GAS IN WARFARE

Manawatu Standard, Volume LX, Issue 135, 8 May 1940, Page 8

GAS IN WARFARE

CLAIMS AS A WEAPON. MENACE QUESTIONED. That poison gas was not so deadly a menace as H. G. Wells and others would have people believe was a contention- advanced by Dr. J. Melville in a lecture oh “Science and War,” given under the auspices of the Workers Educational Association in Palmerston North on Saturday night. | “Wells may bo a great sociologist, and | certainly is one of the world’s leading 'educators, but he is a poor chemist,” added the speaker. “Such gases as he describes in ‘The Shape of Things to I Come’ have never been made inside the walls of any laboratory, and the ,chances are about a hundred thousand to one that they ever will be.” Dr. Melville examined the various poisonous gases, beginning with the tear gas class, which, he said, was not dangerous although unpleasant. No fatalities had ever been reported from it. “Chlorine is very unsatisfactory from a military point of view. It is swept away by the slightest breath of wind. It is not highly poisonous and does not incapacitate a man, let alone kill him, unless it is present to tho amount of one part in 10,000 parts of air. For an area of one square mile, enormous quantities would have to be used. It only affects tlie lungs, and the simplest typo of respirator would keep it out. “In 1915, when the Germans found out the ineffectiveness of chlorine, they turned to a much more_ dangerous material, phosgene, which is effective in only one-tenth to the amount of chlorine. The Allies Intelligence Service had discovered their intention weeks before and had provided a more efficient gas mask. As a result when the Germans launched an attack with no less than 90 tons of phosgene, the Allied casualties were only about 1000, of whom 100 died. But phosgene is not the perfect gas and can be blown away by the slightest- breeze and loses its poisonous character when brought into contact wth water. “In the Great War the Germans made all the introductions of poison gas because the German chemical industry was pre-eminent then, but fortunately for the Allies this is no longer the case. The Germans then tried mustard gas. Now, this material is not a gas at all, but a liquid which like water evaporates very slowly at ordinary temperatures. If an area is well-sprinkled with mustard, it may remain dangerous for several days in summer and several weeks in winter. It lias been used in an artillery shell, which on bursting causes the mustard to disperse a fine mist over quite a large area. It is far more efficient than chlorine or phosgene, and yet the actual achievements with mustard gas were less than might be expected. USE BY GERMANS. “In three weeks the Germans puf over 2500 tons of gas in one million rounds of gas shells against British troops at Armentieres,” Dr. Melville proceeded. “The total casualties were only 15,000, resulting in 500 deaths, a very different conclusion from what might have been expected from the deadly nature of the -gas. The gasmasks and training in defence against gas had proved better than attack. The Allies used gas throughout the last three years of the war in everincreasing quantities, and doubtless the German High Command cursed the day oil which it first used gas, especiailv as the prevailing wind favoured the Allies about five times more frequently than it did the Germans. “The Germans followed this with ft substance to cause sneezing and vomiting, which would force the person attacked to take off his gas mask and expose himself to mustard gas or chlorine. The Allies meanwhile were getting supplies of the new substance. Adamsite. a compound of arsenic, which was liigldv efficient. This material, if heated, suddenly vaporised and lemained in the form of a smoke, and moreover, would penetrate the best German gas masks. Many military authorities think that the German High Command asked for an armistice early in November, 1918. because it knew a devastating attack of Adamsite was to be made. “These were the poisonous gases used in tho Great War. From them arose 1.200,000 casualties, and some 9000 died a percentage of 7.3 per cent. The total casualties of tho Great War were 28,000,000, of whom nearly 7,000,000 died ; of these, 6 per cent, were wounded by gas, and less than 2 per cent, of the total deaths were gas deaths. Of the men injured bv gas, one out of every 16 died, while of the men injured by bullets, bayonets and shells, one in every four died. FURTHER RESEARCH.

"In spite of 20 years’ research on poison gases since the Great War it is very doubtful whether the number of effective war gases has significantly increased. Out of the hundreds of thousands of chemical compounds known in 1918, only 38 actually reached the stage of use in the field as poison gases. Probably not more than 10 repaid the time and trouble spent on them. The rest were failures. Research is most unlikely to produce the supergas. Research against gas has been very successful. "As regards gas attacks on civilian population, it is sheer nonsense to say that a dozen gas tombs could poison a metropolis. To saturate a large city with mustard gas, more than 1000 tons would to required and 2000 bombing machines. Liquid poison gas could only to sprayed by aeroplanes at a height of not more than 200 feet above the city. “Just as it is unlikely that any new gas with startling properties will appear, so for the same reason it is unlikely that any new and more powerful explosive will be used on either side,” Dr. Melville concluded. "Improvements in range-finding instruments have occurred, and in gun construction tougher and niore resistant steel has been used, as well as in all metallic instruments of war. The magnetic mine was a surprise sprung by the Germans in this war, but defence against it rapidly followed by demagnetising the whole ship by means of conductors placed outside the hull." In the discussion which followed Dr. Melville made it clear that a scientist is a worker in the community like any other worker, and has to supply the demands of that community. “I regard science,” he said, "not only as a constantly-growing body of knowledge, but as the effects which are produced when that knowledge is applied to the control of our environment. War is the complete frustration of science.”