DEFENCE OF GAS

Hokitika Guardian, 28 July 1931, Page 7

DEFENCE OF GAS

HUMANITY IN AVAR. LONDON. JULY 17. “Chemical warfare is much misunderstood. Far from being tin most terrible. it is the most Immune.” declares a visiting chemist. Pro essor Charles Parsons, who is a member of the United States Advisory Hoard on Gas Warfare. “While 30 per cent, of the casualties at the close of the war resulted from gas, only two per cent died.” According to this authority, the talk of death-rays shattering cities in the next war is nonsense. He does imt believe that chemists anywhere are preparing new (Toms of poison-gas warfare. Professor Parsons is a trifle late with his defence of gas on humane grounds. Professor Haldane, of Cambridge, remarked some years ago: “Apart from the extreme terror and agitation produced by the gassing of uneducated people, I regard the type of wound produced by tin* average shell as. on the whole, more distressing than the pneumonia caused by chlorine or phosgene.'’ Resides being wounded, be bad been buried alive, and on several occasions in peace time asphyxiated to the point of unconsciousness. “The pain and discomfort arising from the other experiences,’' he said, “were utterly negligible compared with those produced by a good septic shellwound. . . . Mustard gas kills one man for every 40 it puts out of action ; shells kill one tor every three.”