West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1916-03-02
War Losses

lhese lists are tRbulatcd in neutral
and belligerent countries and thus we
get from time TO time from Amster-
dam. from Berne, and from London
the figures of German losses: these
hgures are obtained by adding the to-
tails OF the past lists and those OF the
new lists
Yet in Great Britain and i'm Ameri
ca the announcement I'm tho House
was misunderstood and many com
ments have been made on the suppo-
sition that the figures cited I'm Parlia-
ment were the British estimates. not
the German admissions. and these fig
nres have been used to confound the
observers. who. like myself. have es-
timated the German losses to be much
greater than their lists disclosed
such estimates may be wrong. the
German official statements may be
correct, but the announcement made
IN the House has no bearing. because
I was mere statement OF the fig
ires which came from German lists.
But these figures have a particular
value. At the end OF November the
Germans had lost in killed. according
TO their lists, deaths from sickness
included something over 100000; i'm
prisoners. missing included. little
less than 100000; in wounded. a little
under 100000. Their total loss was.
then' something under 2.6OO.OOO
The British losses for about the
same period were officially announced
IN Parliament to be $50 OOO-l2O. 600
killed 10000 captured, 34O. 900 wound
ed. Compare the two and il will he
seen that the percentage OF killed 10
wounded is about the same-a little
higher in the German case. but we
know that the Germans report only
serious wounds, as do the French
while the British report all wounds
however slight. The percentage OF
captured in both cases is practically
The same. II is reasonable TO CON
clude then that the familiar ratio OF
killed TO total casualties. anywhere
holding good in this war.
But the other day French Socialist
deputy was quoted as saying in Eng
land that the total French losses I'm
The first eighteen months OF the war
lad been 2.5OO.OOO-7OO 900 killed.
100000 wounded and 4O0. 900 captur-
ed. This was instantly seized upon
and used TO prove that the French
we're rapidly approaching exhaustion.
The figures were, of course, prepos-
eerous. Quite possibly the French ac-
eually suffered $500. 900 casualties I'm
,he first eighteen months-this is the
lgure generally accepted-but If thew
ave we shall find that the ratio OF
f'lled TO wounded will be aboat the
same as the Germans: the figure for
he prisoners does meet the probabili-
lies
But If the French casualties were
100000 then the German figures must
Je far higher, for the French loss rem
'esents 90 per cent loss on the high
est figure any one has suggested for
french numbers, namely 5000. 900
Now the French have, on the whole
lone less steady fighting than the
Germans, who have been engaged eth
sr in the West or the East or in both
.ields without interruption since the
var began until December last. II
,he Ere nch, then, have lost so per cent
Of their resources in men, the Ger
mans have lost the same at least and
that would mean around 1000. 600.
"hich Is about what has been estimat-
ed. Accepting the usual ratio. this
would mean: killed. 925.OOO; wound
I'd, 2.265,OOO; captured, 45O, 900.
The last German figures that we
nave place the Prussian losses alone
at just less than 100000 Bavaria
5axony. and Wurtemburg issue their
own lists and on the basis Of popula-
ton, they would add around 100000 10
the total. making 5000 900 in all
100000 less than would be expected
on the basis OF French losses. what
is the explanation Of this DISPARITY?
The Allies believe that it IS found in
the alleged custom OF the Germans 10
include In their casualties only those
who are permanently disabled; that
is. they declare that German reports
show the permanent wastage only.
Colonel Repington, the military cor
respondent OF the Times OF London
fixes at 2.7O0,OO0 the permanent Ger
man loss for the first eighteen months.
This last hgpre is pretty close to the
German losses. as admitted in their
Official statements or lists, Of 1000. 900
iiiaire Belloc estimates for the same
period that the German permanent
loss has been 3,25O.OOO to 8.75O. 900.
and asserts that the French general
stad estimates place Il above 4. 600 600
after the most exhaustive examina-
tions Personally 7 believe that .OOO.-
900 is conservative estimate. This
accepts Colonel Repington's 2.7O0.O00
and merely adds 300, 600 to cover what
Is known as temporary permanent
loss This rather complex thing is
thus explained A. any given moment
there will be several hundred thou
sand men whose wounds will presently
heal and permit them 10 return. but
who cannot 20 back at that moment
This is a constant element and will re-
I