United States Senate Committee on the Philippines

[1] 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.

[3] At the time of the creation of the committee, the Philippines were in a state of civil turmoil that greatly concerned the Senate, where a debate raged between those who wished to extend U.S. sovereignty over the Filipinos and the anti-imperialists.

[15][16][17][18][19] 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.

"[20] David Prescott Barrows, school director in the Philippines testified, claiming that anti-imperialist factions in the press had grossly distorted the situation.

"[21] A fourth witness, General Elwell Stephen Otis testified the week of March 20,[22][23] claiming here had been no warfare in the Philippines for the past two years.

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.

[26] Of late by reason of the conduct of the troops, such as the extensive burning of the barrios in trying to lay waste the country so that the insurgents cannot occupy it, the torturing of natives by so-called water cure and other methods, in order to obtain information, the harsh treatment of natives generally, and the failure of inexperienced, lately appointed Lieutenants commanding posts, to distinguish between those who are friendly and those unfriendly and to treat every native as if he were, whether or no, an insurrecto at heart, this favorable sentiment above referred to is being fast destroyed and a deep hatred toward us engendered.

Under present conditions the political situation in this province is slowly retrograding, and the American sentiment is decreasing and we are daily making permanent enemies.

Senator Benjamin Tillman, a Democrat from South Carolina, similarly objected to this move, claiming information was being "smothered.

In addition to Mr. Aguinaldo, Mr. Rawlings proposed calling Apolinario Mabini, one of Aguinaldo's principal advisors and Prime Minister of the declared Filipino revolutionary government; Sixto Lopez, an advocate for Philippine independence; Judge Pío del Pilar, General Torres, Howard W. Bray, an Englishman, who has spent many years in the Philippines, Robert M. Collins, and Harold Martin, both Associated Press correspondents.

[30][31][32] Instead, Mr. Lodge subpoenaed several veterans from a so-called "safe list" supplied by Secretary of War Elihu Root.

However, when the soldiers appeared, they began to lecture the committee on the necessity of shooting and burning all Filipinos because of their "inability to appreciate human kindness.

Corporal Richard O'Brien, testified he had been present at Igbaras when the water cure was administered to the Presidente (or chief) of that town.

MacArthur said that absolute chaos would result should the Filipinos be given complete independence and the United States entirely withdraw from the islands.

In regards to the death toll in the Philippines, he said, "The destruction is simply incident to war, and of course embraces a very small percentage of the total population, which is dense."

Gen. MacArthur spoke of the capture of papers from high Filipino officials in which the information was contained that, if President McKinley should be re-elected, the insurgents would surrender to the authority of the United States.

[44] Colonel Arthur L. Wagner, the Army's chief public relations officer,[45] had spent two and a half years in the Philippines.

Such camps, he insisted, were created to "protect friendly natives from the insurgents" and to "assure them an adequate food supply", while also teaching them "proper sanitary standards.

Colonel Wagner said that one of the principal purposes of concentrating the native people in the Philippines was to protect them against the Ladrones, which had been admirably accomplished.

The chair ruled that unless the senator identified the author, who had asked to remain anonymous, it was "hearsay evidence" and directed the witness not to comment on it.

But Culberson had already read part of the letter: What a farce it all is ... this little spot of black sogginess is a reconcentrado pen, with a dead line outside, beyond which everything living is shot ...

Wagner said that he knew that one village had been burned because the citizens would not give information of the murderers of a native friendly to the United States.

After intense cross examination, Wagner agreed that some "innocents" had suffered in the Philippines, but he added that the same was true of every war and that it was an injustice as old as man.

Historian Miller criticized this secondary publication, calling it a "deceitful cut and paste job ... gleaning from the record anything that remotely supported his conclusion that the war was one of the most humane ones in history ... [Beveridge felt that] the Lodge committee had destroyed the malicious fiction of "the slanders of the Army".