The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1927-09-03
Continued From Page Five).

Apart from the millions of gas shells used by the
artillery, 763 gas operations lin addition to many
smoke) We're carried out by the Special (Gas) Com
panies of the Royal Engineers, 81 968 cylinders Of
gas were discharged, 196940 protector drums, and
177,40S Stokes mortar bombs were fired The Bril-
fish Offensive (Gas) Companies had 258 officers
and 5,832 men, and the Defensive Company 222
officers and 1920 men. The British troops had $780,
600 casualties from mustard gas alone and although
America came late into the war, her casualties
72.O56.
BRITAIN'S GAS POLICY.
What is Great Britain's post war policy with re-
gard to poison gas? The Hague Convention which
was signed by Britain and other countries before
the expressly prohibited the use of poison gases
in warfare The Allies appeared to have forgotten
this when the French attempted to use Turpinit.
But when the Germans successfully used chlorine,
the Allies suddenly remembered it, and loudly pro-
tested against this form of frightfuness and then
promptly proceeded to copy it.
With the collapse of the German army, in Noveu-
Der, 1918, the Allies obtained much more sweep
ing victory than they had hoped for and found them
selves in the position of dictators; with dsarmed
Germany and no other country in the world strong
enough to attack them. Some people thought this
a grand chance for disarmament, and most peo-
pie believed that poison gas warfare thing of
the past, and would remain like horrible night
mare, mere memory; now that the war TO end
war" has been won. The British government en-
couraged this view, and at the Versailles Confer
ence the use of poisonous gases was loudly de-
nounced. 1t was prohibited by Article III of
the Peace Treaty.
The Washington Conference on the Limitation of
Armaments met in 1921, and here again chemical
warfare (as it called when used by the Allies)
was rghteously denounced and the signatory powers
assented to the probtion of ''the use in war of
asphyxiatng, poisonous and other gases, and of
analogous liquids, materials or devices which had
been justly condemned throughout the civilized
world"
On February 9th, 1922 the Washington Treaty
duly signed by the High Contracting Parties
with great publicity in the press throughout the
world Article of this treaty reads:
THE use in war of asphyNiating poisonous or
other gases and all analogous liquids materials or
devices having been justly condemned by the gen
eral opinion of the civilized world and prohibition
OF such having been declared in the treaties to which
a majority of the civilized powers are parties The
signatory powers, to the end that this prohibition
shall be universally accepted part of interna-
uona law binding alike the conscience and practice
of nations, declare their assent to such prohibition
agree to be bound thereby as, between themselves
and invite all other civilized nations to adhere there
= to-"
At the League of Nations the question of the en-
ployment of poisonous gases in time of war was
first put to the Permanent Advisory Commission
by the British delegation in October 1920 The coun
ell also considered the problem at the same date and
expressed the opinion "that the League of Nations
could not authorize the employment of gases with
out being untrue to its pacifist and humanitarian
aims. In desire to minimize the havoc of future
wars, IT decided to propose to the various govern
ments, that they should consider the penalties to
be imposed any nation first infringing in this
way the universal rules of humanity, and to seek
with the help of the most competent scientists to
discover the means of effectively preventing the
manufacture of gases"
But side by side with this public policy for inter-
national conferences the British government has
private policy of "the development to its utmost ex
tent of chemical warfare for offensive and defen-
sive purposes" All the righteous talk condemning
chemacl warfare was only eyewash; in practice the
government was making elaborate preparations to
use chemical warfare all the time.
The speech of the war secretary (Mr. ChurchilD
IN introducing the army estimates in the house of
commons IN 1920, contained not the slightest refer
ence to chemical warfare This, however did not
mean that signing international treaties prohibiting
its use had any influence the governments chem
ical warfare activities. Shortly after the Washing
ton treaty had been signed Mr.. Morrison asked the
secretary of state for war; whether in view of the
signature of the agreement at Washington in which