January 27, 1916. 
LAND A N D WA T E R . 
Of the wounded about 60,000 had become 
unwonnded — time and space and the four rules of 
arithmetic had abdicated during this month of 
miracle ! 
In the same apocalyptic lour weeks 3,594 
of the Germans " dead from disease " had come 
to life again ! 
Lastly, 24,996 of the missing Germans had 
turned up again safe and sound without a scratch ! 
It is no wonder that after this second set of 
figures the calculating public was in despair. 
One military writer of high competence and 
deservedly influencing a great number of readers 
gravely remarked in a great London daily that 
" there was little more than 11,000 difference 
between the two total figures, surely far too low a 
figure for the average monthly loss." He said 
nothing of the resurrection of the dead, nor of the 
sudden and appalling mortality, he only wrote 
that one sarcastic sentence. For 11,000 German 
losses in a month is indeed too low ! It is at least 
i9/20ths too low ! 
Well, all this confusion and all this mis- 
understanding would have been saved and the 
public solidly informed upon the most fundamental 
element of all in our judgment of the war if, instead 
of two brief answers in Parliament, the Press 
Bureau had issued some such statement as 
follows : — 
" The official figures given by the German 
Government of losses in their casualty lists up to 
and including those of the ;^oth of November, but 
excluding the losses at sea, give a total of just over 
tivo and a half fnillions : 2,524,460. These lists 
do not include losses from disease (save deaths 
from disease) ; they do not refer, upon the average, 
to a later date than the early days of October and 
certain features in them also point to their incom- 
pleteness. For instance, the small proportion of 
ivoimded compared with the dead clearly indicates 
the omission of many light cases. Again, the 
figures set down for deaths from disease are mani- 
festly misleading. They can only refer to some 
particular category, such as deaths in the base 
hospitals, or deaths from a particular set of diseases. 
We knoiv that this is the case because the figures 
given are actually less than half the death rate from 
disease of men of military age in time of peace. 
The number of German prisoners in the hands of 
the various Allies further proves that the figures 
for the missing are insufficient, allowing as we must 
a considerable margin foi^ the missing who are not 
prisoners hut deserters or dead. The total losses 
of the German Empire alone up to the date in question, 
November ;^oth (and not the early days oj October 
to which at latest the official German figures refer) , 
are, upon every line of evidence, somew'hat over four 
million. Of these, however, close upon a million 
must have returned to service after recovery from 
wounds or sickness, and we may set the total loss 
of fighting men from the forces of the German Empire 
up to November ^oth at not less than 3I mJllion, 
more probably 2 2 or even over." 
Such a statement issued by the Press Bureau 
officially would at once have raised the value of 
official pronouncements — for every competent 
observer would have endorsed it — and would 
have been a most salutary piece of food for the 
public. It would have had an utterly different 
effect from the short, hurried and misleading state- 
ment made in Parliament just before Christmas. 
The Permanent Officials who gave those totals 
would have been particularly pleased to have told 
the whole truth and, necessary as a rigid censorship 
is in time of war, there was nothing here that 
could have benefited the enemy. 
Then when the time came for the second 
statement, made the other day, the Press Bureau 
might have issued something like this : — 
" Since the estimate issued last month upon 
German losses giving the official German totals 
and showing how false and misleading these were, 
the lists have been carefully revised in this country 
and the totals so arrived at are of even greater 
significance. • Thus we find that in the individual 
lists over 600,000 are- accounted for as dead ; the 
official German totals give barely more than 500,000. 
We further fi.nd that the- proportion of wounded to 
dead is still lower than that originally given ; there- 
fore even more certainly false. While the number 
appearing in the individual lists as "deaths from 
disease " is lower again : a point which conclusively 
proves that the enemy delays or suppresses portions 
of this item in the individual lists. The Press 
Bureau will issue from time to time statements 
contrasting German official totals with the results 
arrived at by our own analysis of his individual 
lists and will continue to show how these mislead 
neutral opinion by the belittling of the real German 
losses." 
Were our authorities to act in this fashion, 
apart from the moral effect which it would produce 
upon opinion, one of two other results would also 
certainly follow. Either the enemy would be 
driven to draw up really full up-to-date lists 
(inevitably thereby betraying himself to our 
advantage) or he would continue his old method. 
In this — as our permanent officials are well aware 
— a greater and a greater difference would appear 
between his statement and the obvious truth, and 
his official presentation of his case to neutrals would 
be more and more weakened. 
I can see no reason why a policy of this kind 
should not be adopted. As things are, those who 
know the truth talk and discuss among themselves 
in a tone quite different from that which the 
meagre public pronouncements would warrant. 
They leave the public ignorant of the evidence 
most in favour of the Allies, and they leave the 
field free for the dissemination of false suggestion 
and, on occasion, panic. 
So much for the principal example which I 
proposed to give. 
THE GERMAN LOSSES DURING 
THE GREAT OFFENSIVE. 
The second one though of less extent in 
application is perhaps no less significant. 
The great offensive delivered by the British 
at Loos and the French in Champagne three 
months ago produced a certain set of casualties 
in the German ranks which the French estimated 
at the time as equivalent to about six army corps 
at full strength, or say about 240,000 men. 
Since that date everyone in Europe who is 
observing and following the figures has been 
concerned to establish the real damage the 
Germans suffered. The Germans themselves 
issued an official communique in which they 
said that the main shock in the Champagne had 
been resisted by a single division ! They flooded 
the American press with a statement that the 
Allied losses were quite three times their own or 
more, their own being therefore presumably about 
50,000 men. (We may remark in passing that that 
is, to begin with, more than two divisions in losses 
