The last Punic war, Vol. 2 (of 2) : $b Tunis, past and present : with a narrative of the French conquest of the regency.Broadley, Alexander Meyrick
History
The last Punic war, Vol. 2 (of 2) : $b Tunis, past and present : with a narrative of the French conquest of the regency.
Broadley, Alexander Meyrick
Tunisia -- History; Tunisia -- History -- French occupation, 1881-1956
It is in the essential difference between these two statements that we
have to seek for the origin of the typhoid fever and dysentery which has
deprived France of so many of her children. M. Saint-Hilaire deceived
not only Lord Granville and Signor Cairoli,—he deceived France, he
deceived the army, and he deceived himself. If he had said in April that
he was going to “carry out the traditions of his predecessors” and send
the French forces to practically conquer Tunis, a _corps d’armée_ would
have been mobilised, a proper ambulance and hospital service organised,
and care taken not to bring soldiers from infected stations. But he said
nothing of the kind: all he spoke of then was “a military promenade of
ten days—a fortnight at the most,” “a rapid march against the Khamírs
and back into Algeria,” and “a week’s expedition for which no
preparations were necessary.” The frontier was crossed with such ideas
as these, and what were the consequences? To the entry into Khamír-land
succeeded the capture of Kef; the fall of Kef was followed by the
occupation of Bizerta; after Bizerta came the march to the Bardo; the
sequel to the treaty of Kasr-es-Said was the bombardment of Sfax and the
concentric movement on Kairwán. The “military promenade of ten days—a
fortnight at the most,” became an expedition, and the expedition became
an occupation, but no serious preparations were made either for one or
the other—_hinc illæ lacrimæ_. This, however, is not all. M. Barthélémy
Saint-Hilaire not only indulged in the utmost conceivable stretch of the
elasticity of diplomatic language, but he adopted a baneful fiction and
stuck to it. “Tunis,” said this Aristotelian politician, “is at peace
with France; Muhamed es Sadek is our ally: there can be no war between
us, and the soldiers of the Republic must act accordingly. The persons
and property of Tunisians must under all circumstances be respected.” It
was these considerations which prevented houses and other buildings from
being taken for hospital purposes; it was the attempt to solve the
riddle of “when is a war not a war?” which condemned hundreds of sick
soldiers to lie and die under the scant shelter of portable tents that
afforded no adequate protection against either sun or rain. In short, it
was this unhappy conjunction of falsehood and fiction, which set the
ball of epidemic sickness rolling; and when it once began to roll, no
amount of subsequent care and attention could possibly stop it. Add to
the primary causes, a large admixture of red-tapeism, a fair amount of
jealousy of any interference from a Red Cross Society, and no fellow-
feeling between the medical officers and the _Intendance_, and we have
the secret of the mortality amongst the French troops in Tunis, which
even the _Havas_ failed to explain, and official denials were powerless
to conceal.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account