The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-12-31
The Comparatively Small British
Losses In South Africa.

hosSCs 4" SOuth EhTlCh.
We copy elsewhere from the ARM and
Nary journal very striking comparison
between the percentage OF losses by the
British in South Africa and that endured by
our American armies during the Civil War,
and even the percentage Of casualties Of
the British Army itself In long past wars.
The conclusion OF this military authority IL
that. 30 far. the British armies fighting the
Beers have given up the battle before they
had suffered from measure OF loss which
came anywhere near that borne by troops
In other wars before retrcating and con-
Tossing defeat
Gen. METHUEN reported to the War
Office In justification OF his retreat at
Modder River. that his army had been
through 1.-THE bloodiest fighting OF the
century" yet his losses In killed and
wounded were only ATS. or IL per cent. OF
his force OF q. 800 men. In fifty battles OF
our Civil War. as the Army and Navy
journal points out, the average losses were
about o per cent. on the Union and 10 per
cent. on tho Confederate side, and, on
bodies corresponding in sizo to the British
army in South Africa, not far from 20 per
the great historical battles, show that
troops cannot consider that they have been
defeated in a stand-up fight" until they
have lost in killed and wounded from twice
TO three times as many proportionately as
the British Generals have lost in the encoun-
tiers with tho Beers. On the basis Of the
yet insufficient reports OF the numbers
engaged, this military authority calculates
that Gems. GATACRE METHUEN and Bull
LER have lost in their several engagements
less than per cent. In killed and less than
s per cent In killed and wounded. It con-
cludes. therefore, that as yet there has
been nothing In South Africa worthy the
name Of heavy fighting by an army as
whole. The British have thrown up tho
sponge under circumstances where good
troops should stand much heavier losses
| without blcnchIng," and all England has
been aghast Mt an amount OF casualties
which Is only an ordinary Incident Of war
and much less than armies have endured
In the past as the price Of victory or as the
| penalty OF defeat.
| All this IL unquestlonably true. The total
British casualties In South Africa have not
| indicated strain on the armies sufficient 10
| justify tho excitement In London and the
! assertion OF the military dispatches that
| they suffered from fire so helish
! that no troops could withstand it," H.
nornncc OF severe and strenuous war in this
generation OF the English people may ex.
cuse such exaFgeration in them, but what
shall we say when it thus appears even
more strikingly in the army officers them
srlvosS The losses OF the troops In cap
turcd, moreover, suggest u faint-hearted-
ness and tendency toquick decentralization
which needs to be explained away In order
To cntitlo them to tho credit OF DISCIPLINED
stcadincss and Of exhaustlng the posi-
bilitics of fighting, as measured by tho
standard Of past wars
In view OF the cOndescending tone con-
corning the training and fighting ability OF
our Army Regular and Volunteer. which
has been adopted by English officers very
generally and by Lord WoLsELHY, the Com
mander-In-Chief of the British Army, more
particularly, the Army and Nuuy journal il
justified in rcciting these comparative racts
Tor thelr confusion, During our Civil War
tHn. WoLsFLEY WAS loud in praise Of the
Brush regular AT the expense OF the Amori-
can Volunteer and he has since repeated hls
inhu"ndor5 of depreciation; yet in the
actual ordeal Of battle the American Volun-
teer proved his superior discipline and
steadln"ss by standing up against losses OF
10 anu is per cent, while now We sec
inc British regular retreating from
the battlefield when he has suffered a
loss OF from to 7 per cent. in killed and
wounded, and retiring, not to reform and
renew the conflict, but to "a place OF safety
lar from the enemy" Moreover, taking
special bodies 4 troops, both HANCOCK at