The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1915-08-04

mans method OF war was, in spirit
and In action, contrary to the written
law Of war, or to the usages and Gus
toms Of war generally recognized as
legitimate In his time, and that while
the Germans improved upon his
methods Of going from harshness to
frightfulness, they did rot make the
difference between the Two kinds of
warfare so great that to compare
Sherman's with that of the Germans
was to traduce the reputation of the
American volunteer armies"
should think, if yoll wanted to
disprove the first proposition, you
would cite authorities on so-called in
ternational law approving Of the spo-
liation or harassment of a non-com-
blatant population with the object of
discouraging them from supporting
war. You can find almost any theory
on any point of so-called information
al law if you only look for it. So /
should not be surprised if you would
find some authorities-though have
never found any-who justify the
mode Of warfare in question. But
please observe my words, mot gen
orally recognized"
do not say that Shelman's war
fare was not legitimate. I say and
sought to show that it was of a kind
that was not generally recognized as
legitimate. Methods of war which are
calculated to shorten a war I regard
as legitimate, whether they are 'sle-
gal" or regular, or customary, or
sanctioned by authorities on so-called
international law or not
You have no occasion that / can
see to defend General Sherman or
any other of my predecessors in the
service for me, for / have not re-
hected on any of them. / regard
Shernan's warfare as rejecting, not
on him, but on the professors and
other expounders Of so-cailed inter
national law who undertake to re-
strict war to contest between armed
forces.
You show that the enemy was re-
sponsible for Sherman's having to
live of the country, which had not
questioned, but this fact does not ac-
count for his resorting to foraging, or
forced contributions, instead Of to
paid contributions, for the collection
of his supplies.
There was at the worst" you say,
'1ittle wanton devastation by Sher-
mans Army in its march through
Georgia" AS / understand the word
wanton, and as ! read the records of
the war, consider that there was a
good deal Of wanton devastation. I
regard this fact as established beyond
reasonable doubt by Sherman's own
testimony. That foraging loosens the
bonds Of discipline may be learned
from any primer Of the art of war.
An army of $4,000 men cannot march
across hostile country subsisting by
foraging and not pillage on a large
scale. When such a force gees through
an extensive region, sweeping it like
swarm of locusts," it does more
than little wanton injury.
What you say about the people of
the South as insurgents and not en-
titled to payment for supplies is in
teresting from a legal point of view,
but has nothing to do with the para
mount question Of military expedi-
ency. There was nothing in the laws
or constitution of the United States
that prevented Sherman from paying
for his supplies. He chose not to pay
for them because he wanted the peo-
| pie to feel the loss of them. He did
this not in wantcnness, but in an hon
est belief that it would prove effective
political strategy. believe that IN
biased students of the great march
will generally agree with me in con-
| sidering that on this point Sherman
erred. IF we can imagine the same
or a similar problem arising again
our commander, however he may
copy Sherman in other respects
would ignore him as regards the sub
sistence of his army. He would pay
for what he took from the country.
To learn this lesson from General
Sherman Is not to reflect OF. him. Tc
prevent or discourage our officers
from profting by the errors Of those
of a former generation, out of regard
for their memory, would be a short
sighted subordination Of the interests
| Of the nation to the interests of oul
military men; a species of inilitarisn
which, it seems to me, ought partic-
ularly to be frowned upon at a time
when a goodly body of our citizens
are trying to commend the Army te
the people as the champion of theil
national ideals, as the guardian OF
their liberties.