Evening star., 1924-06-10

Regardless of whether Grindell
Matthews has made a great discov-
cry, he has set all Europe and great
part Of America talking about him
and his invisible death ray" which
would destroy whole armies and max e
warfare more diabolical than the in
ventors of poisonous gas ever
dreamed Of American editors who
are not skeptical as TO the powers
claimed for the ray see in it the
probable elimination of wars and the
establishment of world peace.
Those who hope for the future
peace of the world should regard the
frenzied bidding for the new death
ray, reported from Paris, as one Of
the most hopeful auguries of the mil
Iennium," in the opinion of the
Brooklyn Eagle, which says: II the
raw will do all claimed for it, war
fare has been rendered virtually i'm
possible. One government would
paralyze it's enemies and neutrals,
too. Two governments against eacn
other would promptly reach a posi-.
ton of stalemate. One hopes that
Great Britain. France and the United
States are bidding against each other
for the sole purpose of bringing an
end to war" Such an invention in
possession of one or two nations
would give them mastery or the
world" continues the New York Eve
ming World; thus, there IS possibility
that science may end war by giving
to some one nation. or group or ma
tions, the domination OF the world.
If two powers at war possessed IL,
the result might be mutual exter-
mination, according to the Duluth
Herald, which declares "if such in,
vention is made, civilization will
chain it down, because it must ;
therefore lit would be harbInger
of world peace" In fact, the Roch-
ester Times-Union claims, the glory
steadily fades from warfare with the
development of scientific slaughter,
and there is hope in that fact" The
Topeka Capital agrees science makes
war more deadly, but also finally
makes it impracticable.
The Portland oregon Journal sees
in the ray a medium of death never
before known, and it asks: Can we
go on perfecting weapons of destruc-
ton? Can we go on making rays
that kill and live? Is our purpose
to live or to die? If to live, why not
agree among nations to limit arma-
ments, navies, armies. airplanes. gases
and killing rays? Or shall we aban-
don peace and go on qualifying as
experts of destruction" The Spring
held News answers, 1T is high time
this universe began to think in terms
of peaceful pursuits and quit dis.
cussing how something new can be
devised to destroy the human race
In this case, the Miami News Ne
tropolis suggests there is so much
that sounds like pure imagination
m Of or,x
country entering upon bidding en-
terprise for the death ray"
Yet the Seattle Times points out
that "as fantastical as the idea may
seem this country cannot afford tc
possession of such an instrument by
2 militaristic nation might easily
mean disaster to the unprotected
The Grand Rapids Press, however
insists t'it is suggestive OF the pos.
rendering 1t too horrible to be con
sessiement.s s.asIsm n the only danger beina
that "a single predatory power NIGH
obtain and hide such . weapon until
it was ready to make catastrophe
use Of 1t, but the very consideration
of this possibility should have q
salutary effect in the direction oi
| world peace organization"
y X
In case the death ray" Is to be
taken seriously, the Dallas journal
asks. Should Grindell Matthews b
acclaimed as a world benefactor In
that he has perfected q device which
is SO deadly in it's operations as tt
make future wars unthinkable?" The
| Sioux City Journel mentions tha
the league of nations has demanded
that attention be given stipulation
| in the covenant covering the posses
l sion OF new means ana methods o
warfare, which must b OAde thu
common rfoparty Of ep~enmenA