run contrary to accepted theory, it is because of misconception of the fundamental principle involved and misunderstanding of some phases of modern conflict. By “relatively less dangerous,” I do not mean that as many men do not lose their lives in war as formerly. I mean that modern man-killing devices slay fewer men in proportion to the duration of engagements than at any previous time in the history of war. In regard to destruction of human life in the aggregate, war is much as it always was. There is no sound reason, that I have ever seen advanced, showing that humanity will endure less suffering of this kind than in the days, let us say, of Cæsar. To day, as always, troops will endure just so much carnage before abandoning a conflict; and it matters little, from a humanitarian standpoint, if that loss be inflicted in a few hours or be distributed through days. To compel an organized army to abandon the field it must be subjected to a certain amount of suffering and loss, and it makes no ultimate difference whether that loss is caused by battle-axes or by high explosives vomited from machine guns. The human mind grows accustomed to anything, and death is the same to a soldier in any form. In changing its form, war has not changed its objects nor its results. Disease is now the soldier’s worst enemy, slaving its thousands where bullet and shell kill hundreds.
The statement that magazine rifles, machine guns, and high explosives have not added to the dangers of war needs some explanation. It goes without saying, that if the same tactics was employed as was used in our civil war, the slaughter would be frightful. But as weapons change, tactics changes also. Troops no longer march in masses on the field of battle. They are scattered as much as possible, are taught to make every use of cover, are advanced slowly and with great circumspection, and whenever practicable are protected by intrenchments. The amount of ammunition required to disable a combatant has increased enormously. And after he is disabled, provided he is not killed outright, what then? The medical department takes him in hand, and its work is one of the most interesting phases of modern war.
Owing to the use of small calibre, antiseptic bullets, the number of men killed outright in battle is considerably less than formerly. Wounds that used to be fatal are now only disabling, and wounds that were formerly disabling now cause only slight inconvenience, and often are unnoticed in the excitement of battle. There is a great decrease of hæmorrhage, and by supplying the troops with “first-aid” packages they are usually able to check such bleeding as there is. Many wounds that would have formerly prevented locomotion do not now, thus increasing the proportion of wounded men who are able to get off the field without assistance, and to assist others to do so. Many a man who would in previous wars have lain unnoticed on the field until he expired is removed to where he can receive attention. Once in the hospitals, advanced surgery and the use of antiseptics give the patient an increased chance for recovery. In this war, the Russians have made splendid use of hospital trains, frequently running them into the fire zone to bring away wounded. Thousands of wounds that would have been considered serious thirty years ago are now classed as slight. Experience with the Russians in this war has shown that fifty per cent. of wounded are able to rejoin their commands within a month, and thousands are back with the colors in a week. The small calibre Japanese rifle is largely responsible for this. High explosive impact shell is terrifying, but does less execution than was expected of it. It is very effective in destroying cover, but against troops is less so. If a shell strikes a man it annihilates him, but if it strikes the ground it usually does nothing beyond scattering a cloud of dust and stones. The very power of the explosive used destroys much of its effectiveness by splintering the shell into such small bits that they do little damage a few feet away from their point of impact. Shrapnel wounds are far more dangerous, and the troops dread it most.
The results here indicated are doubtless highly gratifying to the humanitarian sentiment of the world. But what profits it? These men return to their commands only to again accept the hazard of battle. In the long run the usual proportion are killed or disabled for life. These manifestations are chiefly interesting for the light they throw upon certain theories advanced within the last few years, and which have been widely accepted. One of these theories is that