The Washington herald., 1914-10-04

y M nov II - the ulBn cost OF Kill
n ing in warfare! A French gen
~ eraI has figured out that IT costs
about 100000 to kill one soldier
In modern war. And the cost seems
to be getting bigger with each war. The
present European war is likely to break
all records.
General Persin, in an article in a
French paper, says;
In 187O-71 France spent about two
billions OF francs in the actual warfare
and q billion more In restoring its own
property and in payments for injuries
caused TO others, which It Is perfectly
fair to include In the costs. Then there
we're fye billions for war indemnity and
still two billions more for interest, loss
Of revenue and seizures by the enemy
for maintenance during the German oc-
eupauon- The last may or may not be
cost IN given war, SO that it lad
better be left out Of the reckoning. In
the same way the Russo-Turkish war Of
1S71-IS cost two billion francs to the
Turks, and the Russo-Japanese war,
1905, cost the Russians six billions. In
the Franco-Prussian war there were
2S,600 Germans killed or mortaIly
wounded; in the Russo-Turkish war,
16,600, and in the Russo-Japanese, S.
600, IN the latter instances, Russians
and Japanese, respectively. From these
figures it is evident that the price per
man killed to the opposing side was, in
1901, 21,000; in 1S77-TS, $4,000,
and in 1905, $2O,40G.
81 rather expected when / undertook
this calculation to find that the costs
we're increasing. On the one side the
engines Of war cost more as they are
perfected. On the other hand, progress
in the art of killing is always surpassed
hv n fha arf ~
result is that the ratio of men killed or
wounded in actual battle is continually
diminishing. This ratio was 6 per cent
unden Frederick the Great, per cent
under Napoleon, 2 per cent in 1870, and
Il per cent IN Manchuria. But in 1870
there were not a dozen great battles.
The German armies fought little be-
tween Froeschwiller and Sedan and the
French little between Sedan and CouI-
miers. The fight was taken up again in
December, but less sharply than at the
beginning. During much of the time
men did not kill, but the expenses never
ceased. IN Manchuria, on the contrary,
they fought nearly every day. The bat
ties were long ones, fifteen days at
Mukden, twelve at Cha-Ho, and eight at
Liao-Yang. This increase in duration
of the battles compensates for the slight
loss in any individual hour of the fight
OQ6 may see also WHY the COSI VI uau
killed is not higher in 1905 than in
1870.
'Tt viii be impossible to predict with
exactness how much II will cost per
man killed In the next war; the sum will
depend upon the nature Of the struggle
II fghting continues nearly every day,
as in Manchuria or in the Balkans, the
cost will be approximately the American
estimate. II the battles are as in 1870,
at rare intervals, the cost will increase
in very appreciable ratio. 1t will not
diminish, that is certain.
THAT which kills and reduces eff
cheney in war is not the cannon or the
rife, but fatigue, cholera, and typhoid.
In 1870 there were registered in the
hospitals no less than $4,000 Germans,
who, although they survived, were in
active for some time. The Crimean war
cost the allies four times as many
deaths from sickness as from battle.
This ratio was three to one among the
Russians in 1S77-78 and only two to
one among the Japanese, thanks to their
excellent hygiene. I count more, there
fore, on improved hygienic methods
and the art of avoiding losses in war
than on progress of ballistics and of the
means of destruction"