New-York tribune., 1901-04-13
LAW AND ETHICS OF FUNSTON'S EXPLOIT.

LAW AND ETHICS OF FENSTON'S EXPLOIT.
The methods adopted by General Funston for
| the capture of Aguinaldo have been the subject
of some criticism from good people who think
that war is sort of a game Of checkers, and
of great outcry the part Of Filipino sympa-
thzers always looking for an excuse to repre-
sent their countrymen as outlaws and aban-
doned wretches without sentiments Of honor or
humanity. Those who have been proclaiming
that Agunaldos capture was perhdious and
disgracefu and a violation of the laws of war
should consider the opinion on THE Legal
Aspects of Aguinaldo's Capture which Mr..
Theodore S. Woolsey professor of international
law in Yale University, has given to "The
Outlook"
Professor Woolsey says there are two ques-
tions TO be considered in deciding on the quality
of the methods employed: Were they such as
are permitted by the rules Of civilized war
fare? Is the United States Government legally
engaged in war with the Filipinos which 1t Is
hound to carry on in accordance with definite
code, The two acts of General Funston most
criticised are the disguise OF native troops and
the use of forged letters. The Hague cOnven-
ton forbds belligerents ito kill or wound
''treacherously individuals belonging TO the hos
title nation or army and TO make improper
''use of n flag Of truce, the national flag, the
distinctive badges of the Geneva convention"
1t also declares, however, that 'ruses of war"
are allowable Expoundlng the meaning Of
these rules, Professor Woosey says that the
prohibition of treacherOus killing does not for
bid ambush, wholesale slaughter by hidden
mines, night attacks, and such like, but is
simply intended TO forbid assassination, the
putting of price on an enemy's head and the
lying in wait for an enemy's stragglers In the
guise of noD-combatant. The use Of an
enemy's uniform is forbidden by The Hague
convention in war between signatory parties to
that treaty alone. 1t was also forbidden by
some previous codes under the same restriction,
though Liebers code for the armies Of the
United States does not forbid it, but those
who adopt enemy's uniform that they are
entitled to no quarter if captured The putting
OF forged dispatches into enemy's hands is
practice old war itself and never forbid
den by any rule 1t is a legitimate ''ruse Of
war" To sum up, Professor Woolsey says
Were the United States waging war with a
civilized power which was itself governed by
similar rules, General Funston would be prop
erly criticised for Disgusting his men in enemy's
uniforms. but not for employing forged letters
But, the facts are. since the Aguinaldo party
is not a signatory of The Hague Convention and
since the laws Of war are only reciprocally bind
ing. there was no obligation on the part OF the
United States army to refrain from using
eDemy's uniforms for the enemys deception.
When the wider question of the name and
nature OF the contest Is considered he thinks the
same conclusion must be reached. The Fill
pinos have gained no international standing and
| have been recognized by no power as beiger-
| ents. They are not bound by international law.
| they do not obey the rules Of war and they are
| not entitled to reciprocal rights. In the Civil
War the Confederates were recognized by sew
eral powers as belligerents and carried on war
| as civilized people. Nevertheless, Lieber did
not consider the laws Of war necessarily bind