BAN ON WAR GAS OPPOSED

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 56, 8 March 1922, Page 2

BAN ON WAR GAS OPPOSED

Opposition to the agreement at Wash? ington banning the mse of gas in war was expressed in interviews published in Paris in January by Daniel Berthelot, professor of the School of Pharmacy and a member of the Academy of Sciences and the Academy of Medicine, and Professor Beha! of the Sorboune, member of the Academy of Sciences and the Academy of Medicine. Professor, Berthelot declared that in his opinion the use of gas was no more barbarous than firearms. Each time a new weapon has been discovered, he states, it- has beerf opposed on the ground of sentimentality strangely out of keeping with the art of killing one's fellownum. This opposition was ■voioed at the introduction of firearms and a decree was even published that those fighting with this weapon would be hanged. "I am not far from the opinion of certain, Amerkan technicians, notably G«neral Fries, who believes gas has for noncombatants a smaller percental* of mortal and serious consequences than hfcvo firearms." lie said. At all events the prohibition is purely theoretical and not practical for enforcement, thus giving the advantage to the belligerents of bad faith. We already have seen that The Hague Convention which prohibited this weapon .served only to give our enemies an arm which, we lacked." ; Professor Behal expressed the opinion that wa.r itself, and not a single isolated manner of •warfare, should be prohibited. The control of the chemical industry of a country in order to prevent the prep/* 1 ration of gas for war he believ« H *■ impossible of realisation. .