The majority of the refugees feel the way this man does. I do not refer to the refugees who left their homes voluntarily through fear of the advancing Germans, but to that greater number who were forced to leave by the compulsion of their own Government, which deliberately destroyed their homes as a military measure. Every Russian, even the military officers who were responsible for this policy of destruction, now realize that the adoption of that policy was one of the greatest mistakes Russia has made during the war. For it has cost her the support of a large and important body of Letts, Poles, Jews, and Lithuanians. The theory was that to leave large masses of civilians behind the forward-pushing German lines would provide Germany with a large number of spies, as well as with sustenance for its armies. To some extent, too, it was believed that buildings left standing in the Russian retreat might serve as protection and cover for German artillery. So everything was destroyed--farm-houses, barns, churches, schools, orchards, even haystacks. Whenever the Russian lines retracted before the unbearable pounding of the terrible German guns, they left only a desert for the Kaiser's men to cross. [Sidenote: Loss too great to be compensated by gain.] War is not a parlor game. A great deal of destruction is inevitable in the nature of war, and sometimes in wars of the past commanders have deliberately laid waste large sections of beautiful country to handicap the enemy, and the results have justified this destruction. A ten per cent social and economic loss is gladly borne by a nation at war for a ninety per cent military gain. Perhaps a commander is even justified in inflicting a forty-nine per cent social and economic loss on his country for a fifty-one per cent military gain. But the deliberate ravaging of Poland and the Baltic provinces was a ninety per cent social and economic loss for a ten per cent military gain--something that is never justifiable. [Sidenote: Relief should meet refugees.]