Gas Warfare.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 19317, 23 May 1928, Page 8

Gas Warfare.

The explosion <s. a tank of phosgene gas in Hamburg, reported in this morning's cable news, is sure to start unpleasant questions in Allied countries, since phosgene is a gas which, under the Treaty of Versailles, Germany is forbidden to manufacture. Indeed, those familiar with the story of this terrible weapon in the Great War will realise that even the suspicion of its manufacture in large quantities in the Rhine chemical factories is good cause for alarm. It has now been established that as early as August, 1914, Professor Haber, who is mentioned in the cable, was directing extensive research operations into the possible military use of phosgene, the deadly properties of which were well known long before the Great War broke out. The work was very dangerous, and after Professor Sachur, one of Professor Habeas colleagues, had been killed by the accidental liberation of a quantity of gas, the experiments were confined to chlorine and chlorine compounds. It was chlorine that was used with such ghastly effect in the first German gas attack of April 22nd, 1915, but the Allies soon had their troops provided with a fairly simple and effective respirator, and the German chemists once more had to turn their attention to the more deadly phosgene. The enemy's first phosgene attack was launched on December 19th, 1915, but the Allies, having received informa-

tion from German prisoners, had issued a modified respirator which prevented a recurrence of the tragedy of the previous April. The French and the British later made extensive use of phosgene, though Britain produced it at great cost and under great difficulties, and always reluctantly. For in addition to the ordinary objections to poison gas, phosgene has a peculiar " delayed effect." Relatively small quantities when inhaled produce apparently no effect, . but death almost invariably follows some twentyfour hours later, or even more. The case of a German who was taken prisoner after one of the early British phosgene attacks, before much was known about the properties of the gas, is often quoted. He passed through the various Intelligence headquarters, giving evidence of the feeble effect of the British gas and his own complete recovery. Twenty-four hours after the last interrogation the gas took effect and he died. To the layman there is something inhuman and terrible aboutsuch a weapon and gas warfare is generally regarded as the most inhumane of all methods of warfare. But it is just as well to remember that there is something to be said on the other side. General Hartley, in a report to the British Association on the subject after the war, wrote: — "If we accept war as a possibility, the most humane weapon is that whicli leads to a decision with the smallest amount of human suffering and death. Judged from this standpoint, gas compares favourably with other _ weapons during the period when both sides were equipped for offence and defence. The death-rate among gas casualties was much lower than that among casualties from other causes, and not only was the death-rate lower, but a smaller proportion of the injured suffered any permanent disability. There is no com-parison-between the permanent damage caused by gas and the suffering caused to those who were maimed and blinded by shell and rifle fire. The real trouble about gas warfare is the virtual impossibility of limiting the potential capacity of nations to produce poison gases. Most implements of war are mechanically intricate, and the adaptation of plant to their manufacture is slow and costly. But any country possessing, as Germany does, a large and powerful chemical industry, can adapt it to the production of poison gases in a few weeks. It is true that Germany has agreed by the Treaty of Versailles not to manufacture these gases, but it is also true that long before the Great War all the important Powers had agreed to an article in The Hague Convention outlawing gas warfare in any form. We can only hope that international morality has improved in the meantime.