Meanwhile the armies of Oku and Nodzu had advanced in force against Liao-yang, but had been driven back by Zarubaeff. Here the main burden of the fighting fell on the 5th East Siberian Rifle Division, which behaved extremely well, as did the regiments of the 4th Siberians. On the night of the 3rd, however, Zarubaeff reported that, though the enemy had been repulsed, he had only three battalions left in reserve, and needed reinforcements and gun ammunition. At the same time a message came in from Lubavin, who was covering the Pen-hsi-hu–Mukden line, informing me of his retirement to the Tung-chia-fen Ling (Pass), sixteen miles from Mukden. From this it is evident that if, choosing the first alternative, we had marched against Oku and Nodzu, Kuroki could most certainly have driven back the 17th Corps and 54th Division, and have seized the railway in rear of our troops moving southwards. As we knew, however, that Kuroki was not operating against us with his main body during the battle of the 2nd, we realized it might have been sent to turn our left. Such being the situation, we had to decide whether to maintain our hold on the river, or to abandon Liao-yang and retire to the position on the left bank of the Hun Ho in front of Mukden, which had been already fortified.
As regards the first alternative, it seemed possible that we might, by an immense effort and skilful manœuvring, be able to hold on to Liao-yang and throw Kuroki behind the Tai-tzu Ho. But for this it was essential to draw in the force that had crossed to the right bank, and to deploy it on a fresh line farther to the north, so that we might be able to attack the enemy’s position on the heights near the Yen-tai mines from the north as well as from the west. Such a movement would have exposed our right, and would have isolated the position still held by the 17th Corps on the right bank of the river. The Japanese might drive it in and issue in rear of the troops at Liao-yang, for that place was only eleven miles distant from the position to which the 17th Corps would have had to retire if it were driven back. The defenders of Liao-yang, being then attacked by Oku and Nodzu combined, would be in a critical situation. As regards the second alternative, a retirement on Mukden presented great disadvantages and dangers. It increased the distance to Port Arthur; it would have to be carried out under pressure from the enemy in front and on the left, and the roads had been so much damaged by rain that it was doubtful whether we should succeed in getting our transport or even artillery to Mukden. The abandonment of Liao-yang could not fail both to depress the troops who had so gallantly defended it and encourage the enemy. But, on the other hand, we should be extricated by such a retirement from a situation in which we were threatened in front and flank. A successful withdrawal would also give time for the 1st Army Corps to come up, and, what was not less important, for us to replenish artillery ammunition, of which we were very short. Besides this, the banks of the Tai-tzu Ho were specially unsuited for our troops, as they were almost entirely covered with kao-liang. Our men were unused to this, lost their heads whenever they got into it, and were very liable to panic.
On the whole, our past experiences of the offensive did not inspire any confidence that we should be able to cope with the difficult situation implied by a retention of Liao-yang. I decided, therefore, on the retirement towards Mukden, which was carried out by September 7. The most difficult work, especially on the early morning of the 5th, fell to the lot of the 1st Siberians, who had to beat off Kuroki’s force attacking from the east; this they did with success, and without losing a single trophy, in spite of the difficulties in which we were placed.
A general account of the operations round Liao-yang, and a statement of all the considerations which led to our retirement, were telegraphed to the Emperor on September 11. On the 14th the army was made happy by the following gracious message, which I received from His Majesty:
“From your reports of the fighting at Liao-yang, I appreciate that it was impossible for you to have held that position longer without risk of being completely cut off from your communications. Under such conditions, and in face of the existing difficulties, the retirement of the whole force across country without the loss of guns or baggage was a brilliant feat of arms. I thank you and the gallant troops under your command for their heroic conduct and enduring self-sacrifice. May God help you all!”
Upon retirement, our troops were grouped in two principal bodies—
1. The defence of the main position on the left bank of the Hun Ho was entrusted to the 10th and 17th Corps under Bilderling, to whom was subordinated Dembovski’s force of 10 battalions of the 5th Siberians, which was guarding the near right flank of the main position. Altogether, the troops under Bilderling’s command amounted to 75 battalions, 53 squadrons and sotnias, 190 guns, 24 mortars, and 3 sapper battalions.
2. The protection of the left flank from Fu-shun to the west was entrusted to Ivanoff’s force, consisting of the 2nd and 3rd Brigades of the 4th and some units of the 5th Siberians (total, 62 battalions, 26 sotnias, 128 guns, and 2 sapper battalions).
3. To keep touch between these two main groups were the 1st Siberians under Shtakelberg (total, 24 battalions, 10 squadrons and sotnias, 56 guns, and 1 sapper battalion). To his force was entrusted the defence of the portion of the Hun Ho from Chiu-tien to Pu-ling.
4. The general reserve was disposed in two groups—