Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1916-03-27

in the German case, but we know, tnat
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. 1t
is reasonable to conclude then that the
familiar ratio of killed to total cas-
ualties, anywhere from one in four to
one in five. is holding good in this war.
But the other day a French Socialist
deputy was quoted as saying in Eng
land that the total French losses i'll
the first 10 months of the war had
been 5OO,0OO,-70O,000 killed, 100000
wounded. and 100000 captured. This
was instantly seized upon and used to
prove that the French were rapidly ap-
preaching exhaustion. The figures were,
Of course, preposterous. Quite possibly
the French actually suffered 100000
casualties in the first eighteen months,
this is the figure generally accepted,
but If they have we shall find that
the ratio of killed to wounded will be
about the same as the German; the
figure for the prisoners does meet the
probabilities.
But if the French casualties were
100000, then the German figure must
be far higher, for the French loss rep
resents a so per cent. loss on the high
est figure anyone has suggested for
French numbers. namely 100000. Now
the French have, on the whole, done
less steady fighting than the Germans.
who have been engaged either in the
West or the East or in both fields with
out interruption since the war began
until December last. II the French,
then, have lost so per cent. of their re-
sources in men, the Germans have lost
the same at least, and that would mean
around 100000, which is about what
has been estimated. Accepting the'us-
val ratio. this would mean: Killed, $685.
900; wounded. 1926, 900; captured, 45O,-
900.
The last German figures that we
have place the Prussian losses alone at
just less than 100000. Bavaria, Sax
ony, and Wurtemburg issue their own
lists and on the basis of population,
they would add around 100000 to the
total making 100000 in ALL. 900, 900
less than would be expected, on the
basis Of French losses. What is the
explanation of this disparity? The AL
lies believe that it is found in the all
legged custom of the Germans to include
in their casualties only those who are
permanently disabled; that it, they de-
clare that German reports show the
permanent wastage only. Colonel Rep
ington, the military correspondent of
the Times of London. fixes at 100000
the permanent German loss for the first
IS months.
This last figure is pretty close to the
German losses. as admitted in their Of
fetal statements or lists, of 100000.
Hilaire Belloc estimates for the same
period that the German permanent loss
has been 3,25OO0O to 3.750,O00 and as
serts that the French General Staff es-
Inmates place it above 100000 after
the most exhaustive examinations. Per-
sonally l believe that 100000 is con-
sentative estimate. This accepts Col.
Repington's 100000 and merely adds
300, 900 to cover what is known as ITEM
porary permanent loss" This rather
| complex thing is thus explained: At
any given moment there will be several
hundred thousand men, whose wounds
will presently heal and permit them
| to return, but who cannot go back at
| that moment. This is a constant ele-
ment and will remain so. Thus at the
end of the war; there will be these
thousands of men, with unhealed
wounds, who in few months would be
available.