MAD BOMBARDMENTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 16169, 4 March 1916, Page 2 (Supplement)

MAD BOMBARDMENTS.

GERMANS' WASTE OF SHELLS. COSTLY LUXURIES. IN " STRAFING." Never before in the history of. the world has there been such a complete line of fortifications as is now drawn across Europe, yet never before have civilians miles behind the trenches run so much risk of being killed as in this war, writes Mr. Warner Allen, the representative of the British press with the French armies. Even apart from' aeroplanes and Zeppelins there are many places 20 miles behind the lines which have undergone bombardment. It will be remembered that when Dunkirk was first bombarded, the surprised inhabitants attributed it to the German fleet, which was supposed to be firing 'on the town from some invisible point in the North Sea. It was not long, however, before it was discovered that the enemy had indulged in the luxury of bringing up a 15-inch naval gun to the lines. Bombardment by 15-inch shells is a most uncomfortable experience. The writer heard them at one of the above-mentioned towns. The noise that they made as they came tearing through the air from 20 miles away, like a runaway express train, was distinctly trying to the nerves. The gun on this occasion was .fired at its very extreme range, and it was believed that it had not the slightest chance of firing with an effect unless it had the wind behind its projectiles. - . Shells Which do no Damage. Next fiy, when it came to taking stock of the damage caused by these unwieldly shells, the impressive' .character of the bombardment was entirely spoilt. It was amazing, even in a town, how much waste ground there is where shells can burst without doing a halfpennyworth of damage or destroy even a cat. - Tho big naval gun, when it puts in an appearance, is promptly spotted by the' French gunners, and rarely stays long in its emplacement. Its main drawback from the German point of view is Undoubtedly its great expense. If its shell caused five pounds' worth of panic for every hundred pounds they cost, the enemy might have some reason in his mad bombardments, but as a matter of ■ fact the damage they have caused so far, both moral and material, is practically negligible, and thousands of pounds have been wasted without appreciable return. £60,000 to Destroy Viaduct. One thing the present was ha& shown us —it costs infinitely more to destroy a village or a town by high, explosive shells than it costs to build it. Perhaps the finest instance of this is Souchez. Souchez is, as an artillery officer expressed it, " beautifully" destroyed! There is not one stone left standing on, another; there is not even a whole stone or brick. Everything has been ground to powder, and no man can say that here was a road or here a house, for over everything there lies the same shapeless pile of shattered debris. Never in the history of- war has any village received so many shells at Souchez, and their cost would certainly suffice to build' up that village again mfy or a hundred times over. There exists a attain viaduct which was' blown up at the banning of the war and then repaired by the French at a cost of about £14,000. The Germans disliked that viaduct, and brought up a .420 (17-inch) howitzer,, with a battery or so of .220 (9-inch) howitzers, to batter it to pieces, They succeeded. It took between 50 and 60 .420 shells, and nobody troubled to count the number of .220 shells. But from the calculations that were made there can be .'ittle doubt that that particular piece of destruction cost the Germans over £80,000.