The Washington times., 1912-07-22
MILITARY COST
OF THE |NSULAR
ARMED FORCES
James II. Blount Takes Issue
With President Taft's
Statement.

President Taft in his message Of last
week on the Philippine Islands, took oc-
casion to say that military forces now
in the islands would have to be support
ed at home, were they not in the Philip
pines"
A very timely reply to this statement
appears in the american Occupation
Of the Philippines" book Just from the
press, by James H. Blount, officer Of
the United States Volunteers in the
Philippines from 1899 to 1901. United
States Judge in the philippines from
1901 to 1906, and now a Nwyer In Wash
ington.
The volume, which contains nearly 100
pages, treats in the most exhaustive ,
way all the features Of the Philippine
occupation from the time of Admiral
Dewey's taking of Manila up to the
present. On pages 600 to 6ol Mr.. Blount
devotes himself particularly to the cost
Of the United States troops in the
islands and to the argument that the
support and maintenance of this armed
force should not be charged to the cost
of the Philippines because of the fact
that the soldiers would have to be
supported at home f they were not in
the Far East. This contention, he ar
CUES, is not based on facts, and re-
garding 1t he says:
"The cost per annum of the Philip
pine (native) Scouts, of which there are
1000, is paid out of the United States
Treasury, and amounts to 5000. 900 per
annum The number of American troops
in the islands for the last few. years
has been about 1900. Those who are
welded to the present Philippine policy
of indefinite retention with undeclared
intention, insist that our military ex-
pcnses in the Philippines in respect to
| the regular army out there. are not
| fairly chargeable as part of the cur
| rent expenses of the Philippine occupa-
ton. This argument must be admitted
to have some force as far as the navy
| Is concerned, but as to the army 1t ~
clearly without merit:
Under the act of Congress reorganiz-
| ing the army Of the United states after
| the Spanish war, provision was made
| for skeleton army of about $1,000 men
| capable OF expansion to something lik.
100000 in time Of war. The method OF
expansion thus contemplated was to
sixty men, in time of peace. which
companies could be recruited up to u
| war footing of 100 men, In time of war
| The suggestion that the cost of the parI
keep in the Philippines Is not charge.
able to TIE Philippines because those
same troops would have to be some,
where In the United States 4 they were
| not where they are, is not we'll taken
II we did not need 1900 men continual
~ in the Philippines, the army coulc
be at once reduced by that much with
out affecting its present organization.
| IF we had no troops in the Philippines
this would not mean the absolute elimi
| nation from the army of enough regi
ments to represent 1900 men. It would
not eliminate any existing organization
1t would simply mean contraction Of
the number Of men in the several com
panies of the several regiments of the
army toward a peace basis to the ex
tent of a total Of 1000 men, more oi
less.
THE War Department has long fig
ured on the cost of an American soldier
In the Philippines per annum. including
his pay, allowances. and transportation
out and back. at 81. 900 per annum. The
cost of 1900 soldiers at $1,000 per annun
is Sl2, 900 900 per annum. The conclusion
would, therefore. seem inevitable tina
the extra military current expense
chargeable to our occupation of thu
Philippines is 1000, 900 per annum, out
side the Philippine scouts, or a tota
i Of Sl4,O00,O ,OO0."