page_title: United States Senate Committee on the Philippines
section_title: Initial hearings
hierarchical_section_title: United States Senate Committee on the Philippines / Investigation / Initial hearings
context_page_description: The Committee on the Philippines was a standing committee of the United States Senate from 1899 to 1921. The committee was established by Senate resolution on December 15, 1899, to oversee administration of the Philippines, which Spain had ceded to the United States as part of the settlement of the Spanish–American War. The committee was established by Senate resolution on December 15, 1899, even though the peace treaty signed in Paris on December 10, 1898, had not yet been ratified.
  In 1921, the Committee was terminated and jurisdiction over legislative matters concerning the Philippines was transferred to the newly created Committee on Territories and Insular Possessions.
context_section_description: Governor William Howard Taft had arrived in the Philippines in June 1900 with the Taft Commission to set up a civilian government. Taft was the first to testify in the Lodge Committee. As a lawyer, Taft would be assumed to have been a safe witness, but he conceded under questioning that "the torturing of natives by so-called water-cure and other methods" had been used "on some occasions to extract information"..."There are some amusing instances of Filipinos who came in and said they would not say anything unless tortured; that they must have an excuse for what they proposed to say." As Miller writes, "Very few died from the water cure, a mild form of torture."
  Taft was immediately followed by three pro-imperialist witnesses. General Robert P. Hughes, chief of staff to General Elwell S. Otis, testified for two weeks in March 1902. In his testimony, Hughes conceded that Filipino houses were burned indiscriminately as a strategy to eliminate shelters and hiding places for guerrillas and as a deterrent. During questioning, Senator Charles Dietrich followed up by asking Hughes to estimate the value of these houses. Hughes said they only took a few days to build, and cost between $1.50 and $4.00. Senator Joseph Rawlins continued the questioning:
  Rawlins: If these shacks were of no consequence what was the utility of their destruction?
  Hughes: The destruction was a punishment. They permitted these people to come in there and conceal themselves and they gave no sign. It is always--
  Rawlins: The punishment in that case would fall, not upon the men, who could go elsewhere, but mainly upon the women and little children.
  Hughes: The women and children are part of the family, and where you wish to inflict a punishment you can punish the man probably worse in that way than in any other.
  Rawlins: But is that within the ordinary rules of civilized warfare? Of course you could exterminate the family which would be still worse punishment.
  Hughes: These people are not civilized.
  Rawlins: But is that within the ordinary rules of civilized warfare?
  Hughes: No; I think it is not.
  Dietrich: In order to carry on civilized warfare both sides have to engage in such warfare.
  Hughes: Yes sir; certainly that is the point, I think that if I am allowed to go on I will come to a place where I shall have something to say that will bear directly on the subject.
  Senator Hale commented that the war had become less and less civilized with each successive commander, to which Hughes agreed saying "from summer to summer, the conduct of the war was sterner, stiffer, as you call it."
  David Prescott Barrows, school director in the Philippines testified, claiming that anti-imperialist factions in the press had grossly distorted the situation. For example, concentration camps and the water cure were explained in the press as "more terrible than they are." He claimed Filipinos in the camps were "there of their own volition", for they "are pleased with it, because they are permitted to lead an easier life--much easier than at home." He went on to claim that alleged torture via the water cure "injured no one." While stating his belief that the natives had benefited from the war, Barrows stated he did not "wish to assent to the proposition that war is a good thing ... but where you have a war existing, it is, I think, better to go ahead and pursue it rigorously and finish it."
  A fourth witness, General Elwell Stephen Otis testified the week of March 20, claiming here had been no warfare in the Philippines for the past two years. Senator Hale questions that statement, saying "there have been a good many fights since." Otis alleged any such fighting was due to "robbers", and that he and his men "were laughed at by the Spaniards and European officers for the humanity that we exercised." The committee proceeded to take a two-week break before continuing with hearings.
caption: William Howard Taft
exif: {}