The Irish standard., 1901-02-09

the statements made by NIr. Balfour in
his speech on the address upon the
subject of the laws of. war as applied
to the conflict in South Africa. When
challenged upon the subject, replying
to Sir Henry Campbell- -Banncrman, oil
the 9th of December, he made the fol-
lowing remarkable statement: "By
the ordinary laws of war, as practiced
by civilized countries, distinction was
drawn between combatants and nom
combatants, and what had been found
universally intolerable is that men
should oScillatc from one character to
another. Nations have laid down the
seyerest rules represSing such prac-
tees. l have placed in my hands in
structionS for the government Of the
army of the United States in the field,
dated 1898, and in this manual rule
32 says, If the people Of a country al
ready occupied by an army rise
against it, they are violators of the
laws of war, and are not entitled to
their protection The second extract
was to the effect that men or squads
of men taking part in raids of any
kind without permission and without
being part or portion of an organized
hostile army, are not public enemies,
and therefore, il captured. are not en-
titled to be treated as prisoners of war,
but shall be treated as highway rob-
bcrs and pirates. l only read these
rules to show what is the state of the
law in the United States. The rules
relate to what is the fate of Il farmer
who acts one time as Il soldier and
other times as Il peaceful citizen, but
who has no standing as Il recognized
public enemy" At this the following
interchange occurred:
Sir William uarcourt-Do you in
tend to adopt those rules? Opposition
checrS)
Mr.. Balfour-I do not say whether
we will adopt them or not.
Tho date of this remarkable state
ment is highly significant when placed
side by side with this officers letter, for
the movement to entrap De Vet was
actually in progress at the mo bent Mr..
BalfOur spoke. and it looks as if Lord
Kitchener had received in advance
approval of his outrageous
From the very nature of
their lives and circumstances there is
scarcely a Bocr peasant on the veldt
fighting in defence of his independence
and liberty whose life would not be
forfeited under the philosophic Mr..
Ralfours definition of piracy. SO that
this ministerial defence seems to have
been actually an apology for the i'll
tcntions which this British officer now
nScribes to his superiors
But. however prepared for it close
students of British methods may be,
the revelation will deepen the abhor-
renee of all civilized and Christian men
for the brutal war and it's brutalized
directors. 1t is quite clear that those
oltlagcs that have from time to time
been chroniclrd, as if they We're some
thing to be proud of, in the private let
terS OF officers and men from the
front. are not the product OF individual
cruelty, but Il settled and deliberate
policy. The killing Of the Boer field
cornct in circumstances which "Tlc
Tablet" eXultingly chronicled, but
which evoked the rcsounding protest
of tho Bishop of Limerick, is not IN
isolated incident. The announcement
i'll another letter, that 'tllc infantry
never gave quarter" had a deeper sig
nilicance than was ascribed to it, The
last three dispatches of Lord Kitchen
or detail Bocr losses in several en-
The losses total-Prison-
rr, l: dead, 47; wounded. O. In some
OF the engagements where all the
HnrrS stricken We're killed there was
not a single British casualty: Il fact
that goes to prove the overwhelming
OF the Beers engaged by superior
numbers and the refusal of quarter,
Thus we read, under date of January
l., "Royers WAS engaged With the en-
rmy ht Senekal; Commnndant Duprrcz
and eight Beers killed: no casualties"
1t is quite clear that the methods used
in the Soudan in fighting Il foe that
ncltlrr gave nor sought quarter have
been transferred to South Africa, and
are h"lng used against Il foe from
whom 30 British officers and over
5000 British soldiers have begged. ana
received. their lives. 1t is horrible:
but it is the natural event of all that
has gone before, from the plot in
iap"tpwn to the homecoming of Lord
Roberts, whose protection no longer
avnils for property or life in South
Afrca.