "the charges are not sustained." Was this acquittal of the Army given due publicity? Did it appear on the front page of the press in anything like the manner in which it was broadcasted over the nation when the allegations were made? How many people of the country who are perfectly familiar with the original charges will be appraised of the acquittal? To these questions the answer must be in the negative. The press items of the acquittal where they were even published were neatly tucked away in the back pages where they sported a oneline head and where they would never be seen by anyone except the fellow who has nothing to do but search through his daily paper column by column. There are tens of thousands of people who know all about the charges. against the Army and have all of them tucked away in their heads who will never know that the matter has been investigated and the Army completely and fully exonerated. Now the point we make is that the newspapers which gave this incident so much front-page space and published so many faked pictures of the alleged crimes that the Army committeed France, should at least make fris announcement of the findings. committee in news colum eader ons for |