y taken part
in glorious and decisive battles. Or why not adopt a two-fold
policy--of supplying men to the Allies as rapidly as possible, for
immediate aid, carrying on preparations the while for an independent
American Army with all its own supplies, as the ultimate goal? Time, it
was urged, was of the utmost importance. And what object was served by
experimenting with new types of munitions, instead of adopting the
types of the Allies, which the American factories were already turning
out in profusion? And so on.

With such feelings did many of us on this side of the water, and a
large section apparently of American friends of the Allies on the
other side, watch the gradual unravelling of America's tangled skeins.
The _North American Review_ asked in December, 1917: "Are we losing
the war? No. But we are not winning it." In January, 1918, the editor
warned his readers: "The Allied forces are not in condition to
withstand the terrific onslaught which Germany is bound to make within
six months. America must win the war." In April the _New York Bankers'
Bulletin_ said: "We have not made progress as far as we might or
could," while months later, even in its September number (1918), the
_North American Review_ still talked of "our inexplicable military
sluggishness," and rang with appeals for greater energy. There was of
course an element of politics in all this; but up to March last year
it is clear that, in spite of many things not only magnificently
planned, but magnificently _done_, there was a great deal of sincere
anxiety and misgiving in both countries.

But with the outbreak of the German offensive in March, as we all
know, everything changed. American troops began to _rush_
over:--366,000 in round numbers, up to the end of March, and 440,000
more, up to the end of June, 70 per cent, of them carried in British
ships; a million by the end of July, nearly a million and a half
before the Armistice. Wonderful story! Nobody, I think, can possibly
exaggerate the heartening and cheering effect of it upon the Allies in
Europe, especially on France--wounded and devastated France--and on
Italy, painfully recovering from Caporetto. How well I remember the
thrill of those days in London, the rumours of the weekly landings of
troops--70,000--80,000 men--and the occasional sight of the lithe,
straight-limbed, American boys marching through our streets!

And yet, curiously enough--what _was_ exaggerated all the time, on
both