The Pascagoula democrat-star. (Pascagoula, Miss.) 1878-1920, 1898-10-07
NUMBER "a.
Loss OF LIFE IN WAR.

Loss OF LIFE IN WAR.
n o. Times Democrat
Here Is the official death record OF
the American army In the late war
with Spain:
Killed in battle or died Of wounds . 346
Died from accidents ................. ...... 10
Died from disease ..-.-....- ........... 2.a25
lUldl 2bul
These figures alone, and without the
slightest additional evidence, are suf.
flcient to convict the War Department
Of gross mismanagemcnt, resulting in
the murder of the troops. Compare
them with the records Of the civil war
Of deaths by wounds and by Disease.
The official figures of the Adjutant
Generals department on this point are
rs follows.
Killed in battle or died of wounds .- 1000
Total ....... . 3Qg l15
In the civil war the Union army was
far more exposed. 1t was most OF the
time in the field with an enemy op-
posed to it. 1t was impossible to pro.
vide 1t with all it needed in tents, ac.
coutrements, food, medicine, etc: nor
had we then as great a knowledge OF
sanitary science as we have to-day.
Compare with ii the experience OF the
soldiers OF the late Spanish war, not
onc.sixth Of whom saw an enemy, who
were campcd ut home on sites chosen
after much delberation, and who had
behind thcnrthc richest government in
the world. ltsecms incredible that in
this later war, with all the means the
United States mad, all the opportuni.
us at haa1, and all the knowledge Of
hygiene and sanitation. the losses by
disease should be proportlOnately
higher than in the civil war, and yet
this was the case. In the civil war of
every 100 men dying in the army Ga
died of disease and 26 were killed or
died from their wounds; in the Span
ish war of each 100 dead soldiers 81
died OF disease and only 10 died Of
Of wounds.
Nor will it suffice to explain this
difference by saying that there were
very few battles during the Spanish
war, and, therefore. the number OF
killed and wounded was small II the
army was not exposed 10 battle, neither
was it exposed to danger from disease.
The greater portion Of 1t remained at
home in camps well equipped, or that
ought to have been we'll equipped.
The report of the Adjutant General
OF the United States declares that
there were 2,776, 3O4 men enlisted in
the Union army in the civil war, or,
reduced to the three years standing,
1926, l6S; that Is, 1896, l6S men served
three years in the army. During the
war with Spain our army at Its MAXI
mum was $4,000. Reduced to the
thrcc-ycar standard, it amounted to
"a, 450; that is, the service rendered
by the army during the war was
equivalent to "a, ,4jO men serving three
full years, instead Of from 10000 to
254, 900 serving from three to five
months. II the army during the
Spanish war lad suffered the same
loss from disease as during the civil
war. a mortality of 4.732 per cent for
the three years, the loss would have
been 1869. 1t was, as we see, twice as
great loss OF life, 2,225, at the rate
of 9.O99 per thousand at the three
years service. Some Of the Northern
papers have recently trOtted out the
figures Of three Maine regiments to
show that these regiments, which did
not do much flghing in the civil war,
lost many more men than by disease
than by bullets, but we imagine that
no one was deceived by any such trick.
We don't want to rest on Maine sta
tistics. We want the figures for the
whole army In 1876 to compare with
those Of to-day, and the comparison
is damning.
What possible explanation Is there
Of this except gross criminal misman'
agement? How Is 1t possible, with
every condition favorable. that the
loss of life in the army In the Spanish
war should be relatively and propor'
tionately twice as high from disease
ne ~ was in the civil war?