506
T H E J O U R N A L O F I N D U S T R I A L A-VD E N G I N E E R I N G C H E M I S T R Y
Vol.
11,
No. 6
EDITORIALS FUTURE ARMS
At last the peace terms have been delivered t o Germany;. T h a t nation is now foaming, squirming, and writhing. At this writing you can interpret these symptoms according t o your own predilections. It’s a fifty-fifty guess as t o whether or not they will sign t h e terms. Press interviews with prominent Germans are extremely interesting. Prince Liclinowsky indulges in threats and says t h e treaty could only be signed “with the thought of beginning a new war soon.” So, too, a proclamation b y t h e government states, “Fresh hatred and killing would result from such a peace.” President Ebert inclines toward t h e humorous when he says “ I t [the German people] still has a cultural mission t o perform and ethical treasures t o bestow.” On t h e other hand, Ludendorff bluntly informs an American correspondent, “If these are the peace terms, then America can go t o hell!” There is something satisfactory about this genial remark of Ludendorff’s. I t gets us out of t h e atniosphere of propaganda, stage-play, and bluff, and makes the issue clear. If this sentiment had been predomin a n t during the first week of last November we would have been in Berlin b y this time with many matters permanently settled. On t h e other hand, if Lichnowsky and t h e government proclamation portray t h e true state of affaiys, then very serious consideration should be given t o t h e remarks of General Foch t o the Paris correspondent of t h e Lolzdon Daily M a i l , The Germans will have no arms for another attack, you say.
Ho! Ho! How do you know? By the time you found out t h a t they had got them it would be too late.
What will be t h e character of those arms? Not battleships, nor submarines, nor the usual army equipment characteristic of t h e first year of t h e war. T h e terms of t h e treaty guard these points with all severity and security Moreover, such means of war making are now obsolete. If Germany is t o have arms for a future war they will be developed in her chemical laboratories. The advance in chemical warfare will be so great as t o be comparable t o the difference between t h e fighting last October and t h a t of the- days before t h e invention of gunpowder. I n t h e published summary of t h e t r e a t y , Germany is forbidden t o manufacture poisonous gases, b u t evidently no curb is placed upon the chemical industries or t h e possibilities of research. The way is open. What are we t o do? Briefly, first, keep the Chemical Warfare Service intact and efficient, particularly in its research and development divisions. Second, create a new division in t h a t Service, a division of tactics and strategy of chemical warfare. Third, foster a highly diversified organic chemical industry, by means of import licenses, tariff, antidumping legislation, and a n y other means which may be suggested, so t h a t more and more of our young chemists may be attracted t o this field; so t h a t superintendents, foremen, and workmen may be trained in t h e
technique of this industry, insuring through t h e channels of peace industries a personnel which can rapidly be expanded if t h e days of “fresh hatred and killing” do result from this t r e a t y OS peace. General Foch says: Remember that those 70,000,000 Germans will always be a
menace t o us. * *’ * changed in four years. they are to-day.
*
Their natural characteristics have not Fifty years hence they will be what
He has been in pretty close touch with t h e Germans; he ought t o know.
.............,
After t h e above editorial was written the President of t h e United States addressed by cable t h e Congress now convened in extra session. T h a t portion of t h e address which is of intense interest t o chemists is t h e section urging prompt and complete guarding of the newly created industry of dyestuffs a n d related chemicals. The President clearly sees t h e full significance of this industry t o t h e national welfare, a n d his exposition of t h e subject is both comprehensive a n d emphatic: Nevertheless, there are parts of our tariff system which need prompt attention. The experiences of the war have made it plain t h a t in some cases too great reliance on foreign supply is dangerous, and t h a t in determining certain parts of our tariff policy domestic considerations must be borne in mind which are political as well as economic. Among the industries t o which special consideration should be given is that of the manufacture of dyestuffs and related chemicals. Our complete dependence upon German supplies before the war made the interruption of trade a cause of exceptional economic disturbance. The close relation between the manufacture of dyestuffs, on the one hand, and of explosives and poisonous gases on the other, moreover, has given the industry a n exceptional significance and value. Although the United States will gladly and unhesitatingly join in the program of international disarmament, i t will, nevertheless, be a policy of obvious prudence to make certain of the successful maintenance of many strong and well equipped chemical plants. German chemical industry, with which we will be brought into competition, was and may well be again a thoroughly knit monopoly, capable of exercising a competition of a peculiarly insidious and dangerous kind.
A NEW TRIPLE ALLIANCE
I n an editorial entitled “The Soldier, the Sailor, t h e Chemist,” in t h e March 1919 issue of THISJ O U R N A L , a closer union between our future generals and admirals and our chemists was urged, through t h e medium of lectures a t West Point and Annapolis b y prominent members of t h e AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY. T h e suggestion has met heartiest endorsement by t h e officials of t h e War and Navy Departments, as is shown b y t h e following extracts from letters received: I beg t o advise you t h a t in their report upon this matter the Professor of Chemistry and the Superintendent of the Military Academy are heartily in accord with this plan. * * * * I desire t o aswre you t h a t the Department is heartily in accord with D. BAKER,Secretary of War. this movement.-NEWTON I think the suggestion contained in your March editorial as t o lectures by eminent chemists a t the West Point Military AcadActing Secretary emy is a n excellent one.-BENEDICT CROWELL, of War. The suggestion is one t h a t I will be glad t o take under consideration; it strikes me most favorably.-JoSEPHuS DANIELS, Secretary of the Navy.
