the army serving in the United States to one man from the army serving in the Philippines!

In 1900, in the Philippines we had to discharge, for these troubles, 47 men out of an average army of 66,882 men—one in about 1400-while in the United States we had to discharge 151 men out of a force less than one-third as great as the force in the Philippines; which means that, in 1900, we had to discharge more than ten men to every 1400 in our army at home while, in the army in the Philippines we had to discharge only one in the same number; and our rate of discharge for these disorders in the United States is the lowest, I am informed, of all the armies of the world and has been so for many years. (Vide 1900 Rpt. Surg. Gen., pp. 384 and 387, also 1901 Rpt, idem, pp. 334 and 340.)

The above is an indication of our showing in the Philippines for the first three years of our campaign there. At no time within those three years were these diseases the "greatest " danger which our soldiers had to face. As illustrative of the average prevalence of these disorders, attention is directed. to page 131 of the 1901 Surg. Gen. Rep., which shows that, according to the latest information contained therein, there was, from June, 1900, to April,

1901, out of every seven men on sick report in the Philippines, one man, on the average, who suffered from venereal disease, so that this danger to the soldiers the danger which Mr. Atkinson says is the "greatest"-was, for the last nine months given in the 1901 report, just one-seventh as prevalent as other diseases.

Since the making up of the 1901 report, we, at times, have fallen off in this excellent showing a little, but not to any degree that warrants the application of any such statistics or pictures as Mr. Atkinson gives. The most unfavorable exhibit our army appears to have made in the Philippines, as a whole, in these matters is in the letter to me of May 8, 1892, from the Asst. Surgeon General, from which quotation was made in the preceding chapter. That letter states as follows:

"Twenty-one per cent. of all the totality of disease and injury (in the Philippines) for March, 1902, consisted of venereal cases,―i. e., 21 per cent. of 6.45 per cent. (the total sick rate for March) or 1.35 per cent. or 13.5 (men afflicted with) venereal (diseases) per 1000 of strength."

Thirteen men to the 1000 afflicted in this way,— about one man in 100,-less than 12 per cent.!

13 men to the 1000! Something of a contrast to the English rate which Mr. Atkinson so gleefully quotes, of 43 for each 1000 men in India in 1896!

The 1902 report of the Surgeon General, which is just at hand, shows that, for the calendar year 1901, the rate of admission to sick report for these diseases in our own army at home was five higher than the corresponding rate in the Philippines—and we had to discharge only 26 men in the Philippines for these diseases out of an army of a mean strength of 59,526 men; while in the United States, here at home, we discharged 118 men out of a mean army of 26,515-that is, here among our troops stationed at home, we had to discharge for disability owing to these diseases 4.42 men in each 1000, and only .44 of a man to the 1000 in the Philippines -and, to sum it all up so that we may grasp the general result quickly, comprehensively, and conclusively, I add that the Surgeon General's reports show that, in the four years of the Philippine struggle, the average annual rate of admission to sick report for these diseases in our army in the Philippines has been 4 (four) men per thousand less than the average annual rate of admissions during the same period for the same diseases in our army here at

home! So that Mr. Atkinson's labored delusions fall to the ground of their own weight.

Let us hope Mr. Atkinson will learn that statistics of the English army in India do not apply to our American army in the Philippines!

I think these facts prove that Mr. Atkinson has overdrawn his picture, and that it was without reasonable excuse. He can find here and there statements of individual officers and men to comfort him a little, and statements from isolated posts that will please him, but nothing can disturb the general results that are established and the figures I have just given. As Mr. Atkinson was only prophesying and comparing, it cannot be proven that he misstated, but it is asserted that his comparisons were unfair, uncalled for, unwarranted, exaggerated and distorted, and so much so, that, considering the delicacy of the subject and the pride and anxiety of the families of these boys for their soldier sons, Mr. Atkinson has shown a marked lack of good taste, of gentlemanly conduct and of decent respect for the soldier.

Before leaving this branch of our discussion, I would like to ask Mr. Atkinson for any statistics he may be able to furnish of the prevalence of these dis

eases among men, without excepting anybody at all, engaged in Mr. Atkinson's business, that of fire insurance-if I may so ask without prying too far into his personal affairs. But, as he has seen fit to impute to the soldiers with so free a hand, it would seem only fair for me, in their behalf, to ask for any testimony Mr. Atkinson is willing to furnish.