No announcement yet.

Imperialist Paranoia and Military Injustice: The Persecution and Redemption of Sergeant Calloway

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Imperialist Paranoia and Military Injustice: The Persecution and Redemption of Sergeant Calloway

    Professor Gill H. Boehringer

    Also regarding Sgt. Calloway by Gill H. Boehringer; See:

    Imperialist Paranoia and Military Injustice:
    The Persecution and Redemption of Sergeant Calloway
    John W. Calloway must have experienced military service in the Philippines as a “mixed blessing” indeed. Born in 1872, the grandson of a union between a white planter of an old Virginia dynasty and a “mulatto slave,” his father was an emancipated “mulatto” slave, while his mother’s family had been “free born coloreds” since well before the Civil War. [1] Growing up in Bristol, a small town in eastern Tennessee on the Virginia border, he already would have known the mixed blessings of late 19th century America. The gains made by Afro-Americans in the post-Civil War period of Reconstruction were being wound back as he approached majority. It was a bad time for colored folks as the dominant Southern whites were imposing a new regime of discrimination and race hatred: “As they re-established their authority, white southerners did not immediately exclude the Negro legally from political activities. The black man was lynched, threatened, bullied and cajoled, and tricked, foxed, and hoodwinked; but he was also voted at the appropriate times and places as a pawn in the white man’s game’ but soon they were “legally segregated and disenfranchised…Southerners searched their souls and found their interests.” [2] Although military service was not free from these problems, in 1891 he abandoned his trade as a printer and joined the army. He re-enlisted in 1894 and, after some hesitation, again in 1899. In the armed forces he was to play a bit part in the emerging US imperialist military campaigns in the American west, Cuba and, finally, in the Philippine Islands. [3] There he found himself engaged in a war against people he came to love and admire. Eventually, having been “railroaded” out of the Army unfairly, he decided to live amongst them, after marrying a Filipina with whom he subsequently had fourteen children. His experience shows officialdom’s response to independent thought and what they deemed to be disloyal behavior by American soldiers. This imperialist paranoia, which drove the destruction of Calloway’s army career, was fueled by the racism which permeated American society and, inevitably, its military machine.[4]

    Calloway traveled out of the south and moved to Boston. [5] Although he learned a trade, he enlisted in the United States Army, at the age of 19, giving his occupation as “printer.” [6] He was assigned to F Company of the 25th Infantry Regiment, a segregated unit for “colored” soldiers, officered by whites. Four such infantry units were in existence after the Civil War, but in March 1869 Congress sharply reduced the size of the Army, consolidated the regiments, and formed two new infantry regiments for its colored soldiers, the 24th and 25th. [7]

    The 25th Infantry had seen a wide range of duties on the frontier. The regiment had skirmished with Indian nations in west Texas and on the contested and troubled Mexican border during the 1870s, on occasions venturing into Mexico on what were considered by the Americans as “punitive raids.” Later it moved north to take on other American Indians, playing a part in one of the last major confrontations, the Pine Ridge Campaign in the Dakota Territory. [8] In the 1890s the 25th was involved in suppressing miners and railroad workers e.g. at the Coeur d’Alene metal mine fields in Idaho, and in southern Colorado and northern New Mexico coalfields and railroad sites. [9] Thus Calloway, who was at the Coeur d’Alene and southern Colorado conflicts, was learning at an early age the contradictions of imposing law-and-order by military force. It is unlikely that he was much troubled by his new role. The institution in which he now worked had a tradition which supported him in the belief that he was doing what was needed for the development and protection of American interests at the periphery. He served well and loyally, with promotions as his reward. When he re-enlisted in March 1894 at Chicago, Illinois, the report on his previous service indicates he was considered to be of “excellent” character. [10] In March of the following year, at Fort Bayard, New Mexico, he was promoted to Regimental Quartermaster Sergeant on the recommendation of his regimental commanding officer, who endorsed the view of the regimental quartermaster that Calloway’s educational achievement set him above others and that his “qualifications, competency, bearing and character will reflect credit on the Regiment.” [11]

    In 1898, he went to Cuba as a part of the American Expeditionary Force in what came to be known to Americans as the Spanish American War but became an imperialist adventure against the Cubans and later the Filipinos. [12] In June, just a week before embarking for Cuba at Tampa, Florida, Calloway, as a senior non-commissioned officer, signed the enlistment papers of a new recruit, David Fagen, who was assigned to H Co, of Calloway’s regiment, now the 24th. [13] Fagen served in Cuba and then in the Philippines and was to become the most infamous American defector to the Filipino Revolutionary Army, referred to by the New York Times as “General Fagen” and even the “Filipino General.” [14] Little did Calloway realize that the later behavior of the young colored recruit would play a part in the destruction of his own career, in significant part because they were of the same distrusted race.

    The 24th and 25th served valiantly in Cuba, as did the 9th and 10th Cavalry Regiments (colored), particularly in battles such as El Caney and San Juan Hill, which brought the beleaguered Spaniards to their knees in surrender at the city of Santiago de Cuba. [15] Like others in those regiments, Calloway volunteered for duty at the infamous yellow fever “pest camp” at Siboney, a beach near the city. Fortunately, although like many others (including Fagen) he developed the disease, he recovered. A great number, black and white, did not. [16]

    The war now over, Calloway was transferred back to the U.S. and re-assigned to Fort Douglas, Utah. There, after discharge, he re-enlisted and was assigned to H Company of the 24th. (Fagen had also re-enlisted after some months in civilian life, and was re-assigned to I Co.) It was again recorded that Calloway’s character was “excellent.” [17] After much consideration, and considerable urging of his commanding officer, he had decided to re-enlist and make the Army his career. He now gave his occupation as “soldier.” It was noted, in another’s script, that he was married, although in the subsequent US Federal Census of 1900 he was registered as a “single man” with an address on Aberdeen Street, Chicago, Illinois. A number of his siblings had previously moved up to Chicago. It is not known if his wife lived in Chicago. Indeed we have been unable to trace the wife, or even to establish whether there was a marriage or a divorce. The matter of his putative marriage becomes significant as events unfold in the Philippines.

    In July 1899, aboard the troop ship “Zelandia,” [18] Calloway arrived at Manila Bay, in the Philippine Islands as they were then known to the Americans who ignored the existing Philippine Republic as an insult to the sovereignty they claimed through the Paris Peace Treaty concluded with Spain in December 1898. The war to change the Filipino regime and establish American dominance had been going since early February, 1899, and the regular troops were now arriving in large numbers. Having been largely deactivated after the Cuban campaign, the army took some months to prepare and cross the Pacific. In the meantime much of the war had been pursued by volunteer regiments, both state and national.

    In October, Calloway was in camp at San Fernando, Pampanga province. He requested an appointment as lieutenant in the colored volunteer infantry regiments which were being organized in the United States. [19] By this time some black officers were being appointed. He had received positive endorsements from four officers serving in the Philippine Division: his battalion commander, regimental commander, brigade commander, and the commander of the 8th Army. It is not clear why he did not receive the appointment, but it may have been simply that there were other even more qualified candidates, white or black. It may have been a question of whom you knew back in Washington, D.C.

    In November that year, a new advance was planned with the purpose of driving the main force of the Filipino Army into a trap, to catch General Emilio Aguinaldo, Commanding General as well as President of the Philippine Republic. [20] It was intended to bring the war to a quick end. The 24th Infantry, which had been assigned mostly to guarding installations around Manila, was now ordered to advance to join the Northern campaign under Lawton and Young. They moved about one third of the way up the railroad line, which ran from Manila towards the northwest some three hundred kilometers to Dagupan, and then turned to the northeast moving through San Fernando and a number of small towns as they crossed into the lower plain of Central Luzon. They met little resistance as the Filipinos, having been hit hard in the early months, suffering very large losses and losing much of the core army which had fought so effectively against the Spanish, were staging a strategic retreat. [21]

    Calloway wrote letters back to the Richmond Planet, an Afro-American newspaper in Virginia, the state of his ancestors, white and black. In them, he described the conditions in which the soldiers were living, the war, and his feelings about it and toward the Filipinos. Many of the black troops wrote such letters. They served as correspondents to such newspapers, which unlike the large urban dailies, could not afford to send journalists to cover the war. [22] The letters sometimes conveyed an underlying ambivalence towards the war. This was occasionally quite explicit, as revealed in the following letter from fair-skinned Sergeant Patrick Mason, of the 24th Infantry Regiment, to the Editor of The Gazette, an African American newspaper in Cleveland. [23]
    Corregidor, Philippine Islands, November 19, 1899.

    Dear Sir, I have not had any fighting to do since I have been here and don’t care to do any. I feel sorry for these people and all that come under the control of the United States. I don’t believe they will be justly dealt by. The first thing in the morning is the “Nigger” and the last thing at night is the “Nigger.” You have no idea the way these people are treated by the Americans here. I know their feeling towards them as they speak their opinion in my presence thinking I am white. I love to hear them talk that I may know how they feel. The poor whites don’t believe that anyone has any right to live but the white American, or to enjoy any rights or privileges that the white man enjoys. I must stop. You are right in your opinions. I must not say much as I am a soldier. The natives are a patient, burden bearing people.
    Mason expressed a common attitude amongst the black troops, although others were of the view that the war should be prosecuted with vigor, some believing it would enhance the position of the Negro in American society. Indeed, Calloway was concerned by such racism as he had seen and heard, but he remained personally committed to fighting the war.

    By November 1899, some black soldiers had seen enough of the American effort to become critical. Perhaps influenced by the deteriorating conditions at home, the development of political anti-imperialism, and the treatment of Filipinos, and themselves, by white Americans, they began to comprehend the war as a racist imperialist adventure. [24] The Filipinos tried to take advantage of this emerging perception by scattering leaflets in Central Luzon telling the black soldiers they were fighting and dying in a war for their political masters while their kin were being lynched at home. [25]

    On the 16th of November, three days before Mason wrote his letter, Calloway had written to the Richmond Planet. As both men were sergeants of the same regiment, and might have spent time together, it is possible that they were developing their ideas in an ongoing conversation, perhaps with others of the same rank.

    Calloway wrote from San Isidro, then capital of Nueva Ecija province, in the great Central Luzon plain, where the regiment had rested for a few days. [26] They were now preparing to move out again in the attempt to trap Aguinaldo’s forces. General Arthur MacArthur was leading a force straight up the rail line to meet another American force which had been deployed by sea further north to make a landing at San Fabian in the Lingayen Gulf, providing the anvil upon which the Filipino troops would be hammered, forcing Aguinaldo to surrender. As Calloway and the regiment were getting ready to break camp the following day, Corporal David Fagen, in his tent not far away, was also getting ready. But Fagen had been in touch with the Filipino “insurgents” somewhere along the route of the march, and was planning to defect the next morning during the commotion caused by the regiment’s departure. In the morning he rode off, fully armed, on a horse provided by a Filipino officer. He headed for Mt. Arayat to join Filipino forces under then Colonel Lacuna, a masterful guerrilla leader, later promoted to General by General Alejandrino for his exploits in Nueva Ecija. Fagen was made a Lieutenant, and Alejandrino later promoted him to Captain. The two Americans were never to meet again.

    In his letter Calloway expressed thoughts and feelings which had been developing for some time. It is one of several extraordinary letters he was to write as his consciousness of what he was involved in began to clarify and the dilemma he and other black soldiers faced struck home. It is a remarkable testimony to his thoughtful and systematic approach to questions faced by troops fighting in an imperialist war: what am I doing here? And what do the local people think of us? It is also invaluable evidence about the way some Filipinos looked on the war, and their reaction at a personal level to the American troops. And Calloway also provides us an account of how, and why, some pro-Filipino sentiments were developing amongst the Americans, especially the black troops. There is also discussion of how the Filipinos would respond to the foreigners who might settle in their land after the war. The writer seems to be thinking about his mission, his relation to the Filipino people, and what opportunities might be open to him in their country when the war is over. [27]
    Dear Mr. Editor:

    ………We received the copies of the Planet sent to us at this point. You can imagine how much we appreciated them when we had not seen a paper of any kind for weeks, and as for an Afro-American paper, I can not remember when I last laid eyes on one. The address of Mr. (Booker T.) Washington is the talk of the camp. Since coming here the boys' bosoms have expanded greatly. Their ideas have indeed broadened. They all say in chorus that Mr. Washington's ideas are destined to revolutionize America educationally, and as to the Negro, we feel the depth of his advice and feel the path of action outlined by him is the only practical one for colored youth.

    ………Since dropping you a few lines from El Deposito, we have been constantly on the jump. First, at San Fernando, then Mexico, Santa Anna, Prayal Cabial (Cabiao-GB), San Isidro. Advantage was taken of these "hikes" to study the Filipino and the Filipino question from the point that follows. The whites have begun to establish their diabolical race hatred in all its home rancor in Manila, even endeavoring to propagate the phobia among the Spaniards and Filipinos so as to be sure of the foundation of their supremacy when the civil rule that must necessarily follow the present military regime, is established.

    ………I felt it worth the while to probe the Filipino as to his knowledge and view of the American colored man that we might know our position intelligently. What follows is a condensed account of the results. The questions were put to the intelligent, well-educated Filipinos so you may know the opinions are those of the sort who represent the feelings of the race, and may be taken as solid.

    ………Question: Do the Filipinos hold a different feeling toward the colored American from that of the white?

    ………Answer: "Before American occupation of the islands and before the colored troops came to the Philippines, Filipinos knew little if anything of the colored people of America. We had read American history in the general, but knew nothing of the different races there. All were simply Americans to us. This view was held up to the time of the arrival of the colored regiments in Manila, when the white troops, seeing your acceptance on a social plane by the Filipino and Spaniard was equal to, if not better than theirs, (For you know, under Spanish rule we never knew there was a difference between men on account of racial identity. Our differences were political.) began to tell us of the inferiority of the American blacks-of your brutal natures, your cannibal tendencies-how you would rape our senoritas, etc. Of course, at first we were a little shy of you, after being told of the difference between you and them; but we studied you, as results have shown. Between you and him, we look upon you as the angel and him as the devil.

    ………Of course, you both are Americans, and conditions between us are constrained, and neither can be our friends in the sense of friendship, but the affinity of complexion between you and me tells, and you exercise your duty so much more kindly and manly in dealing with us. We can not help but appreciate the differences between you and the whites."
    Interview of Senor Tordorica Santos, a Filipino physician.
    ………By the difference in "dealing with us" expressed is meant that the colored soldiers do not push them off the streets, spit at them, call them damned "niggers," abuse them in all manner of ways, and connect race hatred with duty, for the colored soldier has none such for them.

    ………The future of the Filipino, I fear, is that of the Negro in the South. Matters are almost to that condition in Manila now. No one (white) has any scruples as regards respecting the rights of a Filipino. He is kicked and cuffed at will and he dare not remonstrate. On to another interview.

    ………Question: How would the Filipinos view immigration to any extent of American colored people to their country? How about conditions between them, living side by side?

    ………Answer: "Of what I have seen of American colored people, as exemplified in their soldiers, I am very much impressed with them. This in the light of present conditions, when they have little opportunity to show themselves to us in a social way. . . is very encouraging.

    ………"I have very little knowledge of what the American government will do with us in case they elect to hold us as a colony. I have heard that all confiscated lands will be opened for American colonization under some homestead law…but I had not counted the effect it would have upon us… We are accustomed to look upon American relations on any basis, other than that of Filipino independence, as inimical to us. But since American sovereignty is inevitable and American colonization is a probability, I unreservedly believe that all my people would look very kindly upon your people as neighbors. What we are resisting is effacement. Contact with whites to any extent in whatever way we accept them means that to us. The colored people, being of like complexion to our own, the evolution that would come to us through contact would not be so radical, can be viewed in an entirely different light from contact with white people. In your country you are used to molding all nations and races of white men into one white America – that forms an example of what I mean. The same condition would obtain between you and my people, they would become good Filipinos.

    I wish you would say to your young men that we want occidental ideas but we want them taught to us by colored people. In the reconstruction of our country new ideas will obtain. In American political and industrial ideas we will be infants. We ask your educated, practical men to come and teach us them. We have a beautiful country and a hospitable people to repay them for their trouble. Our country needs development. Unless an unselfish people come to our assistance we are doomed."
    Interview of Senor Tomas Consunji, a wealthy Filipino planter.
    I wish to add, before closing, that…our young men who are practical scientific agriculturists, architects…engineers, business men, professors and students of the sciences and who know how to establish and manage banks, mercantile businesses, large plantations, sugar growing, developing and refining… will find this the most inviting fold under the American flag. Cuba does not compare with the Philippines. Another thing, too, when they secure missionaries and teachers for the schools here, see that they get on the list. They must be represented here. White men have told them we are savages. We need to be in evidence to convince the Filipinos of our status. I do all in my power to picture ourselves to them in a good light, but positions of influence among them is what will tell. They extend to us a welcome hand, full of opportunities. Will we accept it?

    Yours truly,

    John W. Calloway
    Sgt. Major, 24th U. S. Infantry
    Another letter from an anonymous writer, who seems to have been in one of the “colored” regiments, reveals other disturbing aspects of the war. Although it appears to have been written after those of Mason and Calloway, it does indicate the kinds of behavior by the occupying military forces which were having an unsettling impact upon many of the black troops. Calloway would certainly have been aware of such reports, even if he had not observed such behavior.

    In the Philippine Islands, no date; from the Wisconsin Weekly Advocate (Milwaukee), May 17, 1900 (which seems to have re-printed a letter sent to another Afro-American paper, a common enough journalistic practice at that time). [28]
    Editor, New York Age

    I have mingled freely with the natives and have had talks with American colored men here in business and who have lived here for years, in order to learn of them the cause of their (Filipino) dissatisfaction and the reason for this insurrection, and I must confess they have a just grievance. All this never would have occurred if the army of occupation would have treated them as people. The Spaniards, even if their laws were hard, were polite and treated them with some consideration; but the Americans, as soon as they saw that the native troops were desirous of sharing in the glories as well as the hardships of the hard-won battles with the Americans, began to apply home treatment for colored peoples: cursed them as damned niggers, steal [from] and ravish them, rob them on the street of their small change, take from the fruit vendors whatever suited their fancy, and kick the poor unfortunate if he complained, desecrate their church property, and after fighting began, looted everything in sight, burning, robbing the graves.

    This may seem a little tall-but I have seen with my own eyes carcasses lying bare in the boiling sun, the results of raids on receptacles for the dead in search of diamonds. The (white) troops, thinking we would be proud to emulate their conduct, have made bold of telling their exploits to us. One fellow, member of the 13th Minnesota, told me how some fellows he knew had cut off a native woman's arm in order to get a fine inlaid bracelet. On upbraiding some fellows one morning, whom I met while out for a walk (I think they belong to a Nebraska or Minnesota regiment, and they were stationed on the Malabon road) for the conduct of the American troops toward the natives and especially as to raiding, etc., the reply was: "Do you think we could stay over here and fight these damn niggers without making it pay all it's worth? The government only pays us $13 per month: that's starvation wages. White men can't stand it." Meaning they could not live on such small pay. In saying this they never dreamed that Negro soldiers would never countenance such conduct. They talked with impunity of "niggers" to our soldiers, never once thinking that they were talking to home "niggers" and should they be brought to remember that at home this is the same vile epithet they hurl at us, they beg pardon and make some effeminate excuse about what the Filipino is called.

    I want to say right here that if it were not for the sake of the 10,000,000 black people in the United States, God alone knows on which side of the subject I would be. And for the sake of the black men who carry arms and pioneer for them as their representatives, ask them to not forget the present administration at the next election. Party be damned! We don't want these islands, not in the way we are to get them, and for Heaven's sake, put the party [Democratic] in power that pledged itself against this highway robbery. Expansion is too clean a name for it.
    In the months following his November letter from San Isidro, Calloway’s service took him further north and west, moving from town to town in northern Nueva Ecija, Pangasinan and Tarlac provinces, helping to smother local resistance in what had become a guerrilla war. Aguinaldo had dismissed his main force regular Army in mid-November, ordering his countrymen to continue fighting in small guerrilla units in their localities. He escaped the trap set for him, and disappeared into the mountains of far Northeast Luzon, establishing his Headquarters at Palanan, Isabella province, where he would be captured in March 1901, surprised by a clever ruse designed and carried out by the indefatigable Kansan, General Frederick Funston. [29]

    During this period Calloway continued his correspondence. On February 5, 1900, he wrote from San Jose, Nueva Ecija, to Tomas Consunji, the man he had previously interviewed in his Survey. Tomas was the son of Don Antonio Consunji, a wealthy sugar planter of San Fernando, Pampanga province. By now, the sergeant had a much clearer position on the war and the American presence in the country. He expressed his sympathy for the struggle of the Filipino people for independence, and deplored the American attempt to stifle their aspirations. He indicated that if it was in his power they would have their independence, and had much to say about the country’s future which he saw as being based in educating “the masses.” It was apparently his view that the US would win the war and that the Filipinos would have to struggle in other ways to achieve their independence. As shown in his letter to the Richmond Planet, he was clearly an admirer of Booker T. Washington and his gradual approach to the question of “Negro advancement” through education. One writer infers that he was in an on-going intellectual dialogue with Tomas, each of them sharing ideas about the future of their people and their nations. [30] Extracts of this letter follow. [31]
    My dear Mr. Consumji:

    ………...I trust you will pardon the liberty I took with your communication, for I showed your letter to my friends as an example of Filipino capability. This may seem strange to you, but let me not surprise you by the statement that nine of every ten Americans are doubting “Thomas” when Filipino ability and manhood is in question, therefore you can see the light of my action as [a] practical demonstration of what is in them, since I know so many bright characters of the race…

    ………After my last conference with you and your father, I was constantly haunted by the feeling of how wrong morally we Americans are in the present affair with you. What a wrong to crush every hope and opportunity of a youth of a race of which you, your brothers and our esteemed friend Thomas Paras form such brilliant examples. Would to God it lay in my power to rectify the committed error and compensate the Filipino for the wrong done! But what power have I? If I could muster every youth of the race under my hand I would say to them be not discouraged. The day will come when you will be accorded your rights. The moral sensibilities of all America are not yet dead; there still smolders in the bosom of the country a spark of righteousness that will yet kindle into a flame that will awaken the country to its senses. What you young men must do is Educate, Educate, Educate! Not alone in the sense of knowing what others have written but what the Filipino is capable of doing. Bring up the masses. Teach them. The capacity of a people is measured by its masses — not its exceptions. Teach them not alone to know, but to DO. Let sanitation, high plane of living, exalted ideas be their catechism. Teach them to know that a man who can do a common thing in an uncommon way is the man the world respects most. I know you will feel this is very long drawn in the face of your being denied liberty of action, but that will come. Mark well my words…Yours truly.

    ………John W. Calloway
    There is nothing in the letter to indicate he believed the Consunjis were involved in the resistance. Nor was there any indication that Calloway was going to lift a finger to help the Filipinos generally, or the Consunjis specifically, in the struggle. Nothing in the letter even hints that he was considering any treasonous act. He knew, of course, that Fagen had deserted to fight with the Filipinos, and that others-black and white-had deserted (though only a small number defected to the Filipino side). But he never referred to this, nor gave a hint that he might follow the same course as his erstwhile regimental companion. It was an honest, considered statement of sympathy and regret for what the Americans were doing to the people and country which had become more and more attractive to him, while the negative impact of the invasion was becoming more obvious to him.

    Unbeknownst to Calloway, the US Army Intelligence had the Consunjis under surveillance. They were considered sympathizers with the “insurrectos” and therefore part of the dangerous section of the elite, as opposed to those amongst the elite who worked with and showed support for the Americans. [32]

    Some years before Tomas had been involved with the great revolutionary Feliciano Jokson. On one occasion they attempted to run guns from Hong Kong to the Philippines in aid of the war against the Spaniards. [33] It is probable that he was on their list of revolutionaries to be watched. It is also possible that this information was given to the Americans, although that may not have been necessary as informers were providing the occupiers with a huge amount of information on those who were active in, or sympathized with, the struggle to save the Philippine Republic. However it came to be, the Consunji house was watched. On October 29th, 1900, it was raided and Calloway’s letter discovered. [34]

    Major Arthur Williams, 3rd Infantry and Provost Marshal General, Pampanga wrote the first report on the case, and his comments on the Consunjis laid the foundation for the persecution of the sergeant. [35] Writing to the Adjutant, San Fernando on October 29, 1900 he reported as follows.
    I enclose herewith a letter found in the house of Antonio Consumji, a man who after having taken the oath of amnesty, has acted as a political agent for the insurgents. The letter is addressed to a son of Antonio, who is well known to be opposed to the United States occupying these islands. The writer is, to say the least, very indiscreet. He is John W. Calloway, Sgt. Major 24th Infantry, and I think it would be well that the Colonel of that regiment should see the letter.
    The somewhat laconic suggestion to pass the letter on to Calloway’s commanding officer should not mislead us. Williams’ comment that the father was linked to the insurgents and had violated his oath, plus the allegation that Tomas was “well known” to be against the occupation, became the basis for the belief that Calloway was not to be trusted as he was knowingly associating with enemies of the occupation forces. There was never any attempt to test that belief other than to confine Calloway and ask him to explain himself, under interrogation, without knowing what charges he was facing and without access to legal counsel.

    According to the Inspector General, [36] in a later, apparently informal report, Capt. Williams informed him, that “both the father and son are well known as sympathizers with the insurgents… Captain Williams tells me he has had many conversations with the son, who is well educated, speaking English fluently. In discussing the relations likely to exist between the Filipino and American races, Tomas Consunji refers to the Negro in America as an example of an oppressed race. Tomas Consunji, Captain Williams tells me, is like Calloway in that he is very fond of talking seudo (sic) sociology and racial antagonism. It would seem probable that his views on the oppression of the Negro by the Americans are derived from Calloway.”

    Captain Williams had been Provost Marshal General in San Fernando for seven months, and his information concerning the Consunjis would have been given great credence. Not only that, the existence of Tomas’ negative views of American race relations were more comfortably imputed to Calloway than assumed to have been original with the Filipino. The Americans were used to dealing with Filipinos who professed admiration for all things American.

    His regimental commander, Colonel H. B. Freeman, was informed immediately. He was an “old army” officer who had been cited for bravery as a 1st Lieutenant in the Civil War. He took a very strong position on the matter, although he had only Williams’ written statement to go on. He had the Battalion Sergeant Major humiliatingly broken in rank to Private at a parade ground formation, and recommended that he be confined, discharged without honor and deported to the U.S. Confined he was, first in Tayug, Pangasinan where he was stationed, then in the Carcel Publica y Presidio de Manila, otherwise known as the Bilibid prison.

    Freeman must have had difficulty relating to Calloway, for he claimed that “The education of this man has fostered his self-conceit to an abnormal degree, and he has shown himself to be without principle by abandoning his legal American wife for a Filipino woman.” In his opinion Calloway “was likely to join the Filipino ranks should favorable opportunity offer.” In a later report (November 27) to Divisional H. Q. he stated that “Private Calloway, in addition to trial by General Court Martial for breaches of discipline, the result of which is not yet published, has been engaged in correspondence with insurrectos.” [37]

    We see here not only the attempt to besmirch Calloway’s reputation by reference to a domestic matter which was not relevant (nor as we shall see, true), but an exaggeration, at the least, about the Consunjis. Tomas was a nationalist sympathizer who opposed the US occupation, while Don Antonio seems to have acted politically for the insurgents (if Captain Williams’ ambiguous statement is to be believed) but had not taken part in any insurgent actions. Insurrectos were freedom fighters, a role neither Consunji had adopted.

    Freeman’s superior, another Civil War veteran, Major General Loyd Wheaton, commander of the Northern Luzon Department, agreed with his recommendations. He took immediate action against the letter- writer and now presumed disloyal soldier, convening a General Court Martial. He charged Calloway under Article 62 of the Articles of War. This is a general, catch-all provision, used where no specific crime is alleged, but the defendant is charged with conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. The wrongdoing specified was that “he, a married man, lived in open adultery with a native woman” The charge was a strange one. It is clear from the official messages from Freeman and Wheaton that they saw Calloway’s real crime as potential treason, the possibility that he would defect and fight for the Filipinos. [38]

    No doubt the commanders wanted to get rid of Calloway. Freeman, in particular, seems to have been outraged and revealed a degree of resentment towards the prisoner, possibly based in a sense of racial superiority.

    But the prosecutors must have felt there was little chance of successfully proving treason, based solely on the letter, particularly in view of his record of service and the high esteem for him expressed by previous commanding officers instanced, for example, by his holding one of the highest non-commissioned ranks in the regiment. Thus the oblique attack on a trumped up charge. In the event, Calloway was not convicted; the “evidence” could not sustain the charge. In fact, in October, 1900, he had married a “native woman,” Mamerta de la Rosa, of Santa Rosa, province of Nueva Ecija. [39] So at the time he was charged, either he was living in bigamy, or he was not committing any wrongful action, and should not have been charged under Article 62 for presumed adultery. Given the evidence of the Federal census of 1900, it seems that Calloway was single, and therefore entitled to marry Mamerta.

    Wheaton was unhappy with the result of the Court Martial, but determined still. In his report to Army Divisional Headquarters in Manila, he first mentioned that Calloway had been “lately tried by Court Martial and acquited.” (sic) Obviously the proceeding was not relevant to the problem raised by the letter: treasonous intent. Since he had not been found guilty, why mention it, particularly without mentioning the nature of the charge? Like Freeman’s reference to “breaches of discipline” it served to call into question Calloway’s character, his reliability. Further, he wrote: “In my opinion he will desest (sic) to the assasins (sic) infesting this Department if he has the opportunity.” [40] As a very senior officer, Wheaton had probably never met Calloway, and it is not at all clear upon what basis he had formed such a negative opinion. Presumably he did so on the basis of the recommendation and comments by Colonel Freeman, and perhaps the belief that he might have another black deserter like the elusive Fagen on his hands, not a pleasing prospect for the General. He would have known that General Funston was being ridiculed for not being able to track down the fugitive who was receiving considerable publicity in the Philippines and, more worrying, in the American press. [41] Having another defector who could lead the “infesting assassins” in the area could turn out to be embarrassing, and bad for his promotion prospects.

    In detention at the Bilibid Military Prison, the prisoner learned that he was likely to be sent back to the U.S. for discharge without honor. He had been reduced in rank to Private, was confined in poor conditions, without legal or any other assistance. On November 27th, he petitioned the Division Commander, through the Provost Marshal General, for a hearing. [42] In this he detailed his long and meritorious military service over the preceding years, and carefully explained that he thought, in justice and equity, the matter should be reviewed. Calloway then wrote:
    ………In view of my having undergone a general court martial on a charge laid under the 62nd A. W., the sentence of which is believed not to include dishonorable discharge, the first claim to equity is made on the ground that, if the proceedings and findings of said court martial failed to establish guilt and invite the extreme measure contemplated, my regimental commander should not have gone behind the proceedings and findings of the court to induce my discharge. I in the premises not having an opportunity to defent (sic) myself against any accusations which may have been made…

    ………In submitting this statement it is not my endeavor to elicit sympathy or the reduction of any punishment for any act or acts I may have committed, but to throw around myself that safeguard of American fairness and equity, is the sole intended purpose of this letter. If I deserve no consideration I beg none. If the resultant consequence of the long years of faithful service I have rendered to my country merits only a brand of disgrace and culpability to myself I acquiesce in her decision; but I do ask before the brand is implanted that an impartial hearing be given the sufferer. There is no act so grave that will not bear of impartial investigation, and as the supplicant feels he has been wronged he here appeals to the Division Commander for rectification.

    ………As I have seen only about 3 months of immediate service under my present regimental commander I would beg that reference be had to Lt. Col. Chas. Keller, 22 Inf for an expression of opinion as to my service since I have been in the Philippines — under whom I have served the greater part of the time since the regiment came to the islands, and to Col. J. M. Thompson, 42 Inf. under whom I served first after coming.

    ………In conclusion I would state that I would not now be here to receive such a drastic fate if I had elected to take my discharge, offered at the time of the regiment’s coming instead of coming at special request made by my then regimental adjutant, as I now recognize at such costly sacrifice.
    That petition was not answered. However, it went to the Adjutant General and then, on December 8, to the Division Inspector General for “investigation, report, and recommendation.” His December 12 Report, [43] below, was just what was needed to get Calloway out of the Islands. The prisoner had no opportunity to challenge it, nor did he ever see it.
    ………Calloway is at present confined in the military prison at Bilibid awaiting action in the case. When interviewed, he said he supposed he was confined awaiting the result of his trial by General Court Martial…

    ………I showed him the letter written by him to Tomas Consunji, and had a long conversation with him about it, endeavoring to arrive at his frame of mind when he wrote it. Calloway is a bright man, with an adroit mind, a very good command of language, and a marked skill in evading a question and misconstruing words.

    ………During our first interview, he claimed the letter was written so long ago that the attendant circumstances had passed from his mind, and he was unable to tell his motives in writing it. I gave him an extract copy of those portions relating to the Filipino wrongs, and saw him again the next day, when he made to me the enclosed statement.

    ………He claims to have known Tomas Consumji very well; that he never met his father but once, then for a few moments only; never talked with either of them on the subject of the insurrection, and disclaims all knowledge of their feelings on that subject; says the letter was purely personal, and had no political significance whatever. In our first interview, he says, “That there is so much interest attached to that letter appears to me as humorous.” He desired to pass the letter off as one written without serious thought, in a casual manner, and one in which he – an intelligent man, an old soldier, and formerly a high ranking non-commissioned officer – could see no possible harm. He disclaims any idea of disloyalty to his country.
    As regards the Consumji family, Captain Arthur Williams, 3rd U.S. Infantry, Provost Marshall at San Fernando de Pampanga since April, 1900, informs me that both the father and son are well known as sympathizers with the insurrectos. The father is now under charges for aiding them after taking the amnesty oath. Captain Williams tells me he has had many conversations with the son, who is well educated and speaks English fluently. In discussing the relations likely to exist between the Filipino and American races, Tomas Consumji refers to the Negro in America as an example of an oppressed race. Tomas Consumji, Captain Williams tells me, is like Calloway in that he is very fond of talking seudo (sic) sociology and racial antagonism. It would seem probable that his views on the oppression of the Negro by the Americans are derived from Calloway.
    ………In view of Calloway’s education, command of language, and knowledge of the meaning of words, as shown in his conversations, and the education of the man to whom he wrote, this letter can only be taken as meaning exactly what it says. It is impossible to assume that he did not know what he was saying when he used this language: “my last conference with you and your father***how wrong morally we Americans are in the present affair with you***would to God it lay in my power to rectify the committed error and compensate the Filipino for the wrong done***the day will come when you will be accorded your rights” and equally impossible to assume it expresses anything save sympathy with the Filipino insurrection. How deep this feeling may have been on Calloway’s part there is no means of telling. Whether it was really felt, or only assumed as a means of making his standing better with the Consumjis and their friends, cannot be determined; nor does it make very much difference. The effect of the letter was the same in either case: an exceptionally well educated non-commissioned officer of the American army expresses sympathy with the Filipino insurrectos and tells them that the day will come when they will get their rights.

    ………In the second endorsement on the original paper, the Colonel of the 24th Infantry states Calloway has abandoned his legal American wife. I am informed Mrs. Calloway is now in Manila, and apparently on good terms with Calloway, whose release she is trying to bring about.

    ………As to the likelihood of Calloway’s desertion, referred to in the same endorsement, I should not think it probable; Calloway has $1,475.00 (sic) deposited with the United States. I doubt if he would sacrifice this amount on sympathy. He has fifteen months more to serve; his idea is then to go into business here. I regard him as a dangerous man, in view of his relations with the natives, as shown by this letter, and the circumstances of his court-martial. I, therefore, recommend that he be at once sent to the United States, under restrain, pending action on a recommendation that he be discharged without honor, as being disqualified in character for the service. He should not be allowed to return to these Islands as a civilian.
    The Inspector General seems more of an advocate than an independent assessor of the nature and strength of any case against Calloway. He did not seek to gather evidence from those Calloway had suggested would speak favorably of him. Nor did he speak with the Consunjis. And his reference to the opinions of Captain Williams can be seen as attempting to smear Calloway and Tomas as antagonistic to what they believed was an oppressive America. His Report could have been attacked effectively if it had ever been presented in a court, or even in a fair administrative hearing. Surely the intention of the letter writer was precisely the point at issue, and certainly the expressed sympathy for the Filipinos was, as Calloway always maintained, a personal opinion which had not deterred him from loyal, even outstanding, military service against them. The following extract from the statement he made to the Inspector General made this clear, his loyalty manifest. [44]
    (W)hen they felt they were on the verge of receiving what they had strived for three centuries—liberty to develop themselves, another war had come on them, and they were now further removed from the goal of their desires than at first. This probably appealed to me in a sense and way that could come only to a son of an oppressed race…remembering that I too was a member of an oppressed race, and a cord of sympathy for conditions was felt. From all that had been printed and said by Americans high in the Government, both civil and military, on the subject of Filipino morality in the controversy, I felt that it would be cruel in humanity, indeed, should I, a son of a persecuted people also, reply to a harmless recital of past wrongs done another with a cruel, iron-like negative; and it is very probable that I intended to convey the idea that, if America had wronged the Filipinos, she would in due time aright them. This expressed feeling had nothing whatever to do with my official connections. To elucidate, it bears the same relation that the question at home relates to my people affects my obligation and duty to the Government through my connections with the army. That we, as a people in America, have few rights that any one is bound is perfectly plain to every colored man; but does it reduce our love for our country, or does it affect in the least our fealty in our discharge of our duty to the Government — whether a citizen or soldier? Not one jot or tittle. And so it was with me in this case. No conversation with this young man ever even so much as suggested that he was an active sympathizer with his people. He was ambitious to do something for them in a socio-politico sense, and was very anxious that they should study American methods on this line, especially as to domestic life, social customs, and civic hygiene; and I believe at one time he expressed himself to me as heartily hoping that the United States might do humanity and civilization the righteous benevolence of protecting and guiding them to a safe plane of civilization, in somewhat as had been done the Japanese. No thought or action of Tomas Consunji, or his father, ever suggested to me the slightest act of mine in the service. If any impropriety was committed, I committed it alone and unassisted. Of their conduct subsequent to the short acquaintance and fellowship of the son and myself, I know nothing. I am only sure that no act of theirs was ever suggested by me – else I would be the first to the front to stand the brunt. With my open, impulsive nature I might commit an error, but to deal dually would be impossible. My country has never suffered one particle as the result of my doing; — my conduct throughout my entire military career attests to that: — every commanding officer under whom I have served will vouch for my fealty, especially in a circumstance of emergency. If this matter could be treated with the same light it occurs to me, it would not occupy one moment’s consideration. I wrote the letter and expressed nothing therein concerning matters military, and however it may be considered I know from the fullness on my bosom that no intent to injure my country was meant. My impulsive sentiments is one thing and my over towering duty to my country is another. From the day of the writing of the letter to this day I have never seen nor heard from the parties in question. If I had intent on some material purpose in the interest of the Filipino Government I am sure that Tomas Consunji would have been the last person in whom I would have confided, he being in the employ of the United States Government, and I, under no circumstance, would have signed open and above-board my name, rank, and regiment. Such stupidity could not have been more, but I had nothing to conceal in the missive. It was a personal feeling, expressed to a personal friend; I had no other intent or motive…

    ………In conclusion, I wish to assure the authorities of the entire absence of any treasonable intent on my part — my love for my country is entirely too strong to permit it. Just as I feel I have ever acquitted myself of my duty in the ten years’ service I have spent in her arms, so now I wish to exculpate myself of the charge of wronging her.
    Upon receiving the damning Report, General MacArthur ordered Calloway removed from the Philippines, recommending his discharge without honor. His words reflect the subjective views of the two commanders and the Inspector General, and again reveal distrust of the black soldiers, superheated by the Fagen successes in recent months. [45]
    It is very apparent that he is disloyal and should he remain in these islands, he would undoubtedly commit some open act of treason and perhaps join the insurrection out and out. One man of the 24th Infantry by the name of David Fagin has already done so and as a leader among the insurrectos is giving great trouble by directing guerrilla bands.
    Although Calloway had originally appealed for a court martial, and then either the reversion of the decisions in his matter, or just a hearing by the Division commander, his pleas went unanswered and, with dispatch, on December 15th, he was sent back to San Francisco aboard the transport “Sherman,” still a prisoner.

    When the “Sherman” arrived in early January, 1901, the victim of this injustice was confined in the military prison at the Presidio, San Francisco. On January 12, he wrote another long letter of explanation and plea for justice, this time to the Adjutant General, Washington, D.C. [46] In it he repeated most of what he had put in his letter of November 27 and his statement of December 11 regarding his loyal service and his relationship with the Consunjis. He again pledged his loyalty and denied any treasonous intent. He sought a fair review of the actions taken against him in order to prove his innocence of the real charge of treason, or even the court martial which he had previously requested in vain. Once again he requested that the views of officers (five in number) under whom he had served in various campaigns be sought and considered. As a measure of just what he had endured, and the frustration he was feeling in the face of the unfair and opaque process in which he had become ensnared, the following is indicative.
    ………Of just what has been stated against me in the letter of recommendation to your office I do not know; neither do I know from whom the recommendation emanates; but I do know that from whomsoever it comes their estimate of me is not based on personal knowledge. I have been told it comes from my regimental commander. If so, under him I have had practically no immediate service. In any case if my conduct and service in the Philippine Islands had been such as to invite such a harsh measure as is contemplated, I was there ever amenable to the same tribunal that serves the entire army. I am left to infer that I am accused of writing a treasonable letter. The sole letter in question was one of a personal nature, to a personal friend, an employee of the U.S. Government and entirely unconnected from any disaffected parties in those islands, and my one strong hope is that the letter in question has likewise been forwarded to your office that personal knowledge may be known of the quality of “treason” alleged against me.

    ………By the process that has been used against me, my comrades among whom I have served for years are left to believe I have committed some heinous crime. Drawn up and degraded before their eyes, cast into prison after prison, stripped to the nether and searched time and again, humiliated to the point of distraction — my very soul brutalized — and at last cast into the hold of a ship and brought home in disgrace without trial to receive a discharge Without Honor! Can any wonder arise that my very (omission) reeks with agony at the bounteous punishment already served?

    ………If any of my acts were incompatible to the interest of the service while I was in the Philippines, some one of the many Commanding officers under whom I served must have observed them. I was always able to exact “services eminently satisfactory” from them, which could not have been done if I had been lax and treasonable. I was in all the battles and skirmishes of any importance which my regiment took part, and was personally commended by General S. B. M. Young for a significant service done in running a gauntlet of the Filipino lines with only a companion at midnight to carry dispatches to him directing the northern advance and the taking of Arayat in October 1899.

    ………The reputed letter as written in Feb. 1899 (sic). I had nearly a whole year’s service with my regiment afterward, a well extended period for observing one’s service.

    ………In conclusion I would state that now as I have been placed in a dishonorable light before my comrades and friends both in the Army and in civil life, it remains for me to vindicate myself. But two courses are open for me to do so: restoration to duty or discharge with honor, and in this I appeal to the Army’s Commander.
    The official papers were forwarded to the Advocate General of the Army, Washington, D.C., H. C. Corbin, who had been a Captain and Company Commander in the 24th Infantry Regiment thirty years before. Calloway’s letter had also arrived. The papers were forwarded to the Judge Advocate General, G. N. Lieber, for review. He reported that “On the basis of these facts I am of the opinion that the Secretary of War would be justified in directing Calloway’s discharge without honor.” It is not surprising, as he would hardly have rejected the recommendation of the commanding General of the Philippine forces, based as it was on what was presented as fact, and supported by the apparently credible Report of the Inspector General of the Philippine Division. His recommendation was concurred in by the Commanding General of the Army, Lieutenant General Nelson Miles, and the Adjutant General forwarded the recommendations to the Secretary of War. In fact, Corbin was now also Acting Secretary of War, and two weeks after receiving the papers in his other capacity, he signed the order for the discharge without honor. [47]

    After three months under lock and key, Calloway was released in San Francisco, free but without a career and with the stigma of having been discharged without honor from an army which was still fighting a hard war, with reported atrocities against American forces, in the Philippines.

    Sometime in the next months, he managed to take passage on a ship back to Manila, slipping ashore unobtrusively. There he was re-united with Mamerta, and Juanita, born the previous year. By some remarkable good luck, and perhaps connections with quartermasters from previous service, he found work as a watchman for the Manila office of the army Quartermaster’s Corps. However, in late August, 1901, Calloway ran into bad luck and further persecution. Captain James A. Moss, commander of the 24th Regiment Band and formerly an adjutant of the 24th, on a visit with the band to Manila from the province, recognized the former sergeant in a Manila street. Having discovered where he was employed, he reported his sighting to the Quartermaster’s office, indicating to them that Calloway was “a bad man.” Nothing came of this so Moss took the matter to the Provost Marshal General’s office. Calloway was arrested again and placed in the old civil prison, Quartel Espana. The view was taken that he had been deported previously with the implication that he was never to be allowed to return. He was soon transferred to the transport “Grant” to be shipped back to the U.S.A. [48]

    A lawyer, Allen A. Garner, was retained by Calloway’s friends. He obtained a writ of habeas corpus from the Court of First Instance, requiring the military authorities to bring the prisoner to court and to explain why they had detained him. However, as he was newly arrived and technically not qualified to practice, another lawyer had to be found for any subsequent hearings. When the government prosecutor appealed to the Supreme Court, Calloway’s friends arranged for attorney Eber C. Smith to take the case. He had arrived in Manila some months previously from Washington state, [49] and was now in general practice, with an office at 204 Magallanes Street, Intramuros. He had a reputation throughout the Pacific Northwest for taking on the authorities and not suffering fools gladly. In the Philippines he began to gain a reputation for defending Filipinos in criminal trials and pursuing them to the Supreme Court of the Philippines, an institution the Americans had recently established and upon which they had a majority of the Justices. He was at that moment defending a Filipino on a murder charge in the Court of First Instance. [50]

    At first the military authorities refused to bring Calloway off the transport. But having been in contact with him, Smith pursued discussions with the authorities, and they relented, although they refused to allow Smith to see what charges had been laid against Calloway. Of course there were no formal charges, just administrative orders. They did make it clear that bringing Calloway ashore was out of respect for the judiciary, but continued to maintain they alone had jurisdiction over the prisoner.

    With Calloway now onshore, Smith no doubt thought they would get their day in court. But the military refused to bring their prisoner to the Supreme Court, risking a contempt of court citation. No doubt they had been assured that would not be the case. Faced with that situation, Smith apparently decided that all he could do was to refuse to participate further, perhaps a defiant gesture in a lost cause. On order of the Justices, unanimously agreed, the petition for the writ was rejected, on the ground that the Court had no jurisdiction when the military had made an arrest and retained the individual in custody. This was one of the first habeas corpus cases decided by the Court and, not surprisingly, was cited as a precedent in a number of following cases. [51]

    Once more Calloway was sent back to the United States. Back in San Francisco, he continued to seek some kind of justice. Thus on October 2, 1901 he wrote to the Adjutant General in Washington, D.C. requesting permission to re-enlist, this time in the 9th Cavalry Regiment, still fighting in the Philippines. [52] He seems to have given up on the idea of seeking an administrative review of his case, or a court martial, at least for the time being. It is difficult to understand how he thought he would be allowed to re-enlist and return to the Islands; although he had established himself as a good worker in civilian life, including in Manila, and had good military and civilian references. It is possible that the arbitrariness of military proceedings, disciplinary and otherwise, suggested there might be a chance he would be forgiven after what he considered needless, baseless persecution. His request was, not surprisingly, refused.

    Again he was successful in returning quietly to Manila. But he was not yet finished with his correspondence. On August 27, 1902, he wrote again to the Adjutant General, this time seeking the return of several references he had supplied the Inspector General when he was asked to make a statement while under interrogation in December 1900. At that time he had asked that they be returned to him but this request was ignored. No doubt he wanted to use them to get satisfactory employment. On October 18, 1902, this request was curtly denied, as the papers were now part of the official records. There was no suggestion that copies would be supplied to him. On the same day a letter was sent to the Commanding General, Division of the Philippines, informing him that Calloway had returned and was living at 35 Calle San Jose, in Trozo, Manila. It was stated that he had been deported in 1901 “as a dangerous character.” [53]

    Fortunately for Calloway, by this time the President of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt, had effectively declared “mission accomplished” on July 4th, 1902, and offered amnesties to Filipinos who had fought against the occupation. [54] For that reason, perhaps, the authorities no longer considered him dangerous. So, although they knew where to find him, they were no longer interested in hounding him out of the colony.

    Calloway continued for several years to seek justice from the government.
    On April 25, 1904, he wrote directly to the Secretary of War, William Howard Taft, asking for a reversal of the discharge without honor. The answer from the Military Secretary was again disappointing. [55]
    Referring to your letter…I am directed by the Secretary of War to inform you that, having been actually discharged the service without honor, by competent authority, it is beyond the power of the War department, or of any executive officer, to modify or amend the discharge already furnished you, or to grant you an honorable discharge from the service.
    This appears to be the last attempt he made to get satisfaction from authorities in Washington. The letter was addressed to him at the National Printing Bureau, so it seems he had found a satisfactory position, one for which his early training as a printer, and the excellent references he had obtained over the years, would have recommended him.

    For many years the Calloways lived in Manila, in the busy district of Quiapo (Regidor Street, since razed for the construction of Quezon Boulevard), and raised their large family. Having been employed by the National Printing Bureau from 1902 to 1904, it is likely that John continued to work there for a time. He subsequently was employed by the American Hardware and Plumbing Company for many years. It was bought out by the Pacific Commercial Company, with head office in Plaza Moraga, Quiapo. By the time of World War II it had grown to be the largest corporation in the country. [56]

    On April 21, 1934, The Tribune newspaper of Manila carried a story on its back page: “Old Timer Dies.” [57] It announced the death of John W. Calloway, age 63, the previous day at Saint Paul’s Hospital. According to the attending doctor he died of “chronic nephritis, high blood pressure-cerebral hemorrhage, and contributory arteriosclerosis.” [58] In the newspaper report he was referred to as a “colored American old-timer.” No mention was made of any of the controversy surrounding his earlier days as a soldier and Supreme Court petitioner. That was a positive sign that he had become accepted as a part of the Filipino community; although still “colored,” he was also fondly remembered as an “old-timer.” Such are the complexities of the race relations to which his survey interviewee referred over thirty years before. It may not have been enough for Sgt. Major Calloway, but it probably would have brought a smile to his face. He had fought hard to stay in the Philippines; a country he knew had been persecuted by his own, as he had been persecuted for merely expressing his sympathy for its people. Perhaps the final sentence in the announcement would have been a source of pride: “Mr. Calloway is father of Maggie Calloway, popular local vaudeville entertainer.” [59] While he had been victimized, he was far from having been consigned to the role of victim. With his children and grandchildren, he had left a legacy which was receiving appropriate recognition. Although his persecutors never admitted to having wronged him, he transcended that enduring wrong. In the eyes of his family and the Filipinos, he was not a disgraced former soldier, but an affectionately remembered member of the community. In that sense, he was redeemed.

    My work on Calloway’s case would have been impossible but for the extensive archival research and path-breaking writing by Dr. Frank “Mick” Schubert on Calloway, Fagen, and the Buffalo Soldiers generally. I owe him a very special debt for his unstinting support, generosity in sharing his material, and his astute and invaluable criticism of my work. Others to whom I am especially indebted are librarians in Metro Manila: Estela Montejo and Waldette Cueto, of the Rizal Library, Ateneo de Manila University; Ellen Alfonso and Anne Rosette Cretencia, of the Philippine National Library; and Mercedita Servida of the Lopez Memorial Library.

    [1] Information about Calloway’s antecedents, personal life, and descendants was kindly provided by his granddaughter, Rebecca Calloway Mosley of Santa Cruz, California. For this and much other assistance I am deeply grateful. Her cousin’s book provides some personal information about Calloway, his mother’s picture, and a family tree. See: M. Chavers-Wright, The Guarantee: P.W. Chavers: Banker, Entrepreneur, Philanthropist in Chicago’s Black Belt of the Twenties (New York: Wright – Armstead Associates, 2nd ed., 1987), pp. 107-113, 110, 311-13.

    [2] W. A. Williams, The Contours of American History (New York: New View Points, 1975), pp. 323-24.

    [3] See: a general account of these campaigns in A. Axelrod, America’s Wars (New York: J. Wiley, 2002). See: also, for an overview of internal colonialism, F. Jennings, The Invasion of America: Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest (New York: Norton, 1976). On the contribution of African American soldiers from American colonial days to the war in the Philippines, see: B.C. Nalty, Strength for the Fight: A History of Black Americans in the Military (New York: Free Press, 1986).

    [4] See: T. F. Gossett, Race: The History of an Idea in America (New York: Schocken Books, 1965). The racism in American society fueled America’s military machine in continental expansion and overseas imperialism. See: M. L. Krenn, ed., Race and U. S. Foreign Policy from the Colonial Period to the Present (New York: Garland Publishing, 1998); P. G. Kramer, The Blood of Government: Race, Empire, the United States, and the Philippines (Chapel Hill, N. C.: University of North Carolina Press, 2006).

    [5] Calloway might have been attracted to Boston because of its reputation as a stronghold of abolitionism, while its substantial cultural life, including publishing, offered interesting employment possibilities. He was not to know that it was subsequently to raise the cry of resistance to imperialism. See: on Boston and anti-imperialism, D. B. Schirmer, “U. S. Racism and Intervention in the Third World, Past and Present” in A. V. Shaw and L. H. Francia, eds., Visages of War: The Philippine War and the Aftermath of an Imperial Dream, 1899-1999 (New York: New York University Press, 2000), pp. 163-76.

    [6] U. S. Army Register of Enlistments, 1891, p. 88. He enlisted on June 1. Description: “Brown eyes; Black hair; Yellow complexion; height 5’ 6-1/2.” He was assigned to “F” Company of the 25th Infantry. In a later entry, upon discharge in 1894, it is noted that his service – includes character – was “Excellent.”

    [7] See: W.G. Muller, The Twenty-fourth Infantry: Past and Present (Fort Collins, Colorado: The Old Army Press, 1972); J. H. Nankivell and Q. Taylor, Buffalo Soldier Regiment: history of the twenty fifth United States Infantry, 1896-1926 (Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 2001). See: generally, F. N. Schubert, Voices of the Buffalo Soldiers (Albuquerque, New Mexico: University of New Mexico Press, 2003).

    [8] See: A. L. Fowler, The Black Infantry in the West, 1869-1891 (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Publ., 1971); W. A. Dobak and T. D. Phillips, The Black Regulars, 1866-1898 (Norman, Okla.: University of Oklahoma Press, 2003).

    [9] Throughout the west, especially in Colorado and Idaho, rail and mining strikes were a response to wage cuts and employer offensives in depression years. Federal troops were used to break up strikes, aid employers to bring in strikebreakers and to back-up state militias who were struggling to enforce martial law. See, for example, J.M. Cooper, “The army as strikebreaker: the railroad strikes of 1877 and 1894,” Labor History 18:2 (1977) pp. 179-96. See, also: P. S. Foner, History of the Labor Movement in the United States, vol. 2 (International Publ., 2nd ed., 1975), especially Chapters 15-18. See: also, S. Yellen, American Labor Struggles, 1877-1934 (New York: Monad Press, 1974); S. Lens, The Labor Wars (New York: Doubleday and Co., 1973); L. Adamic, Dynamite: The Story of Class Violence in America (New York: Chelsea House Publ., 1958).

    [10] U. S. Army Register of Enlistments, 1894. He re-enlisted at Chicago, March 3, having been discharged November 30, 1893 at Fort Missoula, Montana. He again gave his occupation as “printer.” This time his complexion was referred to as “mulatto.” He was re-assigned from the 25th Infantry to “H” Company of the 24th. Again his service was rated “Excellent.”

    [11] Quoted from a letter of recommendation by the Regimental Quartermaster, 1st Lieutenant J. E. Brett, March 14, 1895. The letter was endorsed by Colonel Z. R. Bliss, the regimental commander, and was approved by the Adjutant General, U. S. Army. (Letter held by the author.) Bliss later served in the Philippines and attained the rank of Brigadier General.

    [12] There is a huge literature on American imperialism; one of the most interesting is T. Schoonover, Uncle Sam’s War of 1898 and the Origins of Globalization (Lexington, Ky.: University of Kentucky Press, 2003). See: also, the account by two anti-imperialist stalwarts, M. Storey and M.P. Lichauco, The Conquest of the Philippines by the United States, 1898-1925 (New York: G.P. Putnam, 1926). Lichauco was a Filipino. For a contemporary, succinct Filipino view, see: the seldom cited book by A. De Viana, Apples and Ampalaya: Bittersweet Glimpses of the American Period in the Philippines (1898-1946) (Manila: University of Santo Tomas Publishing House, 2001), with photographs from the Filipino-American war, including a photo at pp. 50-51, of American soldiers demonstrating the “water cure.” See: also, P.G. Kramer, “The Water Cure; Debating torture and counterinsurgency-a century ago,” The New Yorker, February 25, 2008 (with another photo from the Philippine War, “reportedly taken in May, 1901”).

    [13] For a fascinating account of Fagen’s early life and a brief account of his service in Cuba and the Philippines, see: F. N. Schubert, “Seeking David Fagen: The Search for a Black Rebel’s Florida Roots,” Tampa Bay History 22 (2008), pp. 19-33.

    [14] See: the seminal account in M.C. Robinson and F.N. Schubert, “David Fagen: An Afro-American Rebel in the Philippines, 1899-1901,” Pacific Historical Review 44 (1975), pp. 68-83. See: also, R. G Ontal, “Fagen and Other Ghosts: African-Americans and the Philippine-American War,” in Shaw and Francia, Visages of War, pp.118-133; R. G. Ontal, “Native Warrior: A Black Man’s Embrace of an Asian Revolution,” The City Sun (New York) May 31-June 6, 1996, pp. 14-15. And, see: the discussion of Calloway in S. Brown, “White Backlash and the Aftermath of Fagen’s Rebellion: The Fates of Three African-American Soldiers in the Philippines, 1901-1902,” Contributions in Black Studies, vol. 13(1995) Article 5, (at Fagen has been very positively remembered by Filipino writers, see: for example, G. Hizon, “A’black hero’ for the Philippines,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, February 2, 2009; O.A. Ochosa, “Big Black Brother: Remembering David Fagen, a black guerrilla in the Philippine-American War,” Diliman Review 36, No.4 (1988) pp. 46-50; A.R. Ocampo, “A black soldier in the revolution,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, June 10, 1988. The latter was written for the Centennial of the first Philippine Republic which was over-thrown by the U.S.A. In it the author says “History must not forget Capt. David Fagen, Filipino.” Much of this account is based on the sympathetic stories told of Fagen in his commanding General’s autobiography, J. Alejandrino, The Price of Freedom: Episodes and Anecdotes of Our Struggles for Freedom (Manila: M. Colcol and Co., 1949), pp. 172-176.The racist context of Fagen’s rebellion is discussed by R.R. Constantino in The Poverty of Memory; Essays on History and Empire (Quezon City: Foundation for Nationalist Studies, 2006).

    [15] See: generally, M. Curtis, The Black Soldier or the Colored Boys of the United States Army (Washington: Murray Bros., 2nd ed., 1918). See: also, M.V. Lynk, The Black Troopers: Or, The daring Heroism of the Negro Soldiers in the Spanish-American War (N.Y.: AMS Press, 1971 (re-issue, original 1899 can be seen at At pp.55-64 he quotes at length from J.W. Galaway of the 24th. This must be J.W.Calloway. And, see: F.N. Schubert, “Buffalo Soldiers at San Juan Hill” (unpublished paper, available at; F.N. Schubert, Black Valor: Black Soldiers and the Medal of Honor (Wilmington, Del.: Scholarly Resources, 1997) chap.10; A. Kaplan, “Black and Blue at San Juan Hill” in A. Kaplan and D.E. Pease, eds., Cultures of American Imperialism (Durham: Duke University Press, 1993), pp. 219-36.

    [16] See: for example, Curtis, The Black Soldier, pp. 38-39. See: also, Lynk, The Black Troopers, chap. 9.

    [17] He joined up again at Fort Douglas, Utah, on March 7, 1899, one month after the war had commenced in the Philippines. See: F.N. Schubert, ed. On the Trail of the Buffalo Soldier: Biographies of African Americans in the U.S. Army, 1866-1917 (Wimington, Del.: Scholarly Resources Inc., 1995), pp.77-78. His re-enlistment paper was signed by Lieutenant J.D. Leitch, Adjutant of the 24th Infantry, under whom he had previously served and would again. It was probably Leitch who encouraged him to re-enlist; he had been collecting references and may have been considering a civilian life. He is here described as of “Light” complexion and, at 5’ 7-1/2,” an inch taller than when he first enlisted. (Document in my possession.)

    [18] Reported in a short, matter of fact article, “Arrival of the Transport Zelandia,” Manila Times, July 24, 1899, p. 6, simply noting that a battalion of “Coloured troops” had arrived along with “a number of recruits” and “180 sacks of mail.” These were the first of the colored troops to arrive. See: a succinct account of the contribution of the colored regiments in, R.E. Miller, “Black American Troops in the Philippines,” American Historical Collection Bulletin 13, No.4 (1988), pp. 75-81.

    [19] Letter of October 8, 1899, to Adjutant General, United States Army, Washington, D.C. (“Through military channels”). He had a very positive endorsement from his immediate superior, the battalion commander, and this was forwarded, without reservations, by his regimental commander, and two of the most respected officers from the “old army” now in command positions in the Philippine Division of the Army, Brigadier General S.B.M. Young and Major General H.W. Lawton (Letter in my possession.)

    [20] See: for example, W.T. Sexton, Soldiers in the Sun: An Adventure in Imperialism (Harrisburg, Pa.: The Military Service Publ. Co., 1939), pp. 174-75; he also describes how the trap was unsuccessful, 176-200. See: also the assessments of various campaigns and participants by two military officers in, R.E. Dupuy and W.H. Baumer, The Little Wars of the United States (New York: Hawthorne Books, 1968), Chap. 3. They argue that it was Major General Wheaton who failed to close the trap, thus allowing Aguinaldo to escape. For Filipino accounts, see: U.S. Baclagon, Military History of the Philippines (Manila: Saint Mary’s Publ., 1975), pp.88-9; S. Tan, The Filipino-American War, 1899-1913 (Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press, 2002), pp. 109-10.

    [21] See: Baclagon, Military History of the Philippines, chap. VI; Tan, The Filipino-American War, 1899-1913, chap. 6. See: also the Filipino political-military context of the retreat in, O.D. Corpuz, The Roots of the Filipino Nation, vol. 2 (Quezon City: AKLAHI Foundation, 1989), chap. 20.

    [22] See: G.P. Marks, III, The Black Press Views American Imperialism (1898-1900) (Arno Press, 1971) with an excellent preface on white racism and jingoism, and black anti-imperialism by W.L. Katz. There were many white journalists, but one, a correspondent for the New York Evening Post, wrote an ambitious account of the history and circumstances of the war, as well as the people and their country, A.G. Robinson, The Philippines: The War and the People (New York: McClure, Phillips, 1901).

    [23] In W.B. Gatewood, Jr., “Smoked Yankees” and the Struggle for Empire: Letters from Negro Soldiers, 1898-1902 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1971), p. 257. Gatewood explains that the Gazette was anti-annexation and believed that the Filipinos would suffer like Negroes had in America; but Mason stopped short of mentioning that explicitly. Gatewood’s volume is a classic on the attitudes of the black soldiers and those at home. His collection of letters from the Afro-American Press is invaluable. It also provides a contrast to the books of letters of individual white military men which were collected by the families to whom they wrote. Curiously, he refers to Calloway as “Galloway” in publishing a letter from him, at p. 251. In her book Gail Buckley also refers to “Galloway” (and Fagen), American Patriots: The Story of Blacks in the Military from the Revolution to Desert Storm (New York: Random House, 2001), chap. 5, at 157-9.

    [24] See: S. Ngozi-Brown, “African American Soldiers and Filipinos: racial imperialism, Jim Crow and social relations” The Journal of Negro History, 81, No.1 (1997), pp. 42-54. See: also, W. B. Gatewood, Black Americans and the White Man’s Burden (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1975), esp. Chap. 10. And, see: M. Mitchell. “‘The Back Man’s Burden’: African Americans, Imperialism and Notions of Racial Manhood, 1890-1910,” International Review of Social History Supplement 44, No.4 (1999), pp. 77-99.

    [25] See: Ochosa, Big Black Brother, pp. 46-50. On lynching, see: National Association of Colored people, Thirty Years of Lynching in the United States, 1889-1918 (New York: Negro Universities Press, 1969).

    [26] The march north, the campaign in pursuit of Aguinaldo, and other activity of the 24th Infantry is detailed in S.M. Thomas, War in the Philippines: A True Story (n.p., 1903). Thomas was a Sergeant, Company “H”, 24th Infantry. Two of the best accounts of the various campaigns, with scholarly attention to detail, are those by the military historian, B. M. Linn. See: The Philippine War, 1899-1902 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000); The U.S. Army and Counterinsurgency in the Philippine-American War, 1899-1902, (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000).

    [27] In Gatewood, “Smoked Yankees,” pp. 251-255.

    [28] Ibid., pp. 279-80.

    [29] See: the captor’s account in F. Funston, Memories of Two Wars: Cuban and Philippine Experiences (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1911), chap. VII. Despite its self-serving nature, this is a clear and comprehensive account of much of the war in central and northern Luzon from its outbreak on February 4, 1899; Funston was in many of the significant actions and has given much of the battlefield details, and comments freely on many of his colleagues and Filipino soldiers and officers.

    [30] See: S. Brown, White Backlash, pp. 2-4.

    [31] The Consunji letter (and other documents in the Calloway case referred to below) is found in the National Archives, Washington, D.C., Record Group 94. For this letter, AGO file #17043. (Copies of all AGO documents cited are in my possession.)

    [32] There is a large literature on the response of the Filipinos to the ‘regime change” and colonization. An excellent source is M.S.I. Diokno, “Benevolent Assimilation” and Filipino Responses,” in H. McFerson, ed., Mixed Blessing (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2002), pp. 75-88. Of course that response does not occur in a vacuum, see: A. Paulet, “Racing the Filipino; The United States and the Question of Filipino Identity, 1898-1905 (forthcoming; paper in my possession).

    [33] See:

    [34] Calloway wrote to Tomas Consunji, misspelling his last name with “m” for “n” which was repeated throughout the proceedings. (It is a Chinese mestizo name, very prominent in San Fernando at the time, and still.) It was addressed to No. 25 Calle Maura, San Fernando, not to Manila, as most accounts have it. On surveillance in the war era, see: B.M. Linn, “Intelligence and Low-Intensity Conflict in the Philippine War, 1899-1902” Intelligence and National Security, 6, No. 1 (1991), pp. 90-114. See: generally the exceptional volume by, A. W. McCoy, Policing America’s Empire: The United States, the Philippines, and the Rise of the Surveillance State (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2009).

    [35] Document in AGO file #356799.

    [36] In his report of December 12, 1900 to General MacArthur. It now seems the commander of the Army in the Philippines may be trying to cover himself, as on December 3 he had ordered Calloway deported and recommended he be discharged without honor, one day before having Calloway’s petition. The Inspector General was only given the matter on December 8. There was clearly no time to investigate the matter thoroughly, but the bureaucratic process was carried through. The many critics of the Army in the U.S.A. might have caused problems for the General if word leaked out. Documents in AGO file #356799. Despite censorship, negative reports about conditions in the Philippines, including abuses by the military, reached Washington, often by reports in the Manila Times and other papers. After atrocities in Samar in the wake of the Filipino victory at Balangiga, a Senate Investigating Committee was convened on January 31. See: the response to the evidence presented in, M. Storey and J. Codman, Secretary Root’s Record. “Marked Severities” in Philippine Warfare (Boston: G.H. Ellis, 1902).

    [37] Documents in AGO file #356799.

    [38] See: a journalist’s view of the different reasons for black (and white) desertions, S. Bonsal, “The Negro Soldier in War and Peace,” North Am. Rev., CL V (June 7), pp. 321-7.

    [39] Information obtained from Becca Calloway Mosley, Calloway family historian.

    [40] See: Wheaton recommendation of November 15, 1900. Document in AGO file #356799. The deserters who fought with the Filipinos were not only active in central Luzon, but in a number of areas in the northern half of the country, including southern Luzon, the provinces of the Bicol region, Isabela, Samar (where they were blamed for planning the massacre of Ameicans at Balangiga), as reported on page one of the Manila Times, “Deviltry of U.S. Deserters-They Are Responsible For Nearly All the Recent Fatalities” October 15, 1901. In other accounts, deserters were blamed for the improvement of Filipino marksmanship which had been poor in the early stages of the war. See: also, L.C. Dery, “When the Whole World Loved the Filipinos and other Essays on Philippine History” (Manila: University of Santo Tomas Press, 2005). He reminds us that there were not only American defectors who fought with the Filipinos, but numerous others from around the globe, including one famous “unknown soldier” found dead in the trenches at Caloocan, mentioned by Funston in Memories of Two Wars, p. 198.

    [41] Fagen sent Funston taunting letters, and continued to harass and elude him. Even his sister-in-law chided him with humorous doggerel about his failure to capture Fagen. He subsequently placed a $600.00 bounty on Fagen, dead or alive. See: Schubert, “David Fagen,” pp. 76-7, 80.

    [42] This “appeal” was never transmitted to General MacArthur until the day after he made his decision that Calloway be sent back to the U.S.A. and discharged without honor, under Special orders, No. 201, December 3, 1900 (signed by Assistant Adjutant General S.D Sturgis “by command of Major General MacArthur. (This information is contained in a Summary of the case prepared February 5, 1901 in the War Department.) Document in AGO file #356799.

    [43] The December 12 report to General MacArthur by Major Inspector General S.C. Mills (Acting Inspector General of the Philippine Division), accompanied by Calloway’s statement of December 11, is found in AGO file #356799. It is not clear what evidence there was that “Mrs. Calloway” – clearly meant to suggest that he was in fact an adulterer – was in Manila trying to obtain his release. In the circumstances of slow communication and travel (and strict military censorship) it would surely have been impossible for his putative wife to get to Manila from the U.S. in the short period since his detention.

    [44] Document in AGO file #356799.

    [45] General MacArthur submitted his report to the Adjutant General in Washington, D.C. on December 15, 1900, the day the transport “Sherman” sailed for San Francisco. Document in AGO file #356799.

    [46] Document in AGO file #356799.

    [47] Corbin had all the papers from General MacArthur to consider; a summary of the case prepared in the Department from those papers; an advice from the Judge Advocate General G.N. Lieber; an endorsement of MacArthur’s recommendation from Lieutenant General Nelson A. Miles, Commanding the Army. Although he also had Calloway’s most recent petition, there was no hope of a fair result. Documents in AGO file #356799.

    [48] The case is reported at length in “Conflict Between Dual Authority-Military Refuse To Recognize Habeas Corpus Mandate of Supreme Court,” Manila Times, August 24, 1901, p.1. And again covered in “Calloway Will be Deported-Supreme Court Holds No Jurisdiction Over military Prisoner,” Manila Times, August 27, 1901, p. 1. The case is reported as In Re Calloway [G. R. No. 456, August 28, 1901.] Philippine Law Reports, vol. 1 (1901-1904), pp. 11-12, and at

    [49] See: G.H. Boehringer, “Eber C. Smith: An Early Human Rights Lawyer in the American Colony of the Philippine Islands, 1901-1908.”(Forthcoming).

    [50] See: for example, “Murder Trial,” Manila Times, August 29, 1901, p. 8, reporting the closing of the trial of Lorenzo Antiporda. Smith’s defense: the accused was in church at the time of the killing.

    [51] The front page Manila Times report, September 6, 1901, “Petition Sent to General Wheaton-Lawyers Contend That Military have no Jurisdiction over Teamster,” referred to the “much-mooted question as to the line of demarcation between military and civil jurisdiction” as each case involved different combinations of facts. See: also, “Habeas Corpus Not Granted-Supreme Court Decides Finnick must stay in Bilibid,” Manila Times, September 7, 1901, p. 1, where it is reported “The ground of the decision was identical with that in Calloway’s case…”Other cases in the same period were reported: “Habeas Corpus for Soldier,” Manila Times, August 23, 1901, p. 8 (writ being argued for);”Question Regarding Jurisdiction-Solicitor General Claims courts have jurisdiction,” Manila Times, August 24, 1901, p. 1 (involving a case of “muchacho whipping and choking” by police officers, allegedly including the ex-Chief of Detectives at the American administered City Police Station).

    [52] Written from 11 East St., San Francisco, he would not have known that six men of the 9th had defected , and two of them were executed in Albay (with, it is said, 3,000 Filipinos watching), the only deserters’ death penalty not commuted in that war. (See: Brown, “Whitebaclash.” pp. 169-172). He spoke of being deprived of a court-martial, seeking vindication, and professed his love for the military in which, as he asserted once again, he served faithfully and diligently. He was informed by letter dated October 14, 1901, that the War Department had given “most careful consideration to all attainable facts connected with your case.” Of course that was not true for the case had never been properly investigated. That they considered the report from General MacArthur as “attaining all the facts” must have rankled greatly. Documents in AGO file #356799.

    [53] He sought a letter of recommendation signed by two officers of the 24th who knew him well, Lt. J.D. Leitch and endorsed by Colonel E. H. Liscum. (The latter had been killed-in-action fighting the “Boxers” in China, to which a number of regiments had been sent from the Philippines.) The documents are in AGO file #356799.

    [54] Although there was an end to the formal war as far as the Americans saw it, the fighting continued in the provinces for many years. While American historians usually refer to the war years as 1899-1902 (for example Linn, see footnote 26) this is not generally the case in Filipino histories. See: for example, Tan, The Filipino-American War, 1899-1913. See: also the analysis of the American criminalization of resistance as banditry, under the Brigandage Act of November, 1902, in O.A. Ochosa, “Bandoleros”: Outlawed Guerrillas of the Philippine-American War, 1903-1907 (Quezon City: New Day Publ., 1995).

    [55] The response was dated June 3, 1904. The documents are in AGO file #356799. In his petition, addressed to “The Honorable William H. Taft, Secretary of War,” the former civil governor of the Philippines, seeking an honorable discharge, he named as a referee the Public Printer for whom he had worked for two years. He also named Mr. T. Thomas Fortune, “editor of the New York Age, who has known me for years,” a well-known African American publisher and writer, who had visited the colony to see for himself what was happening there.

    [56] See: L. E. Gleeck, Jr., American Business and Philippine Economic Development (Manila: Carmelo and Bannerman, 1975), Chap. 11. Gleeck was formerly U.S. Consul General, Curator of the American Historical Collection, (now housed as a special collection at the Rizal Library, Ateneo de Manila University) and long-time Editor of its Bulletin until his death in 2005. He wrote a large number of books, articles and reviews on the Philippines, and though very conservative, his research on the impact of America in the country is invaluable.

    [57] The Tribune newspaper, April 21, 1934, p. 16. Tribune was established in October 1925 as one of a chain of three papers established by the “father of Filipino journalism,” Alejandro Roces, Sr. The editor, Carlos P. Romulo, later won a Pulitzer Prize, served as the U. N. General Assembly and was regarded as “America’s most trusted Asian spokesman.” Calloway, no doubt, would have been pleased to be in such company.

    [58] See: the official Certificate of Death from the Manila Municipality, Reg. No. 2934, April 20, 1934. He is referred to as “Ex. Soldier, U. S. Army, Nationality American.” (Copy with the author.) For some reason, he was not buried until April 29, 1934. Interment was at Cemeterio del Norte (now North Cemetery), at Caloocan, near the site at which intense fighting occurred in the first major battle of “his” war, in February/March, 1899. He rests in the vicinity of hundreds of American military who died in WW II; also buried there are many famous Filipinos-artists and writers; statesmen, politicians and lawyers; military leaders from the American war; and a handful of Presidents of the Philippine Republic.

    [59] Maggie continued dancing in Manila for many years. Later she moved to Shanghai, performing with her husband’s band, moved to the United States, and was still dancing in the 1970s.

    More Gill H. Boehringer writings with Shortcut Links