A. No, sir; I had no occasion to have anybody court-martialed for any misconduct.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. If they had misconducted themselves you would have had them court-martialed?
A. I would have taken notice of it in that way. A militia officer occupies a very singular position. He ought to have more judgment and more courage than an officer of like grade in the field if he is confronted with any great emergency. The men that he commands are part of the people—part of the very people he is called on to oppose—and in a disturbance like this, suddenly thrown up, a large proportion of the community may be against the troops and in favor of the disturber of the peace. It is a very difficult position to hold, and it requires a great deal of judgment. In fact, a great deal more than it would require in the field.
By Mr. Means:
Q. It is not like meeting an enemy on the field to meet these people?
A. No. Of course this is only at first blush. After everybody cools off and they begin to realize that there must be law and order, then the reaction comes, but in the first instance it is a very difficult thing to determine just what to do. I would not like to loosely condemn people. I cannot tell what I would have done if I had been there. No man can tell. It is probably much easier to tell what ought to have been done after it is all over, and I am very confident now what I would do in the future. I have learned a great deal from these riots that I never knew before, and the experience has been quite valuable to the officers of the National Guard, and everybody. I do not think the like would occur again, unless there is a general revolution.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. I would like to ask you this question: Whether you have noticed any tendency of the civil authorities of the State to rely upon the National Guard and shirk their own responsibility since the organization of the guard?
A. There has always been a National Guard in the State. As to the main question, there is a tendency to rely too much on the guard.