HumanitiesWeb HumanitiesWeb
Sort By Author Sort By Title

Sort By Author
Sort By Title


Get Your Degree!

Find schools and get information on the program that’s right for you.

Powered by Campus Explorer

& etc

All Rights Reserved.

Site last updated
28 October, 2012
Real Time Analytics
Secretary Root's Record:"Marked Severities" in Philippine Warfare
The Evidence from Statistics as to Killing Wounded Men and Prisoners

After the battle of Caloocan the evidence on this subject from the official records is overwhelming. Thus the report of Brigadier-general Hughes, commanding Department of Visayas, gives the figures of the enemy's loss thus: "for August, 1899, killed, 40; for September, killed, 10."

October 1 Captain B. A. Poore "made a second attack on Tabaun Negros. The works were taken by assault." Enemy's loss: killed, 21; rifles captured, 12; rounds of ammunition captured, 6,000.

The summary for October is: "killed, 59; captured, 26."

The summary for November is: "killed, 95; wounded, 6; captured, 4"; for December: "killed, 88"; for January, 1900: "killed, 42; captured, 10"; for March: "killed, 29; wounded and captured, 5"; for April: "killed, 19; wounded, 5"; for May: "killed, 134; wounded, 21"; for June: "killed, 141; wounded, 1."

For the year,

Enemy's loss: killed, 801; wounded, 38; captured, 100; our loss: killed, 40; wounded, 72; drowned 3.

Take now the report of Major-general Wheaton, commanding the Department of Northern Luzon for April, May, June, and July, 1900, -- Northern Luzon, whose people, as Mr. Root said, "received us with open arms":

			  American   Insurgent 
Killed               36      1,014 
Wounded              63         95 
Captured             12        507 
The report of Major-general John C. Bates, commanding Department of Southern Luzon from April 10 to July 31, 1900:

		  American   Insurgent 
Killed   	    23               610 
Wounded         81               214 
Missing          2   Captured, 1,742 
The losses by guerilla warfare, from Nov. 1, 1899, to Sept. 1, 1900: Filipinos, 3,227 killed, 694 wounded, 2,864 captured.

In a letter to Mr. Herbert Welsh, of Philadelphia, an official of the War Department says:

The aggregate killed and wounded [Filipinos] reported by commanding officers is 14,643 killed and 3,297 wounded.... As to the number of Filipinos whose deaths were due to the incidents of war, sickness, burning of habitations, etc., we have no information.

The comparative figures of killed and wounded -- nearly five killed to one wounded if we take only the official returns -- are absolutely convincing. When we examine them in detail and find the returns quoted of many killed and often no wounded, only one conclusion is possible.

In the fiercest battles of the Civil War the proportion was as follows: at Antietam, where we attacked: killed, 2,010; wounded, 9,416; at Fredericksburg, where we charged again and again under a withering fire of rifles and cannon: killed, 1,180; wounded, 9,028; at Gettysburg, where two veteran armies joined in desperate battle: killed, 2,834; wounded, 13,709; at Cold Harbor, where the carnage was frightful: killed, 1,905; wounded, 10,570.

In the recent Boer War the proportion is the same. At Magersfontein: killed, 171; wounded, 691; at Colenso: killed, 50; wounded, 847. In all battles from October, 1899, to June, 1900: killed, 2,518; wounded, 11,405.

In no war where the usages of civilized warfare have been respected has the number of killed approached the number of wounded more nearly than these figures. The rule is generally about five wounded to one killed.

What shall we say of a war where the proportions are reversed? How are these figures explained by the officers in command?


Terms Defined

Referenced Works