網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

Army, and to perform such other duties as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Army or the Chief of Staff. All other inspectors general, regardless of where they are serving, are to conduct, and report upon, such inspections, investigations, studies and surveys as are required by law and regulations or are directed by proper authority; and to receive, and take appropriate action to resolve, complaints from individuals. Their sphere of inquiry includes the conduct, discipline, efficiency, living conditions, and morale of units and individuals; the condition and state of commands and installations, and of their arms, equipment, and other supplies; the economy, efficiency, and legality of expenditures of funds and use of property, to include the purchase, receipt, storage, issue, and disposition of property and the condition of accounts pertaining to funds and property; and in general, every branch of military affairs, except where specifically limited in Army Regulations or orders. Inspectors general report their findings with impartiality, note especially meritorious performance of duty, and make recommendations for the correction of deficiencies and irregularities.

The activities of inspectors general include:

1. An annual inspection of the United States Soldiers' Home, Washington, D. C. and the United States Military Academy, West Point, New York.

2. Periodic inspections of commands, installations, and activities of the Army; records of accountable disbursing officers and class B agent officers; Army units and activities of the National Guard of the United States; accounts and records of United States property and finance officers; and appropriate elements of other civilian components of the Army.

3. Action to insure that all Army personnel under their inspectional jurisdiction, especially those in confinement, are given the opportunity to present, orally or in writing, their individual grievances to an inspector general, not less frequently than once in each quarter of a fiscal year; and that each such complainant is advised, orally or in writing, of the final action taken on his or her complaint or grievance. 4. Investigation of complaints and allegations concerning individuals, and of conditions detrimental to the service.

5. Such other investigations, surveys, studies, and special inspections as may be appropriate or as may be directed by higher authority.

PROCUREMENT OF OFFICERS. To be detailed as an inspector general, an Army officer must be mature; must have broad experience and Army background; must have a record of past performance of "average" or above; must have the moral attributes and personal traits needed for a position of dignity and prestige; and must be in the grade of major or higher.

INSPECTORS GENERAL. The following have served as Inspector General of

the Army or equivalent

8 Jul 1777-11 Oct 1777
11 Aug 1777-15 Sep 1777
13 Dec 1777-28 Apr 1778
5 May 1778-15 Apr 1784.
17 Apr 1784-28 Oct 1787
10 Mar 1792-23 Feb 1793
23 Feb 1793-17 Jul 1793.
18 Jul 1793-13 May 1794
13 May 1794-27 Feb 1796
27 Feb 1796-1 Aug 1796
1 Aug 1796-27 Feb 1797
27 Feb 1797-18 Jul 1798
18 Jul 1798-15 Jun 1800
15 Jun 1800-2 Apr 1807
2 Apr 1807-28 Apr 1812
6 Jul 1812-3 Mar 1813
12 Mar 1813-27 Apr 1813
9 May 1814-2 Jul 1814
22 Nov 1813-1 Jun 1821
1 Jun 1821-25 Jun 1841
25 Jun 1841-8 Jan 1849
9 Jan 1849-8 Aug 1861
9 Aug 1861-1 Jan 1881
2 Jan 1881-8 Mar 1885
11 Mar 1885-20 Sep 1885

Col. Mottin De La Balme

.Maj. Gen. P. C. J. B. T. DuCoudray
.Maj. Gen. Thomas Conway

.Maj. Gen. (Baron) F. W. A. von Steuben

.Maj. William North

.Lt. Henry DeButts Maj. Michael Rudolph Capt. Edward Butler .Maj. John Mills

.Maj. Jonathan Haskell . Capt. Edward Butler .Maj. Thomas H. Cushing .Maj. Gen. Alexander Hamilton .Maj. Thomas H. Cushing .Maj. Abimael Y. Nicoll .Brig. Gen. Alexander Smyth Brig. Gen. Zebulon M. Pike .Brig. Gen. William H. Winder .Brig. Gen. Daniel Parker Col. John E. Wood .Col. George Croghan

. Col. Sylvester Churchill

.Brig. Gen. Randolph B. Marcy .Brig. Gen. Delos B. Sacket .Brig. Gen. Nelson H. Davis

.Brig. Gen. Absalom Baird .Brig. Gen. Roger Jones .Brig. Gen. Joseph C. Breckinridge Brig. Gen. Peter D. Vroom ..Brig. Gen. George H. Burton .Brig. Gen. Ernest A. Garlington .Maj. Gen. John L. Chamberlain .Maj. Gen. Eli A. Helmick .Maj. Gen. William C. Rivers Maj. Gen. Hugh A. Drum .Maj. Gen. John F. Preston Maj. Gen. Walter L. Reed ..Maj. Gen. Virgil L. Peterson Lt. Gen. Dan I. Sultan Maj. Gen. Ira T. Wyche .Maj. Gen. Louis A. Craig .Lt. Gen. Daniel Noce

21 Sep 1885-20 Aug 1888
21 Aug 1888-26 Jan 1889
27 Jan 1889-11 Apr 1903
11 Apr 1903-12 Apr 1903
12 Apr 1903-30 Sep 1906
1 Oct 1906-20 Feb 1917
21 Feb 1917-6 Nov 1921
7 Nov 1921-27 Sep 1927
28 Sep 1927-11 Jan 1930
12 Jan 1930-30 Nov 1931
1 Dec 1931-30 Nov 1935
1 Dec 1935-23 Dec 1939
24 Dec 1939-5 Jun 1945
14 Jul 1945-14 Jan 1947
30 Jan 1947-30 Jun 1948
1 Jul 1948-31 May 1952
1 Jun 1952-31 Oct 1954
1 Nov 1954-31 Jan 1956
1 Feb 1956-31 Oct 1957

1 Nov 1957

.Maj. Gen. Wayne C. Zimmerman
.Lt. Gen. David A. D. Ogden
Maj. Gen. Albert Pierson

THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL'S CORPS

spect to rank and pay, but most of them retained commissions in regiments of the line. Records of trial by general courts-martial, which were required to be preserved by the Secretary of War, were actually reviewed, prior to being filed, by The Adjutant General, who performed some of the present-day functions of a Judge Advocate General with respect to revision of such records for clerical and procedural errors, and in some cases with respect to the legality of the punishment imposed.

The Judge Advocate General is the legal adviser of the Secretary of the Army and of all officers and agencies of the Department of the Army. He is responsible for general supervision of the system of military justice throughout the Army; for administration of the system of statutory appellate review of all records of trial by general courts-martial; for the assignment of trained legal officers (judge advocates) to all principal Army commands; and for the rendering of miscellaneous legal opinions, in all fields of the law, to the Secretary of the Army and the military establishment.

Ta

war

In 1849 Congress created the office of Judge Advocate of the Army. Beginning at that time there seems to have been a complete revision in the concept and functions of the office. Although such duties were not prescribed by statute, the Judge Advocate concerned himself with the review of general court-martial records, and also rendered legal opinions on miscellaneous subjects to the Secretary of War. Prosecutions of general court-martial cases continued to be conducted by officers detailed as "judge advocates" by commanders empowered to appoint such courts. Thus, for the first time, there was a distinction between personnel of the "office" of the Judge Advocate of the Army, who were responsible to that officer for the performance of their duties, and judge advocates of general courts-martial, who were responsible, as they are today, to the commanders appointing them. Also, for the first time, the office of the Judge Advocate of the Army began to exercise some influence on the overall operation of

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND. The office of Judge Advocate of the Army may be deemed to have been created on 29 July 1775, when the Continental Congress named William Tudor of Boston to this position. The appointment was made less than a month after the adoption of the first American Articles of War, and it heralded the use of professional legal talent by the Army. This does not mean, however, that a JAG's Corps as we know it today has been continuously in existence since that time. On the contrary, no such Corps was created until 1862. Until 1849 the terms "Judge Advocate General," "judge advocate" and "Judge Marshall and Advocate General" were used interchangeably as referring to the title of an office, the chief function of which was to prosecute, and to perform certain other duties at trials by general courts-martial. Some officers performing these functions were given a special status by Congress with re

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

the system of military justice, through the review of general court-martial records.

The Department actually came into its own in 1862, when Congress created the office of Judge Advocate General, established a corps of judge advocates, and provided that the records of proceedings of all courts-martial and military commissions should be forwarded to the office of The Judge Advocate General for revision. In 1864 the Bureau of Military Justice, to which The Judge Advocate General and his functions were transferred, was established. Despite the large number of troops which served in the Union Army, and the large number of death sentences (267, as opposed to 141 in World War II) which were carried into execution after having been adjudged by general courts-martial or military commissions, only 33 judge advocates were required to handle the work of the office during the war. It should be noted that the automatic appellate review system provided for in the modern system of American military justice was not then in existence.

In 1884 the Bureau of Military Justice and the corps of judge advocates were merged by statute into the newly created Judge Advocate General's Department. The war with Spain heralded the first legislation providing judge advocates for field commanders (Army Corps). In 1901 the Department was reorganized. When we entered World War I, it consisted of 17 officers; by December of 1918 it had expanded to 426 officers. The increase was accelerated by widespread criticism of the operation of military justice during the war; especially of the fact that it was almost wholly under the control of line officers without legal training.

No history of the Department in the nineteenth century is complete without mention of the splendid work of Colonel William Winthrop of New York, who entered the Department as a major in September 1864 after creditable service in the line. In 1886 he published the first edition of his monumental and scholarly treatise, "Military Law and Precedents," and in 1895 a revised and annotated second edition. Although more than a half century has passed since

this treatise was first published, it is still a most valuable authority on the subject.

The sweeping changes made in 1920 in our system of military justice further enhanced the responsibilities of The Judge Advocate General. An automatic appellate review system and other safeguards were established, tending to place the processing and review of all courts-martial under his advisory supervision, or that of an officer of his Department.

World War II witnessed an unprecedented expansion in the Department, from 105 officers (on duty in 1940) to more than 2,300. After the war it was of course reduced; at the end of 1948 its active duty strength was 542. With the outbreak of hostilities in Korea, expansion was again necessary, and, primarily by the recall of reserve JA officers, strength was increased to a peak of 1,247 by the end of 1953. As of the beginning of fiscal year 1958, the Judge Advocate General's Corps (as it is now called) was authorized strength of 1,029.

a

THE CORPS TODAY. The coming into effect of the Uniform Code of Military Justice in 1951 placed the Corps on its present footing, and also tended to bring about a uniform administration of military justice in the three Armed Services. It likewise established further safeguards for persons tried under military law.

Army, corps, and division staffs, the staffs of such other commanders as may be announced from time to time by the Department of the Army, and most installation staffs, include one or more officers of the Judge Advocate General's Corps. The senior judge advocate of such a command is the legal adviser of the commanding officer thereof, and as to that command he performs duties somewhat similar, in general nature and scope, to those discharged by The Judge Advocate General with relation to the whole military establishment.

Although the Corps' functions relate principally to legal questions arising in the Army, its advisory capacity on frequent occasions requires collaboration with various other Federal agencies, such as the Department of Justice, the

Department of State, and the Comptroller General's Office, on matters of a dual capacity affecting governmental interest.

For further details on Military Law see chapter 17.

TRAINING

OF JAG PERSONNEL. Just before and during World War II there was difficulty in obtaining enough qualified officers for the JAG's Department. Some were provided by the Officers Reserve Corps and the National Guard; and efforts were made in 1942 to get others from civil life, or from among enlisted men with legal backgrounds. These methods proving inadequate, a Judge Advocate General's Officer Candidate School was activated in March of 1943. From that date until 26 February 1946, a total of 891 candidates were graduated from the school and entered the service as judge advocates. In addition, 1,097 officers attended the judge advocate's refresher course, and 486 officers attended the contracttermination course, both offered at the Judge Advocate General's School.

The present Judge Advocate General's School, located at the University of

[blocks in formation]

The procurement of sufficient judge advocates to carry out effectively the missions imposed by law is a continuing problem facing The Judge Advocate General. Available sources of procurement are: recall to extended active duty of reserve judge advocates in the lowest commissioned rank of first lieutenant; appointment of graduates of approved law schools who are members of the bar of the highest court of their state or a Federal Court; and transfer of qualified officers from other arms or services. As an indication of the magnitude and difficulties of the personnel procurement program, at the beginning of fiscal year 1958, there were 158 of the Corps' authorized 645 Regular Army spaces still unfilled after a continuing and energetic recruitment program.

JUDGE ADVOCATES GENERAL OF THE ARMY. The following have served

as such or in an equivalent position

29 Jul 1775-9 Apr 1777
10 Apr 1777-3 Jun 1782

2 Oct 1782-3 Nov 1783
16 Jul 1794-1 Jun 1802
2 Mar 1849-3 Sep 1862
3 Sep 1862-1 Dec 1875
1 Dec 1875-22 Jan 1881
18 Feb 1881-22 Dec 1894
3 Jan 1895-21 May 1901
21 May 1901-22 May 1901
22 May 1901-24 May 1901
24 May 1901-14 Feb 1911
15 Feb 1911-14 Feb 1923
15 Feb 1923-15 Nov 1924
16 Nov 1924-15 Nov 1928
16 Nov 1928-28 Feb 1931
1 Mar 1931-30 Nov 1933
1 Dec 1933-30 Nov 1937
1 Dec 1937-30 Nov 1941
1 Dec 1941-30 Nov 1945
1 Dec 1945-30 Nov 1949

3 Jan 1950-26 Jan 1954
27 Jan 1954-30 Dec 1956
1 Jan 1957

...

Col. William Tudor .Col. John Lawrence Col. Thomas Edwards .Capt. Campbell Smith .Brevet Maj. John F. Lee Brevet Maj. Gen. Joseph_Holt .Brig. Gen. William M. Dunn .Brig. Gen. David G. Swaim .Brig. Gen. G. Norman Lieber .Brig. Gen. Thomas F. Barr

.Brig. Gen. John W. Clous .Maj. Gen. George B. Davis Maj. Gen. Enoch H. Crowder .Maj. Gen. Walter A. Bethel

..Maj. Gen. John A. Hull .Maj. Gen. Edward A. Kreger .Maj. Gen. Blanton Winship .Maj. Gen. Arthur W. Brown .Maj. Gen. Allen W. Gullion Maj. Gen. Myron C. Cramer .Maj. Gen. Thomas H. Green . Maj. Gen. Ernest M. Brannon .Maj. Gen. Eugene M. Caffey .Maj. Gen. George W. Hickman, Jr.

Chapter 3

ORGANIZATION AND STRENGTH OF THE ARMY

By "organization" of the Army is meant the manner in which personnel and units of the various combat arms and services, and their supporting and overhead agencies, are fitted together to make a complete machine, ready to keep the peace and to fight at a moment's notice if we are attacked.

Beginning at the bottom, we have small troop units or detachments, each consisting wholly or primarily of one particular arm or service. These are

TROOP UNITS OF THE

The complexity of modern war requires many specialized units at the lower levels (company or equivalent, battalion, and regiment or equivalent). At the present moment'1 the Army has 521 different kinds of such units. Of these, 167 pertain to the combat arms; 312 pertain to the services; the remaining 42 pertain to other activities such as security, intelligence, military government, etc.

Each such organized troop unit has a specified number of officers and men of various grades and skills; specified equipment, including weapons, tools, machines and mechanical devices, housekeeping equipment, transportation, and so on; and specified assignments and duties. For each unit there is published a "Table of Organization and Equipment" (often abbreviated TOE) giving full data on personnel, equipment, etc. Every TOE is designated by a hyphenated number, of which the first part designates the arm,

grouped together to form larger balanced combat units, each containing units or personnel from a number of different arms or services. Such large units must receive service support, not only from their own service personnel but from other service establishments behind them. All the foregoing must in turn be grouped, in peace and war, into territorial commands; and over all of them is the Department of the Army.

ARMS AND SERVICES

service, etc., to which the unit pertains, and the second identifies the unit. Thus, the TOE's of all infantry units have the initial number 7-; TOE 7-17 deals with the infantry rifle company.

This does not exhaust the list of lower-level Army units. The table below shows certain entities, usually called "service organizations," which can be identified by the fact that their TOE numbers end in -500 (for example, TOE 8-500, the Medical Service Organization). Such an entity is not an "organization" in the usual sense of the word, but merely a category, comprehending a number of small "cellular" units, in general independent of each other, usually called "teams." Generally speaking, a team differs from the ordinary type of troop unit in that the latter is more or less self-sufficient from an administrative and housekeeping viewpoint. A team, on the other hand, consists wholly or chiefly of specialists in

1 The progressive reorganization of the Army, needed to keep it in step with the development of new weapons and techniques, has resulted and will result in continuing changes in lower-level troop units. The data given below are correct as of the date when this book goes to press.

« 上一頁繼續 »