CHAPTER III
THE ALLIED REACTION
Loos, September, 1915, to Ypres, July, 1917.
The Need of Retaliation.—The conclusive sign of the Allied reaction to the German poison gas attack appeared at the battle of Loos. "Owing to the repeated use by the enemy of asphyxiating gas in their attacks on our positions," says Field-Marshal French in his despatch of October 15, 1915, "I have been compelled to resort to similar methods, and a detachment was organised for this purpose, which took part in the operations commencing on the 25th September for the first time." Five months thus elapsed before retaliation. From a military point of view their can be no doubt as to the wisdom, in fact the absolute necessity, of using gas in order to reply to the many German attacks of this nature. The question of morale was bound up in this retaliation. Had the Germans continued their chemical attacks in variety and extent as they did, and had it been realised that for some reason or other we were not able to retaliate in kind, none but the gravest consequences could have resulted with regard to morale. It must be remembered that the earlier use of cloud and shell gas by the Germans was of local incidence, when compared with its tremendous use along the whole of the front in the later stages of the war.
First Signs.—Our preparatory period was one of feverish, if somewhat unco-ordinated, activity. The production of a protective appliance, the gas mask, was vital. This development will be considered later. Allied chemical warfare organisations arose, to become an important factor in the later stages of the war. The history of Allied gas organisation is one of the gradual recognition that chemical warfare represented a new weapon with new possibilities, new specific uses, and new requirements from the rear. Its beginnings are seen in the English and French Scientific Advisory Committees appointed to examine the new German method. One could always trace an element of reluctance, however, in Allied development, signs that each move was forced upon us by some new German surprise. We find the other extreme, the logical outcome of war experience, in the completely independent Chemical Warfare Service now actually adopted in the United States of America. This is dealt with in a separate chapter.
The decision to retaliate once made, our difficulties commenced. We required gas, weapons, and methods for its use, trained personnel, and the association of certain scientific with military standards without losing the field efficiency of the latter. The German staff found this in their co-operation with eminent scientists, notably Professor Haber. Without drawing invidious distinctions between pre-war military and public appreciation of chemical science in England and Germany, it would be merely untrue to state that the Germans were not in a position of advantage in this respect. However, chemical mobilisation and co-operation proceeded sufficiently rapidly to provide us with personnel and material for the Loos attack.
The assembly and organisation of personnel occurred in three directions. In the first place the Royal Society had already begun to mobilise prominent scientists for other war purposes. In the second place, different formations in the field, realising the need for specialist treatment of the gas question, after the first German attack, created staff appointments for certain chemists chosen from infantry regiments and other formations on the front. Thirdly, men were collected at a depot in France to form the nucleus of the offensive gas troops. For this purpose chemists were specially enrolled and chosen men from infantry and other front line units were added. Early gas attacks and gas organisation did not appear to justify the immobilisation of so much chemical talent in the offensive gas troops, when chemists were needed all over England for munition production so vital to war. But later events justified the mobilisation and military training of these specialists. The expansion of the advisory and offensive organisations at the front necessitated a large number of officers, whose chemical training was of great value. It is difficult to see where they would have been found had they not been mobilised with the Special Companies. Moreover, their offensive and battle experience gained with the latter was of great value. Six or seven weeks' training witnessed the conversion of a few hundred men of the above type into one or two so called Special Companies. The spirit and work of these men in the Loos attack cannot be spoken of too highly.
The Loos Attack, September, 1915.—The Field-Marshal bears testimony to its success as follows: "Although the enemy was known to have been prepared for such reprisals, our gas attack met with marked success, and produced a demoralising effect in some of the opposing units, of which ample evidence was forthcoming in the captured trenches. The men who undertook this work carried out their unfamiliar duties during a heavy bombardment with conspicuous gallantry and coolness; and I feel confident in their ability to more than hold their own should the enemy again resort to this method of warfare."
There is evidence, however, that this early attack, inefficient as it appeared to be to participants, met with considerable success. Schwarte's book tells us: "The English succeeded in releasing gas clouds on a large scale. Their success on this occasion was due to the fact that they took us by surprise. Our troops refused to believe in the danger and were not sufficiently adept in the use of defensive measures as prescribed by G.H.Q."
On the occasion of a cloud attack a few weeks later, at the storming of the Hohenzollern redoubt, Sergeant-Major Dawson, in charge of a sector of gas emplacements in the front line trench, won the Victoria Cross. The German reply to our bombardment was very severe and under stress of it a battery of our cylinders, either through a direct hit or faulty connections, began to pour gas into our own trenches. In order to prevent panic and casualties among our own troops at this critical time, a few minutes before zero, the moment of assault, Sergeant-Major Dawson climbed on to the parapet under a hail of shell, rifle, and machine-gun fire, and, hauling up the cylinders in question, carried them to a safe distance into the poisoned atmosphere of No Man's Land and ensured their complete discharge by boring them with a rifle bullet. In addition to the Hohenzollern attack cloud gas was used in December, 1915, in the region of Givenchy.
The Somme Battle, 1916.—My impression as an eyewitness and participator, however, was that the real British gas offensive began after, and as a result of, the Loos experience. Material, organisation, and numbers of personnel, both at the front and at home, co-operation with staffs and tactical conceptions all improved vastly in time to contribute largely to the efficiency of preparations for the Somme offensive in July, 1916. During the early months of 1916, a Special Brigade was created by expanding the four Special Companies, and the 4-inch Stokes mortar was adopted, training being vigorously pursued. As many as 110 cloud gas discharges, mainly of a phosgene mixture, occurred during the Somme battle, and evidence of their success is seen in German reports. These successes were due not only to the magnitude of our operations, but to the carefully developed cloud attack tactics which aimed at obtaining maximum results from the gas employed. The factor of surprise governed all other considerations. Attacks occurred at night and depended for success upon the concentration of the maximum amount of gas in the given sector for a short, sharp discharge under the best wind conditions. There is abundant evidence of our success in these attacks. Probably the most marked feature of the captured documents or of prisoners' statements during the later stages of the Somme battle was the continual reference to the deadly effect of British cloud gas. The captured letter of a German soldier writing home stated: "Since the beginning of July an unparalleled slaughter has been going on. Not a day passes but the English let off their gas waves at one place or another. I will give you only one instance of this gas; men 7 and 8 kilometres behind the front line became unconscious from the tail of the gas cloud, and its effects are felt 12 kilometres behind the front. It is deadly stuff."
The accuracy of this reference to the long range effect of our gas clouds is borne out in a number of other statements. For example, we learnt from a prisoner examined by the French: "The men were thrown into disorder and raised their masks because they were suffocated. Many fell in running to the rear; a number did not become ill until the next day. Vegetation was burnt up to a depth of 8 kilometres." Again, prisoners taken at Maurepas stated that one of the English gas attacks was effective 10 kilometres back.
There are also marked references to the surprise nature of our gas attacks, which are an unconscious tribute to the successful tactical developments which have already been referred to, and also numerous other references to the "delayed" action of phosgene. The prisoner mentioned above, taken at Maurepas, gave testimony that some were only taken ill after several days, and one died suddenly two days after, whilst writing a letter. One prisoner, pointing to Les Ayettes on the map, stated that about the beginning of September when gas came over suddenly in the late evening, they thought it was from artillery fire because it was so sudden. No one was expecting gas and very few were carrying their masks. Another one stated: "The attack was a surprise and the cloud came over and passed fairly quickly. The whole thing did not occupy more than ten minutes." More than thirty per cent. of the battalion was put out of action.
Finally, to show what a serious imposition this constant cloud gas attack was upon the German Army, we will quote from the Special Correspondent of the Vossiches Zeitung. He said: "I devote a special chapter to this plague of our Somme warriors. It is not only when systematic gas attacks are made that they have to struggle with this devilish and intangible foe." He refers to the use of gas shell, and says: "This invisible and perilous spectre of the air threatens and lies in wait on all roads leading to the front."
In a despatch dated December 23rd, 1916, from Field-Marshal Sir Douglas Haig, G.C.B., the situation is ably summarised: "The employment by the enemy of gas and of liquid flame as weapons of offence compelled us not only to discover ways to protect our troops from their effects but also to devise means to make use of the same instruments of destruction. Great fertility of invention has been shown, and very great credit is due to the special personnel employed for the rapidity and success with which these new arms have been developed and perfected, and for the very great devotion to duty they have displayed in a difficult and dangerous service. The army owes its thanks to the chemists, physiologists, and physicists of the highest rank who devoted their energies to enable us to surpass the enemy in the use of a means of warfare which took the civilised world by surprise. Our own experience of the numerous experiments and trials necessary before gas and flame could be used, of the preparations which had to be made for their manufacture, and of the special training required for the personnel employed, shows that the employment of such methods by the Germans was not the result of a desperate decision, but had been prepared for deliberately.
"Since we have been compelled, in self-defence, to use similar methods, it is satisfactory to be able to record, on the evidence of prisoners, of documents captured, and of our own observation, that the enemy has suffered heavy casualties from our gas attacks, while the means of protection adopted by us have proved thoroughly effective."
One of the causes which leads to a lack of understanding of the chemical weapon is the fact that the results of chemical attack are not, like those of a huge assault, obvious to the mere visual observer. A period of months often elapsed during the war before the immediate effect of a gas attack was known. It was inspiring to witness the assault of the 18th Division near Montauban on July 1st, 1916. But few realised the part played by the preparatory gas attacks in that and other sectors of the line, in weakening the numerical strength and battle morale of effective reserves. It is, therefore, of great interest to follow up a particular case and to obtain a connected idea of the series of events associated with some particular attack.
The early stages of the Somme battle were characterised by a number of cloud gas attacks which served the double purpose of a feint, and reducing the strength of available reserves. These attacks occurred chiefly along the part of the line north of the Somme battle zone, and they extended as far as the sea. One of them occurred on the 30th August, 1916, at Monchy, between Arras and Bapaume. About one thousand cylinders were discharged during the night. The usual careful organisation preceded the attack and it is quite likely that it shared the advantage of surprise common to a large number of these attacks. Three German regiments were holding the line directly in front of the British sector concerned. Before December, 1916, the following reliable information was collected from prisoners and confirmed by cross-examination. One Company of the 23rd regiment, was in training and had no gas masks with it. The gas came along quickly and about half the Company were killed. After that there were more stringent rules about carrying masks. They had no recollection of a gas alarm being sounded. Another man said that in his Company no special drill or training was being done, and a large number of men were put out of action through not being able to adjust their respirators in time. There was no warning, although after this gas alarms were given by ringing church bells. Other prisoners, from the 63rd, regiment, had such vivid recollections of the attack that they said: "The effects of the English gas are said to be appalling." Collecting information from prisoners belonging to this or that Company, and carefully checking by cross-examination, it is clear that this attack must have been responsible for many hundreds of casualties.
Reasons for British Cloud Gas Success.—The fact that the British persisted with cloud gas attack and attained so much more success than the Germans, after the first surprise, was due to a curious combination of causes, quite apart from the prevailing favourable wind.
Our Casualties.—In the first place, we knew from bitter experience the deadly effect of a successfully operated cloud gas attack. We knew, for example, that in the first attack at Ypres there were more than 5000 dead with many more times that number of casualties. On the other hand, the Germans, left to speculate on our casualties, retained the conviction, from apparent non-success, that cloud gas was not a suitable form of preparation behind which to develop big infantry attacks. Quoting from Schwarte: "Large gains of ground could hardly be attained by means of an attack which followed the use of gas clouds, therefore such clouds were soon merely employed as a means of injuring the enemy, and were not followed up by an attack." This represented German policy, and it lacked vision. They did not realise that their difficulty was the method of forming the cloud, and that if a more mobile and long range method of cloud formation materialised, with correspondingly less dependence on wind direction, the object which they once sought and failed to attain would again be within their reach.
Exhausting Preparations for Cloud Attack.—The second reason accounting for the relatively early cessation of German cloud attacks is one constantly referred to in the German war memoirs. It was the enormous mechanical and muscular effort required in preparing for such an attack. Few people realise what hours of agonised effort were involved in preparing and executing a cloud gas attack. The cylinders had to be in position in specially chosen emplacements in the front line within certain time limits. The "carrying in" could not be spread over an indefinite period and usually took from two to six nights, according to the magnitude of the attack and the local difficulties. Naturally, all the work occurred in the dark. Picture the amount of organisation and labour required to install 2000 cylinders on, say, a two mile front. These cylinders would have to be assembled at a number of points in the rear of the given line where the roads met the communication trenches. No horse or lorry transport could assemble at such points before dark, nor be left standing there after dawn. To carry this number of cylinders more than fifty lorries would be required or, say, perhaps, go G.S. wagons. All the points of assembly would be under possible enemy shell fire. These points would be normally in use for the unloading of rations and trench engineering materials, etc., with which cylinder transport would have to be co-ordinated. Once arrived at the unloading points, parties had to be provided for unloading the lorries and for conveying the cylinders up to the front line trench. In a normally difficult trench system, for a carry of a mile to a mile and a half of communication trench, at least four men per cylinder are required to give the necessary margin for casualties and reliefs, etc. This implies the organisation of more than 8000 officers and men for the installation, with a fundamental condition that only small groups of these men be assembled at any one point at any given time. The installation of gas for an attack on this scale would have been a matter of vast and complicated organisation if there were no other activities in the trench system, and no enemy to harass the work. But to co-ordinate such an enterprise with the busy night life of the trench system and to leave the enemy unaware of your activities was a task which tried the patience, not only of the Special Companies, who organised, guided, and controlled these operations, but much more so of the Infantry Brigades and Divisions whose dispositions were interfered with, and who had to provide the men for the work.
Add to this even more acute difficulties. The front line trench is nothing but a series of traverses, thus to avoid the enfilade effect of shell and machine-gun fire. A straight trench is a death-trap. But to carry hundreds of pole-slung cylinders, already weighing as lead, round traverses on a dark night, is a feat requiring superhuman endurance. Therefore many "carries" finished with a hundred yards "over the top" through the parados wire, to the near locality of the appropriate emplacement in the front line. This last carry was critical; a false step, the clatter of falling metal, meant drawing the fire of some curious and alert German machine gunner. The sudden turning of darkness into day by enemy Very lights imposed instantaneous immobility. Yet all the time tired men were straining at their heavy burden and any moment a cylinder might be pierced by intentional or unaimed rifle fire.
But the spirit of the infantry in this work, as in all they undertook, is to their everlasting credit. These tasks were an enemy challenge and they accepted it successfully, albeit with much cursing. The work was indeed beyond description and the country, colonial, and London troops expressed their opinion equally emphatically in their own peculiar way. Think again of the need of systematic wind observation along the whole front of attack, the disorganisation and "gas alert" conditions imposed on the favourable night, the possibility of postponement, and we can only draw one conclusion. There must have been some imperative need or justification of cloud gas attack for the army to have encouraged or even tolerated its continuance. There is no difficulty in understanding why gas attack was so exceedingly unpopular among the staffs in the early stages of the war. Later, however, when they realised the enemy casualties that were being created by the gas, and what a large part it was taking in the war of attrition, the opposition and lack of appreciation vanished. Further, when the projector arrived to produce similar effects with less demand upon infantry personnel, and less dependence on the wind, the whole tone of the army towards gas was changed, and it became almost popular.
The peculiarity of cloud gas attack was the concentration of all this effort of preparation within a few days. In terms of military efficiency, the amount of energy expended was fully justified by the casualties produced. We know that some of our cloud attacks were responsible on one night for many thousands of casualties, and the amount of artillery effort to give such a result would probably have been considerably larger. But under normal conditions of warfare, such artillery effort would have been expended over a much longer period of time.
The Livens Projector.—The Somme offensive witnessed the use of a new British gas weapon which became of the utmost importance. This was the mortar known as the Livens Projector. Its origin dates back many months, however, and is of considerable interest. A British engineer, Lt. Livens (afterwards Major, D.S.O., M.C.) of the Signal Corps, was inspired to constructive and aggressive thought on the gas question by a double motive. He quickly realised the tactical weakness of the German method at Ypres, once shorn of its vast initial possibilities of surprise. He saw the advantage of being able to command the point or locality of incidence of the cloud, instead of being limited to the actual trench front. Prompted by a direct personal interest in the huge loss sustained by the Lusitania outrage, he determined to find a practical outlet for his feelings by developing his views on the future of gas clouds. In a few months the general principles of the projector were defined and a crude specimen resulted. Caught up, however, in the gas organisation, preparations for the cloud attack at Loos absorbed all his attention and energies and the consequent reorganisation found him developing a flammenwerfer and training a company for its use. It was really the Somme battle which gave him the first opportunity to carry his idea into offensive practice. This arose in front of High Wood, which was a veritable nest of German machine gunners in such a critical tactical position as to hold up our advance in that region. The huge stationary flammenwerfer had recently been used by Major Livens and his company against a strong point in front of Carnoy in the assault of July 1st. Here again the effect of flame was limited even more than that of cloud gas by dependence on a fixed emplacement. It was quickly grasped that the solution was to be found in the application of the projector principle to the use of oil for flame and a crude projector was devised for the emergency, using oil cans as mortars, burying them in the earth for two-thirds of their length and employing water cans as bombs.
As soon as the possibilities of the weapon were seen its development was pressed. The usual Livens Projector consisted of a simple tube mortar or projector closed at one end, and fitted with a charge box on which rested the projectile. By an electrical arrangement and suitable communications, large numbers, sometimes thousands, of these projectors could be discharged at a given moment. In this way quantities of gas, comparable with the huge tonnages employed in the normal stationary cloud attack, could be used to produce a cloud which would originate, as cloud, as far as a mile away from the point of discharge. In other words, the advantages of cloud attack could be used with a much smaller dependence on wind direction, and with a much greater factor of local surprise. Thus when the partially perfected and efficient weapon was used in large quantities during the British Arras offensive in April, 1917, the German Army was thrown into great consternation. But for the fact that protection had developed so strongly on both sides, the use of the Livens Projector would have gone far towards a decision.
The simplest way to illustrate the peculiar value of the projector will be to quote from one or two of the many Intelligence reports collected. Thus from a captured document dated July, 1917, belonging to the 111th German Division, signed Von Busse, we have: "The enemy has combined in this new process the advantages of gas clouds and gas shells. The density is equal to that of gas clouds, and the surprise effect of shell fire is also obtained. For the bombardment the latter part of the night is generally chosen, in a calm or light wind (the direction of the latter is immaterial). The enemy aims essentially at surprise. Our losses have been serious up to now, as he has succeeded, in the majority of cases, in surprising us, and masks have often been put on too late. . . . As soon as a loud report like a mine is heard 1000-1500 metres away, give the gas alarm. It does not matter if several false alarms are given. Masks must not be taken off without orders from an officer. Men affected, even if apparently only slightly, must be treated as serious cases, laid flat, kept still, and taken back as soon as possible for medical treatment. Anti-gas officers and Company Commanders will go through a fresh course of training on the above principles." The influence of gas discipline is borne out by another captured statement that they could only attempt to "reduce their losses to a minimum by the strictest gas discipline." Again, from a prisoner we learn that "every time a battalion goes into rest, masks are inspected and a lecture is delivered by the gas officer on British gas projectors, which are stated to be the most deadly form of warfare." So great was the impression formed by the introduction of the projector that uneasiness at the front was reflected later on in the Press. Thus, quoting from reference to the military discussion before the main committee of the Reichstag. "Casualties from enemy poison gas admit on the whole of a favourable judgment, as the harm involved is only temporary, and in most cases no ill after-effects persist" (Tagliche Rundschau, 24.4.18). "Cases of gas poisoning are not as a rule accompanied by harmful consequences, even though the treatment extends sometimes over a long period" (Vorwarts, 25.4.18), Based on the later mustard gas casualties these statements would have been more truthful. As it was, they afforded poor consolation to the German people.
British Gas Shell.—The British first used shell gas as lachrymators, in trench mortar bombs, in small quantities, during the battle of the Somme, but for the first time, during the battle of Arras, 1917, our supplies of gas for shell were sufficient for extensive and effective use. Our success can be measured by the report dated April 11th, 1917, from the General Commanding the first German Army, on "Experiences in the Battle of Arras," in which he says: "The enemy made extensive use of gas ammunition against our front positions as well as against batteries." "The fighting resistance of the men suffered considerably from wearing the mask for many hours." Artillery activity seems to have been paralysed by the effects of the gas.
In a general comparison of British and German methods of gas warfare,[1] General Hartley tells us "our methods improved rapidly during 1917. At first we neglected, almost entirely, the question of rate of firing, but we soon arrived at the method of crashes of lethal shell. These got the surprise concentrations of gas which proved so effective, and we realised that the number of shells required to produce an effect was much bigger than we thought originally. At Messines gas was used in much the same way as at Arras."
[1] Journal of the Royal Artillery, February, 1920.
German Gas Shell Development, 1916.—The main evidence of Allied reaction was to be found in the intensive development of cloud gas attacks, but during the same period the Germans, who appeared to be abandoning the use of cloud gas, were making steady efforts to regain their initiative by the comprehensive development of shell gas. Thus, to quote from General Hartley's report to the British Association, "In the Summer of 1916 chlor-methyl-chloroformate with toxic properties similar to those of phosgene was used against us in large quantities during the battle of the Somme. Later this was replaced by trichlor-methyl-chloro-formate, a similar liquid, which was used until the end of the war as the well-known Green Cross shell filling. The use of phosgene in trench mortar bombs also began in 1916." Many of those on the front in 1916 will remember the surprise gas shell attack of December of that year, on the Baudimont gate at Arras. We were fortunately let off lightly with little over 100 casualties, but the effect was to tighten up gas discipline all along the line. The appearance of the new substances represented definite German progress and had definite military results, but they lost decisive value owing to the relative inefficiency of German gas shell tactics.
Consideration of the Allied reaction must include some reference to the appearance of the American Army in the field. The Americans during their more or less educational period gave serious attention to the gas question, and showed almost immediately, by their preparations, that they attached enormous importance to the new weapon.
Main Features of the Period.—It is difficult to generalise. But the following features appear to characterise the period under discussion. In the first place we see German policy tending towards the use of gas projectiles containing a variety of organic substances. Secondly, we have the British exploitation of cloud gas attack both in magnitude and method. The Livens Projector provides the third important feature. Fourthly, we note the somewhat tardy development of the British use of gas shell. A number of causes, no doubt, unite in responsibility for the above. But whether due to definitely framed policy on our part, or merely to the hard facts of the case, one important factor seems largely responsible. It is the relative ease of production by Germany as compared with ourselves. When German military opinion tended towards the development of gas shell, a variety of substances came quickly to hand, not only from German research sources, but in quantity from the dye factories. No such quick response could have met, or actually did meet, the demands of Allied military policy. Whatever ideas emanated from our research organisations, there was no quick means of converting them into German casualties. It is true that we could obtain chlorine and later phosgene in bulk and devote them to the exploitation of the older gas appliances in cloud methods. But British chemical supply was weak, owing to the absence of a strong organic chemical industry. In other words, German flexibility of supply meant flexibility in meeting the requirements of military policy, and, given sound military policy, this flexibility meant surprise, the essence of successful war.