The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1874-08-16
SOME PECULIAR FACTS IN HISTORY.

| CVME ALVVLlAn AV1S IN nlSIUTt
The Congress of European powers WIFI
began its ,ssion in Brussels on the 9th al
has as yet given out but very little of
work beyond general outline OF what it
: proposed to do. The object Of the COME
ence. in general terms, is to provide for NIT
cation of the horrors Of war; to present.
rules where only usages dependent upon Il
precarious will of a commanding officer ft
their observance. have hitherto prevailed
The prime mover in this laudable schsm
is the En- peror Alexander of Russii
whose advanced notions of human
tarianism were alluded to in the r,
publican two or three Sundays ago. TIL
main object of the Russian Government, how
ever, seems to be diplomatic rather than phil
anthropic, inasmuch as the bulk of the labor
OF the conference is directed towards lessenin
the destructiveness to life and property @
naval warfare. This fact the British Govern
ment has already accepted as proof of tn
entirely diplomatic nature of Russias objects
and she has entered her protest in the shap,
OF refusal to participate i'll or be bound by
| the action Of the conference.
In this connection it Is of interest to note O
fact that We have seldom seen adverted to. II
is the essential difference between the Anglo
o''AoAA ehOoiS VI "uIldIS tIIl lIittt uelu Ny
more despotic nations Of Christendom. In
discussing this point we will take England as
the Anglo-Saxon representative and Russia,
Austria, Prussia and France as the representa-
tlves OF the counter idea. Spain is not W, nth
consideration, for the reason that, in respect
to her theories and methods Of warfare she
has never fully established her title to rank as
a civilized nation. The two ideas of warfare
which we are about to contrast NAV, for the
sake of convenience, be named the British and
the Continental. The Continental idea con-
templates war as struggle between two or
more governments. That is to say, be-
tween the governments as individuals, and it
has ways been held under this theory that a
state OF war between two powers did not in
vol>e antagOnism between the individual citi-
zens Of each respectively. This theory is
corollary to the despotic or autocratic theory
OF government, in which the citizens is con-
templated as merely an atom in a mass, and
his individuality sunk in the single personality
OF the government. Hence the war of 1866
was between the Emperors William and Fran
els Joseph; that OF 1901 between William
and Louis Napoleon and the Allied Powers
With this theory the idea OF warfare under
defined code is perfectly compatible.
But the British theory of warfare, which is
also the American theory, involves ell the an
tutt Cbu Uc AIOu66u anu all Tue
appliances of destruction and conquest that
can be invented or imagined. Reinorseless
commandments, confagrations of ships and
dwellings,, close confinement of prisoners of
war, retaliatory executions, frequent sackines
and occasional butcheries, all 90 to show that
the British theory of warfare contemplates en-
nifty toward individuals as well as to ward gov
This is one point upon which Great
Britain and the Continental powers in session
at Brussels radically disagree. The Continental
nations frequently fight for what they call IAN
idea; that Is to say, sentimental cOnsidera-
ton. But England never fights except tor
material object, and then she fights in very
way, and generally with strikingly
material results. Take the history of the last |
1870 years, beginning with Marlborough and |
ending with Sir Garnet w olseley, and we find |
that, in point of vindictiveness, destructive
NJ IS and unmercy. English warfare has been |
the most barbaruus waged. Savagery has
been the rare exception with the Continental |
nations--so rare that it has found but two |
really prominent opponents, Butcher and Su- |
NARROW, and these have been frequently called |
crazy, because OF their excuses. But none of |
Butchers pursuits ever approached in |
erocity Wellington's following up OF |
MS victory in Spain, nor did any
IF Suwarows butcheries ever assimihte in !
horror the murderous retributions Of the Eng
ish upon the East Indian mutineers. All |
he Continental nations fought the first Ma
poleon with what was for them unexampled |
erocity, because they deemed him an usur-
per, but it remained for England to adjudge !
aim a fel IN without hearing and deny him |
he simplest rights of conquered Christian |
oe. To use homely Americanism, the Con-
mental nations have merely fought to whip, |
while England has fought to kill. No battles |
nave been so destructive of life as those in |
which English troops have fought, no bonn
Dardments have been so terrible as those |
which were inflicted by English fleets.
Hence it is very logical that England should |
appear as protestant against the mitigation |
If those possibilities Of horror which give |
ler su h dreadful supremacy in war; The |
iii k English neck, the stiff Scotch backbone
md the hot. hard IRISH head combined, have |
given England a trio of brute forces which, |
inspired by the brains of her Pitts her Can
1ings, her Norths and her Palmerstons, have |
made her mistress of the seas and dictator on |
he land. Now the progress of inventive art
lpplled to the science OF warfare, paradox
I'll as it may seem, has decreased the average
mortality in battles on land and increased it in
lights at sea. The statistics of war make curl
'us showing relative to the effect OF improve
nent IN firearms upon the average of casualty
II land battles. We may divide modern war
are into three eras The flint-lock and
mooth-bore era, substantially terminating at
Waterloo. the cap-lock, muzze-loading
lfie era. substantially terminating at Solferno
II Europe and at Appomat:ox in Amerca.
Ind the breech-loading rife era, in which
me great war has been fought, the Franco
herman struggle Of 1901. The percentage
# casualty in the flint-lock era ranged from
thirteen per cent in ordinary engagements to
hirty-three at Blenheim, forty-odd at Minden
nd fifty seven per cent at Waterloo. We in
lance here the percentage OF casualty sui
cred by the defeated army in each ca c.
There were but few wars fought with rifles
'efore the metallic cartridge and loading at
he breech displaced the cap-lock and the
..mrod. The greatest OF them were the Cri-
mean and Italian wars Of s. and SO Here we
md the percentage of casualty reduced to a
minimum of seven per cent and maximum
# fourteen, with the exception of Inkennann,
sht re we find casualty OF thirty four per
emit But this exceptional slau liter il nc
ountable tor by the desperate fighting of the
4, h. 4 ]