THE SOUTH AFRICAN CASUALTIES.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XXXXI, Issue 7053, 24 October 1900, Page 4

THE SOUTH AFRICAN CASUALTIES.

An actuarial correspondent of the Times has lately contributed to that paper an account of the casualties during the war, and also a comparison between those casualties and, first, those in the American Civil War, secondly, those in the Great War, 1793-1815, and, thirdly, in the FrancoPrussian War. It will doubtless be interesting to the colony to know the amount of risk its soldiers run, and in view of the setting up an Imperial reserve it 'may encourage prospective recruits if they are informed how the risks of the future may affect their life insurance. In reßpeot to the latter, it will doubtless but add to the martial ardour which no danger can deter to know that in respect to officers' risks, supposing the danger to be equal to that in South Africa, where the officers' | death rate was 102.7 per 1000, the usual premium of from five to seven per cent, was quite inadequate, ten per cent, would barely cover the risk without any allowance for company's expenses and profits, and twelve 'guineas is considered a fairly reasonable chargej; which is rough on the family of the warrior. In respect to the non-commissioned officers and men, on the contrary, it was found that the extra premium of five guineas per cent, the estimate of actuaries at the beginning of the year, was correct. Companies are likely to accept South African figures as the measure of the risk run by an officer in a great modern war. In the South African war, of officers, whilst the normal British death rate was 12.5 per 1000, there died of disease 30.6 per 1000, and there were killed 72.1 per 1000". Compare this with the Franco-German officers' death rato in the Franco-Ger-man war, and it will be seen that our little colony faced a great Power danger. In the Franco-German war 8-9. per 1000 officers died of disease and 65.5 per 1000 were killed. These deaths are calculated on the average of a full year, to enable the South African casualties to be compared with tSie other returns. If the South African casualties had been divided into two half years, then the returns would have shown a far larger per centage killed in the first half and a very much larger percentage of deaths from disease in the latter half-year. Of Tommy A., whilst the normal British death rate is 15 per 1,000 ; of Mr Atkins whilst the band was playing in South Africa there ditd of disease 31.8 per one thousand and there were killed but 19 per 1000. There are some aspects of this return, which are sufficiently apparent without particularisation, which are creditable to those who lead. Now, in the Franco-Prussian wt>r we shall find a far smaller per centage of officers in comparison with the men who died of disease than in the returns jnst given. Of the Franco-German equivalent of Tommy, there died of disease 14 2 per 1000 (officers B*9), and there were killed 309 per 1000. It may be presumed that latterly Tommy extended himself in open order whilst his Franco-German namesake marched to death like the kilted Tommy did at Majersfontein. Further returns seem to show that tbo longer a war lasts the lower i 3 the mortality rate from wounds and the higher from disease, which Appears quite natural. Whilst the normal British death rate of officers and men is stated at 15 per 1000, in South there died of disease 31-7, and ihei'e were killed 20*5 per 1000. Of all ranks in the Franco-Prussian war there died of disease 12-5 per 1000, and there were killed 31*8 per 1000 ; in the American Civil War 51*4 died of disease per 1000 and 14-2 were killed ; in the Great War 49-6 per 1000 died of disease and but 66 per 1000 were killed. In a long war a battle is not an every day affair, and the old leisurely way of campaigning has given place to high pressure operations. We say nothing about improvements in weapons, for we believe that ruder men with ruder weapons wrought greater slaughter. Whilst we have written in a pleasant tone about these enormous losses, it must not be supposed that we are either heartless cr blind to the weight of the burden we have assumed, and which it would appear that our representatives have shouldered with the lightness of a troubadour :— The clink of arms is good to bear, The flap of pennons good to see ! Ho ! is there any will ride with me, Sir Guy Ie bon dcs larrieres.

We shall await with interest the reception of the colonial returns, and hope to compare them with the above, with favor to the former. But it should not be forgotten that in a sparsely settled country, struggling to reclaim and populate the wilderness, figures speak poorly of the loss and deprivation, individual and collective, which fall on the people, when compared with

older and richer countries with congested populations. We think it would have been wiser to have left the adoption of extensive military measures until we know the cost in blood and treasure of what we have already done, and, in saying so, we have by no means lost sight of the necessity for increased and improved defence.