_Captain Company H, Seventh Cavalry, Missouri State Militia_.
In reporting this case to the Adjutant General in Washington I did not
approve it, as my investigation showed that the statements of
McReynolds's acts were true. I did not censure the officers, but issued an
order that officers should follow more closely the orders of the
Department, and ended that order as follows: "Hereafter men caught in arms
will have no mercy shown them." General John McNeill, of Missouri, took
twelve citizens out and shot them, it being claimed they were connected
with guerillas that shot a Union man. In some histories it is known as the
Palmyra massacre. It is claimed that the Union man turned up alive. If the
reports of the numbers of robbers, guerillas and outlaws who were shot on
sight in Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee, and elsewhere, by both sides in
1864 and 1865, could be gathered up they would furnish retaliations and
cruelties enough for these water-cure journals for years.
Consider this matter in a broader sense. Take the order of General Grant
to General Sheridan to make the Shenandoah Valley a barren waste; it was
absolutely destroyed so the enemy could not again occupy it. I can see no
difference between an order to make the Shenandoah Valley a barren waste
and Smith's order to make Samar a "howling wilderness." Take the order I
received to go to the rear of Bragg's Army and destroy the Valley of the
Tennessee, and all the supplies gathered there for the use of his Army,
which valley was burned from Bear River to Decatur. These were orders from
principal officers in our Army, and I only quote them to show the contrast
between that time and the present. Senators in the halls of Congress find
it necessary in these days to take up the question. Senator Rawlins, of
Utah, made an attack upon our officers, and especially upon General
Chaffee, which was nothing short of disgraceful, and should not be allowed
to go without vigorous condemnation. He represents a state and people
under whose orders Lieutenant Gunnison and his party were massacred by
Mormons disguised as Indians. Some one should get up in the Senate and
call him to account for these things, and ask him, in consideration of
these facts, why he is so deeply outraged by the orders of General
Chaffee, a gallant soldier and gentleman, a humane man, and one who, in my
opinion, has done nothing in the Philippines but what was perfectly
justified, and will in time be considered to have been humane.
The two Senators from Colorado have taken it upon themselves to denounce
in bitter terms what they call unheard-of acts and cruelties of our Army.
I would point them to a case in their own state, which was more severe
than any act in the Philippines has been. A regiment of Colorado cavalry
under Colonel J. M. Chivington, a minister by profession, attacked and
destroyed a band of Indians encamped on the Big Sandy, near Camp Lyon, who
claimed to be under the protection of the officers at Fort Lyon. This was
a massacre of men, women and children of a friendly band of Indians, and
was one of the main causes of bringing into arms against the United States
every tribe of Indians south of the Yellowstone. When an investigation of
this affair was ordered the State of Colorado almost unanimously protested
against it, upholding the act, and quoted that old saying, "There is no
good Indian except a dead one." Think of our wars with the Indians in
which whole bands were wiped out, even the women and children being
destroyed; think of the wars in which we employed Indians against Indians;
they not only killed but scalped. I do not know of a single treaty ever
made with the Indians that the United States has not violated, and when an
Indian had the hardihood to object the Government started in to wipe him
out. This has been the treatment of the Indians from the Atlantic to the
Pacific, until at the present time there is not a wild Indian living in
the entire country; yet I cannot remember that this press has ever been
aroused; it was too near home.
Take the case of Major Glenn, who is about to be courtmartialed for giving
the water cure to the presidente in one of the Provinces of Luzon, as the
testimony goes to show. This presidente had been appointed to office by
our Government, had taken the oath of allegiance, and was there to
represent us. While he was occupying this position, it was discovered that
he was the captain of an insurgent company, giving active assistance to
the enemy, and he was, therefore, a traitor and a spy, and under the laws
of war deserved to be shot; but instead they proposed to courtmartial
Glenn for simply giving him the water cure; and this, in my opinion, is a
great wrong.
Order 100, which is often quoted, was issued in the Civil War to govern
officers. It was prepared by Professor Lieber, and was considered and
adopted, I believe, by a board of officers; anyhow, it was very carefully
drawn. I am told it has been considered and used by nearly all the
nations. It gives an officer great latitude, and where an officer meets a
savage enemy, or one that is violating the laws of war, those laws are
suspended and it virtually is left to his own judgment as to how far he
should go in inflicting punishment, and under this order there is no doubt
both Smith and Glenn were protected in their actions. It may seem harsh,
but you are all aware how many harsh orders were given in the Civil War
for the purpose of forcing the enemy to obey our orders, and how often
those orders and threats accomplished the purpose without any other act.
When the colored troops were first organized, on several occasions
Confederate officers sent in demands for them to surrender, coupled with
the threat that if they refused the place would be taken and no quarter
granted. I know of one instance where an officer believed this threat and
surrendered a Regiment of colored infantry for the purpose of having them
protected. Then there is the case of Fort Pillow; whether or not Forest
gave the order it is claimed he gave, I do not know; but the fact that no
quarter was shown there has been amply verified.
Within the past week there has been appointed a committee of distinguished
citizens, most of whom are well-known opponents of our Government in its
policies and acts during the Spanish War. They propose to hunt up and lay
before Congress all cases of cruelty on the part of our Army, with the
avowed purpose of sustaining the national honor. I must say this is the
first time I ever heard of national honor being sustained by such methods.
Have you, or any one else, ever heard a single word of protest from these
people or any one connected with them against the revolting cruelties of
the enemy in the Philippines? They evidently have no desire to learn about
these things, but want some excuse for attacking our Army, hoping thereby
to bring dishonor upon our country before the world. The national honor
never has, never can, and never will be protected by such methods. It is
upheld and maintained today, as it always has been, by the patriotism of
our people as represented by our Army in the Civil War, in Cuba, the
Philippines, and China.
These attacks upon the Army are for a double purpose, and you should not
forget it. Every time they make this great hubbub about cruelties they are
hitting back at those that were in the Civil War. There is an element in
this country that already has no use for the soldier of the Civil War.
They are continually crying about the pension he is getting; that he is
favored in the Government service; etc., etc. They do not dare attack him
openly, as yet, but do it covertly. There is no officer listening to me
who did not see cruelties in the Civil War. Many of you have had to order
them, but you know you were never brought to account for them when they
were acts of necessity. We were always careful that no cruelties were
committed by enlisted men, but whatever was done was by the order of an
officer. It was the practice of the War Department never to interfere in
these matters, leaving them to the officer who was in charge of the forces
in the field. None of these things occurred without his knowledge; he was
on the spot and knew the necessity for them, and if he did not take action
it was considered that none was necessary, and they were seldom called to
account for it afterwards; but in the Philippines they are bringing
officers to account simply because of the outcry of people who care
nothing for the merits of the case, except to make capital against our
country's policy in maintaining itself in the Philippines. In view of all
the facts, I must doubt the sincerity of those who are seeking to bring
discredit upon our little Army, the marvellous efficiency of which has won
the admiration of the world. Under the regulations, it is impossible for
the Army to defend itself and make answer to these attacks, except through
their own officers, and their reports do not reach the public, for the
press seems to use only that which reflects upon the Army, and omits that
which is in its favor. It is the duty of every companion here, as well as
of every good citizen, to enter his protest against these unjust attacks.
The right side is beginning to get a hearing, and when the facts and
causes for the action of the Army are generally known, it will be found
that our Army is as humane and well-behaved a body of troops as ever went
into a foreign country, and we must all assist in seeing that it receives
justice.