GAS WARFARE

Taranaki Daily News, 21 September 1931, Page 11

GAS WARFARE

HUMANE METHOD. CHEMIST’S VIEW. Popular notions about death-rays and poison gas warfare of the future were dismissed by Professor Charles L. Parsons, secretary of the American Chemical Society and one of the most distinguished chemists in America, as exaggerated (says the London Daily Telegraph). Professor Parsons visited England for the jubilee conference of the Society of Chemical Industry. “Much that is talked about deathrays being used for shattering cities in the next war is perfect nonsense,” Professor Parsons declared. “A tremendous amount of sensational material is put put in reference to chemical warfare which has no real basis in fact. I do not believe that the chemists of the world anywhere—unless it is in Russia, and I doubt it very much—are making any special attempt to develop new forms of poison gas for the next war. “Chemists have not got their minds on warfare. There have not been since the w’ar any discoveries of _ great moment which would have a bearing on chemical warfare. The chemical warfare service in America is studying almost entirely methods of defence against known gases.” “Chemical warfare is very greatly misunderstood. Far from being the most terrible form of warfare, it is the most humane. It may sound, strange, but this is demonstrated by the facts; and in Germany, England, France and America the facts are essentially these: At the close of the war, while 30 per cent, of the casualties came from gas, yet gas was responsible for only 2 per cent, of the. deaths. “All the casualties recovered. You do not get your arms blown off, your eyes put out, and your lungs ruined by gas. There were no more tubercular cases from those gassed than from those not gassed; statistics show there were elightly fewer. “There is no more danger of wiping out cities by gas attacks than by high explosive attacks,” declared the professor. “Either might be possible if-done on a sufficiently enormous scale, but it ia almost inconceivable that big cities should be wiped out. “It is a much simpler matter to protect against gas than high explosives. If. you are supplied with gas masks you are comparatively safe. It would be a monumental task to supply, a city like London with masks, but It could be done. Gas in another war will be specially important in preventing operations by the opposing forces. You can spray all over an area of country with mustard gas, and nobody is going to cross that country for several weeks. The reason is that the gas evaporates very slowly. “The great of mustard gas, therefore, would he. to make certain areas untenable. It wiL compel troops to leave, but it will not kill many of them.”