The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-04-27
War Gases.

The manner Of liherating deadly
fumes for the destruction of the en-
envy does not seem an essential OF the
question. A bottle hurled. spigot
turned when the wind Is favorable. a
bomb thrown by hand or by gunpow-
der: the practical result Is the same
and likewise the ethics OF the EN-.
ployment Of this forbidden weapon.
We have already shown the near
approach to unan!m!ty on the part
of the nations of the earth with re-
gard to the use in war OF asphyXiat!ng
or deleterious vapors. For the first
time here IL a convention OF the series
adopted at The Hague which has not
been nullified technically by the cir
cumstance that not every one Of the
belligerents has become party 10 the
compact by ratification or adhesion.
The declaration respecting asphyyiat.
ing gases was adopted NJ the First
Conference. In 1899. II is still in force
as binding engagement. And every
one OF the eleven beil,gerents IN this
war has ratified II except Great Brit
ain. which adhered in 1907 and thus
became equally party. The treaty
contract is therefore complete
The position Of the United States
concerning this declaration is unique.
When II was proposed at The Hague
that the Powers should agree to alb
stain from the Use Of projectlles tho
| object OF which Is the diffusion of
/ asphyxlating or deleterious gases
the only dissenting vote was that of
! the United States. Our representa-
tives did not sign the declaration.
Great Britain's signature was condi-
tonal on unanimity hut seven years
later, on the eve Of the Second Con
| ference. that Government adhered, \
| proceeding equivalent to ratification
and full acceptance
Why did the United States hold n
! self aloof from n declaratio so gen
orally accepted ny the other contract
Ing Powers and so nearly akin TO the
other stipulations for the mitigation
Of the inhumanities OF warfare which
our delegates fervently and cons az
emily supported Thcrc was no more
singular incident at the conference
no more perplcxing departure from
the course which might have been ex-
pected Of our fellow countrymcn.
The American delegates to The
Hague In 1899 were DR.. ANDREW -.
WHITE. then Amha ssndor 10 Cor.
many Or. SETH Low, then president
OF Columbia University: STANFORD
Newell. then Minister TO the Neither
lands; Captain ALFRED T. MAHAN,
afterward Rear Admiral: Captain
WILLIAM CRozIrR OF on Ordnance
, Department. aftcrward Brigadier-
General, and DR.. FREDERICK W
Hollis, who acted ms secretary and
counsel OF the American commission
The narrative in Or lIoTIs's "rcnco
Conference at The Hague" indicates
that the American commissioners were
Influenced by the views Of Captain
MAHAN on this subject. Az n mem
Der Of the naval subcommittee he
prepared memorandum Of his real
sons for opposing the provision. This
memorandum IL Of such great interest
at the present time that we reproduce
It in full!
II, No shell emitting such gases IL q.
yet In practical use or has undergone
adequate experiment; consequently, a
vote taken now would be taken In igno
rance Of the facts as to whether the re.
suits would be OF n decisive character
or whether injury in excess OF that
necessary to attain the end of warfare
OF Immediately disabling the enemy
would be inflicted,
q. Tho reproach of cruelty and per.