7o: 



NATURE 



[August 5, 1920 



position, what must be said about the question of 

 superannuation? A short time ago a deputation 

 consisting of representatives of the g-overning 

 bodies of the Universities and institutions of Uni- 

 versity rank in England and Wales, together with 

 representatives of the Association of University 

 Teachers, waited upon the Chancellor of the Ex- 

 chequer to put before him certain proposals re- 

 garding the present unsatisfactory state of super- 

 annuation in the Universities. Briefly these pro- 

 posals were to the effect that the Government 

 should grant University teachers the same, or 

 similar, superannuation benefits as already granted 

 to other branches of the profession under the 

 School Teachers (Superannuation) Act, 1918, plus 

 certain other benefits which the University 

 teachers were prepared to pay for themselves by 

 an annual premium on their salaries. The deputa- 

 tion was a most representative one and absolutely 

 unanimous in its proposals. We now understand 

 that the Chancellor is "prepared to consider the 

 advisability of proposing to Parliament a further 

 non-recurrent sum to assist the Universities in 

 meeting the grievance of those senior members 

 who are precluded from profiting to the full by 

 the benefits of the University Superannuation 

 Scheme." At the same time, it is announced that 

 the Council of the Federated Superannuation 

 System of the Universities has undertaken to 

 obtain the information upon which the proposed 

 non-recurrent grant will be made. 



In all this there is not a word about giving Uni- 

 versity teachers the same, or similar, privileges 

 that school teachers have in their non-contributory 

 Government scheme. Not a word about facilitat- 

 ing the transference of teachers from the schools 

 to the Universities or from the Universities to the 

 schools, so that there would be no loss of super- 

 annuation benefits on the transference. Not a 

 word about full retrospective benefits, irrespective 

 of whether the service has been in schools or in 

 Universities. Not a word about the consequent 

 unity of the teaching profession. It would seem 

 that the policy is to make such transference as 

 diflficult as possible. Now, obviously such a policy 

 cannot be in the interests of education. It may 

 be that we have placed too narrow an interpreta- 

 tion upon the words quoted above. We hope so. 

 For, unless we are profoundly mistaken, the great 

 bulk of the University teachers will be bitterly 

 disappointed if the Government does not at least 

 grant them benefits equivalent to those already 

 granted to 95 per cent, of the teaching profession 

 in the country. 



NO. 2649, VOL. 105] 



Tanks and Scientific Warfare. 



Tanks in the Great War, 1914-1918. By Brevet- 

 Col. J. F. C. Fuller. Pp. xxiv-f 331 + vii 

 plates, (London : John Murray, 1920.) Price 

 215, net. 



THIS remarkable book is a clear and straight- 

 forward history of how the British Army 

 learnt to use the most revolutionary weapon the 

 great war produced. It is written by a con- 

 firmed believer in that weapon, whose belief prob- 

 ably became more and more complete as the Tank 

 Corps gradually grasped a few of the principles 

 involved in its use. It is somewhat of a pity that 

 the author does not devote a chapter to the 

 process by which the Tank Corps arrived at the 

 tactics which eventually proved so successful. It 

 took something like two years to overcome the 

 prejudices raised against tanks in official quarters, 

 and this in war-time, when progress is relatively 

 rapid compared with that in peace. It is there- 

 fore to be hoped that the principles so ably set 

 forth by Col. Fuller, and so well proved In the 

 late war, will never again be overlooked. 



It Is only natural that it took many months for 

 the Tank Corps to evolve anything like effective 

 tank tactics. Many methods had to be tested in 

 battle before being discarded, and it is not un- 

 usual, but rather a matter for congratulation, if 

 the tactics evolved for the battle of Hamel were 

 primarily suggested by the Australians, for it 

 serves to show the close co-operation obtained, 

 and the openmlndedness of those in the Tank 

 Corps to adopt the suggestions of others. 



The history of tank tactics is an instance of 

 how an effective weapon may be entirely wasted 

 unless its use Is understood. As to how much 

 blame attaches to the Tank Corps for the use of 

 tanks in the Ypres salient and similar misuses up 

 to the first battle of Cambrai the author is silent, 

 nor does it matter much, except that it serves to 

 show how necessary it is for the expert on the new 

 weapon to have some say in such matters. How- 

 ever, if, as Col, Fuller says on p. 58, the follow- 

 ing lessons were learnt as the result of the first 

 use of tanks on the Somme in 1916, especially 

 No. 2, then the later tank actions need a lot of 

 explanation. 



The battle of Cambrai, although it demonstrated 

 what tanks in numbers over good ground 

 and without a preliminary bombardment could do, 

 yet would have been a far greater success had 

 the tank tactics as finally adopted at the battle ^ 

 of Hamel been in use. There is no question that«j 

 the town of Cambrai itself would have been taken 

 on the first day of the attack had proper co- 

 operation with the infantrv been maintained. The 



