Of what happened in Russian prison camps we have only rumours, and the usual individual statements. The old Russian régime was scarcely likely to be very efficient or very humane in its treatment of prisoners, but any one who has examined war stories will be very cautious of believing all that is told. What the “unofficial information and rumours” were may be sufficiently gathered by referring to the _Cambridge Magazine_ of August 26, 1916, Supplement “Prisoners.” It may be well to add this: in November, 1918, Erzberger, interviewed by Dr. Stollberg, of the _Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_, asserted that out of 250 thousand prisoners in Russia only 100 thousand remained alive. AN IMPORTANT COMPARISON. It will help to clarify our ideas of charges of ill-treatment to remind ourselves of the following. A British officer, Lieut. Gilliland, was put in charge of the British prisoners of war captured by the Bulgarians. Mr. MacVeagh brought forward in the House of Commons various charges made against this officer by repatriated prisoners. It was said that he distributed unfairly food and clothing consigned to Irish prisoners, and that he ordered the flogging of British prisoners by their Bulgarian captors for the most trivial breaches of discipline. Mr. Macpherson, for the War Office, said prisoners repatriated from Bulgaria had made allegations against Lieut. Gilliland which were entirely opposed to information received from independent sources, especially from the U.S. Legation in Sofia, who stated that the officer had done everything possible for our men. Further inquiry was promised (_Manchester Guardian_, November 8, 1917). The charges of the prisoners are in this case not considered as necessarily true or unbiased. Ought not similar caution to be observed against whomsoever the charges may be made? FOOTNOTES: [Footnote 2: It is fair to add that the International Red Cross in January, 1915, visited camps at Holyport, Dyffry, Dorchester, Southend, Portsmouth, and Queensferry. They did not visit the Isle of Man, where even then about 4,600 civilians were interned, and they were evidently, if somewhat innocently, hoping for the release of civilians (First Series, p. 25). The reports are quite satisfactory as far as they go, and the delegates considered that the prisoners, and especially the military prisoners (_surtout les militaires_), were treated well. The feeding is, however, criticised rather adversely in the case of Portsmouth (both military and civilian) and at Queensferry (civilian). (_La nourriture est elle bien ce qu’elle doit être_?) Removal from boats at Southend to _terra firma_ is recommended. The eternal soup, which seems to have been the lot of prisoners in all countries, must become fearfully wearisome. The preserved fish, etc., of later days may become even more trying.]