The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-05-02

The real animus of the attacks now being
made upon our army officers and soldiers
in the Philippines can be best appreciated
when IL is remembered that they come
mainly from members of the same. political
party that did all in it's power TO hinder,
embarrass and discredit the government
during the civil war. At that time denunci-
alton of this cruel and inhuman war was
d stock phrase of Democratic conventions,
and then, as now, the acts and orders of
our officers were stigmatized as barbarous.
while everything done by the enemy was
overlooked or justified. The object is the
same now as it was during the civil war,
namely, to make political capital. In the
present case an attempt is made to create
the impression that no other war of mod
ern times has been marked by any such
acts of cruelty as those which are alleged,
but not yet proven. TO have been committed
in the Philippines. Those who are making
the present outcry would have us believe
that all previous wars have been conducted
in a mild and gentle manner and that the
real horrors of wal were never practiced
until now. They know better, as anybody
may who will read history. Instances Of
retaliation and vindictive punishment have
characterized all wars. and to a large ex-
tent they are justified by the laws of war.
A Washington dispatch in yesterdays Jour
nal intimates that the order issued by Gen.
Smith for which he is now being tried by
court-martial may be held justihable under
the military Instructions issued by Presi-
dent Lincoln in 1868. and still in force. The
dispatch said:
The nearest step to. any instructions from
Washington regarding the kind Of warfare
10 be waged in Samar was the republica-
ton as a guide for the army of General Or
der 100. the department taking this means
of calling attention to the fact that the
order was still in force. If the cOurt-martial
now trying General Smith accepts the view
that this order is in as full effect now as
when il was promulgated in the days of
the civil war then IL Is predicted here at
the department that General Smith will
rely for his acquittal upon Article 80 of that
order. which authorizes a suspension of all
rules of civilized warfare and retaliation
when the enemy acts in a similar manner.
Article 80. above referred TO. defines war
as "a means to attain great ends of state. -
and says that mo conventional restriction
Of the modes adopted 10 injure the enemy
is admitted" Under this article an order
to kill and burn or 10 make "a bowling
wilderness" of an nsurrectionary district is
clearly defensible as a means TO suppress
a stubborn insurrection. Another article OF
General Order 100 defines war-rebels as
persons within an occupied territory who
rise in arms against the occupying or con-
quering army" and says: such persons.
if captured. may suffer death whether they
rise singly. in small or large bands. They
are not prisoners OF war
Our civil war history furnishes some
Notable instances of retsliatory orders and
of acts not justified by the laws Of war.
a general order issued by the commander
Of the Confederate army in August. 1852.
ordered that Major General Hunter and
Brigadier General Phelps, of the Union
army. be no longer held and treated as pub