Evening star., 1927-03-19
BACKGROUND OF EVENTS
BY PAUL Y. COLLINS.

Once more the League of Nations
disapproves of the attitude OF the
United States. This time 1t is be-
cause this Government declines to
accept the idealistic plan for an in
ternational agreement not to use
chemicals in warfare.
The United States has studied the
statistics and the history of chemical
warfare fatalities in battle and
found that method of defense the
most humane, the lowest in per-
centage of deaths of the victims ana
the most effective in eliminating large
forces of the enemy. Besides, the de-
velopment of chemicals for defense
and attack In war cannot be segre-
gated from progress and research In
Industries. The same chemicals as
those used in battle are essential IN
industries, such as dyeing. or "esso
gasoline. There is no nation which,
in time of peace, could meet COM
mercial competition without keeping
i'm the vanguard in developing
chemistry. Yet the League of Ma
tions is disappointed at the response
of the United States, because 1T
opposes the proposal to make the
training for gas warfare criminal.
x X r v
A recent editorial in a leading
Japanese publication reviewed the
nosition of all countries regarding
chemical warfare, and 1t rateu
France as the most anxious nation
10 keen ahead of its neighbors In
gas development. Italy seriously
searching for new means OF using
gas, Germany and Russia more eager
in gas development than they are
willing the world should know ana
England in advance of all other
countries. except the United States.
Our own progress in research is in
advance of other nations, according
to the Japanese editor, not alone for
warfare. but mainly in Industrial
uses. a.,
So. as cabled from Paris, it is de
nrassine" TO learn that neither Soviet
Russia nor pacific United States Will
agree to abolish chemistry and that
the United States holds against an
international agreement TO prevent
training men in the use or poison
gas and bacteria, on the srounu
that such prevention is impracticable,
and the United States opposes ac-
cords between gas manufacturers as
a means of limiting the output OF
gas" a..
Off1cial statistics prove that So
called poison gas used in warfare Kills
from 2 to per cent OF the victims
n reaches. while other weapons actu-
allv bring death to from 25 to 43 per
cent of all casualties. In short, 1t
would be 10 to 20 times as humane 10
advocate the abolishment or explo-
sives of all kinds as to argue for the
suppression of gas.
In our Civil War (when gas was
unknown % per cent or the Union
wounded died of their wounds and 80
per cent of the Confederate wounded
succumbed.
In the Franco -Prussian War. of the
French wounded 80 per cent died and
of the Prussian wounded % per cent.
In the Russo-Japanese War the
Russian wounded lost 36.9 per cent |
in death and the Japanese lost 81 per
cent.
Then came the World War and gas.
In that war the French wounds from
explosives resulted in SO per cent OF
the struck being killed and of the
gas victims only 81 per cent. The
English wounded from explosives lost
36.6 per cent in death and of the gas
XlCIlDnS OHiy 90 PCA SOAS'
German wounded by explosives 43 per
cent died, while their gassed lost only
2.9 per cent in deaths.
In the World War the combined
armies Of Germany, England and the
United States had gassed victims to
the number of $50, 1886, OF whom 9,76S
died-2.9 per cent.
The same armies had, by other
weapons, 6.264. .507 casualties. OF which
2,552,931 resulted in death-4O7 per
cent.
Why is it that the deaths of 2.9 per
cent by the new methods of warfare
are SO much more terrorizing than the
4O.7 per cent by the old methods?
Is it not merely the scare due to the |
novelty?
X X X
The United States entered the war |
after the use Of gas and the means |
OF opposing 1t had become familiar. |
America was not taken by surprise, |
therefore; also the American Army |
took more hlgnane care Of Its wounded