GERMAN LOSSES.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 1554, 23 May 1916, Page 4

GERMAN LOSSES.

A MILLION DEAD

EVIDENCE OF PRIVATE LISTS

In the February number of Land and Water. Mr Hilaire Belloc devotes a long article to the examination of Germany's losses in Hie present war. He points mil (hat, mi the authority of (he oflieial German lists, published up to Hu* end of January of (his year, Hu* total number of dead is given al (isl,7(iS. Adding to (his 100,000 “missing” the figure is brought up to S 10.000. But Hie real number, proceeds Hu* writer, is “very much more.” The German Government, after certain unavoidable delays, privately nolilies tin* family of a deceased soldier. For Hu* first few monlbs of the war, says Mr Belloc, these private lists “do not (litter very appreciably from the official lists. If you contrast (he results obtained Irma both forms of evidence, it is not till the beginning of the winter of 1914 that any very grave disparity between them clearly appears. It has, however, already appeared very sensible by the month of January, 1915, and if we fake some time about Hie middle'of January for our point of departure, we shall arrive a few months later at a very remarkable result. We shall see the course of the death-rale established by Hu* detailed private lists rising regularly .and uninterruptedly, while the course of the death-rale drawn from Hie general public and oflieial lists as regularly declines.' After seven mouths from January, 1915 —that is, by about the middle .of August,. .1915* —the difference between the total of deaths is obtainable from the average of (he private lists and that obtainable from the public lists (which alone have hitherto been quoted in Ibis country) is already well over 150,00(1.

“Here is another way of putting it ; Hu* official lists, although Hu* lighting is exceedingly seven* up to Hu* autumn of Hie year 1915, and particularly through Hu* summer of 1915, show upon Hu* whole a regu-

larly declining rale. The private lists show no such decline. If the selection of private lists were a small one this peculiarity might be due to the accident of some particularly heavily-t ried locality. But scores of such lists grouped in four great categories, anil covering great masses of the army drawn from all classes, from all occupations, and from all regions, cannot possibly suffer from such a cause of error. I have already said that the rate of increase, month by month, of the dead in these private lists was singularly even. How regular it is the following statement will show “Taking tin* deaths reached by the middle of January as one hundred. about fifteen on the average were added for the month of February ; twelve more; for March, twelve more for April, between fifteen and sixteen lor May (when (here was the first tremendous lighting in Galicia) ; rather more than sixteen for June (which was the month of (he long struggle on the San) ; and about the same amount for July. Not all the lists carry us as far as August. Those that do show, as might be. expected, no appreciable diminution for that month.”

Mr Belloc reaches the conclusion that hy 31st December, 1915, the Germans had lost, at least, a million dead. This, he says, “does not mean anything excessive, in comparison with the general losses in this war. It is a somewhat higher amount, in proportion than the losses of the Allies in the west —but then the Germans have been lighting on two and even three fronts. It is more than (hey themselves admit but only 1!) per (tent. more. It does not mean that a mobilised force of 9,000, 000 is exhausted in men (though nearly exhausted in reserves). There is nothing marvellous or abnormal, as this great campaign ','oes, that a force should lose by death .01 per cent, (or, say, one man in 153—for that is all it comes to) per month of the fighting. M hat would be remarkable, abnormal, and actually miraculous, would be the ridiculous figure of hull a million which was current a short time ago.”