Greenbrier independent. [volume] (Lewisburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1980, 1919-02-28
British Empire.

British Empire.
In his last report for 1915 Secre-
tary Baker draws an interesting COM
parison between the development Of
the British and American expedi-
tionary forces. which contains hither-
to unknown facts in regard to the
former:
The British forces In France climb
ed to one million men in the Fall of
1915. and to high figure Of slightly
more than two million troops in the
Summer of 1917. three years after
England entered the war. In nine
teen months after the United States
entered the war we were represented
overseas by an army Of two million
mn. TIL growth of the American
force was twice as rapid as that of
the British force. 1t must be borne
In mind that the British, practically
from the beginning, used large num-
bers of men to fill gaps left by casu-
altfes, while the American forces
could for many months apply practi-
cally every man to building up the
force.
Prior to the war the land forces
of the United Kingdom, which were
| first affected. consisted Of the Regu-
lar Army of 10000 men and the
Territorial Army, organized prilnar-
| lily for home defense. At the battles
of Mons and the Marine the expedi-
tionary force was of about 10000;
It's losses were filled by special re-
serve. During 1915 Lord Derby. Di-
| rector General OF Recruiting, manag-
ed to maintain the volunteer system
| and registered 2,829,263 men be-
tween the ages of Is and 40, which
| brought the total enrolment up to
| 100000, OF which only about L.
100000 remained effective. The
new Military Service act, which came
into force on February 10, 1916, add
ed $4,000 men to the army during
that and the following year, and
then, in January, 1918, it became
necessary to withdraw nearly $780,
600 men under "a years of age from
essential industries and send them
into the army on account of the ex-
German offensive which actually be-
gan March 21st.
- wac III CAPAohdlSOu VI lue lTdIlS-
fer Of 100000 from industry that Sir
Auckland Geddes, Minister Of Nation
al Service, made an important state
ment in the House of Commons on
January 10, 1918, In regard to the
man power Of the Empire. He said
that the British Army was then over
100000 strong on all fronts where
it was engaged. The empire as a
whole had raised over 100000.
England alone had contributed A.
100000. or 60 per cent; Scotland,
$40, or per cent; Wales, 100000,
or 81 per cent. Ireland, 10000, or
2.3 per cent. and the dominions,
100000, or IL per cent.--significant
figures OF which all, except the Irish,
may be proud.
In 1918 the United Kingdom by a
new class OF recruits and the diver
sion Of man power from industries
to the war had managed to raise the
total registration from 5,570,00O TO
a few hundred over 100000 when
the armistice was signed. To this
may be added the total registration
In the British possessions, which fur
! nished, tn round numbers, from the
beginning Of the war, 2, 900, 700 men
Thesn. however, include the nur.er-
Gus camp followers of the native In
dian Army and the native troops In
Africa. concerning which little sta.
tistical information has so far been
published.
Canada, with a contribution OF
nearly 100000 mon, 100000 OF
whom went overseas, lost a total OF
220,1s2 with a mortality total of 6O,-
383.
Australia, with her volunteer sys.
tenn. out Of q population Of 100000
sent abroad $4,000, which suffered a
total loss OF 290,1S1, including 54,.
431 dead, $4,000 wounded, and g..
401 prisoners.
At the outbreak Of war the
strength of the army in India was
British, 1888; Indian, 239,561. The
number of Indian ranks recruited
during the war up to September 80,
1918. was 1,161,7S9, of which 49,.
747 were combatants and tho rest
non -combatan6. The number of Of.