LAND AND WATER. 
June 19, 1915. 
you have sufficient weapons for the discharge of 
80 much munitu.c. It takes so very much longer 
to make, turn, fill, and fit a shell than it does 
to fire it off that the whole process of these 
^ deluges " of bombardment is necessarily spas- 
modic. To borrow a metaphor from jiydrauhc 
engineering, you have to get a " head " of shell. 
jiyou have to accumulate shell for very many days 
|/which will be discharged in a very few hours. 
ilBefore undertaking a great offensive effort such 
as the Germans and Austro-Hungarians have just 
)iindertaken in Galicia, you must spend weeks or 
months in stocking up shell at your advanced 
bases of supply. The more you stock up the better 
chance you have of achieving your object. There- 
fore the longer you wait — in reason, and always 
supposing that the enemy is still tangled up else- 
Mfhere — the wiser vou are. 
It follows from all this that to press the 
production of shell to the utmost limits is the 
chief and obvious duty of a community engaged 
in modern war when met by siege conditions. 
Whether it is wise to stimulate this produc- 
tion by dull ofiicial rhetoric, newspaper panic, or 
any other adventitious method I will leave it to 
others to discuss. At any rate, you cannot have 
too much supply. 
Meanwhile, those who see the campaign as a 
whole are asking themselves such questions as the 
following, and everyone who desires to judge the 
position must ask himself the same questions : 
Have we any proof that the enemy can pro- 
duce shell, new linings for guns as those linings 
pet worn out, new big pieces, &c., can fill and fit 
the same at any greater rate than can the Western 
'Allies? It is, to say the least of it, doubtful; and 
until one has very good proof to the contrary one 
would — knowing the character of the various 
nations involved — doubt it. The enemy has made 
a mighty effort in Galicia. In spite of that 
effort he has not succeeded in breaking the 
'Russian line, and therefore he has lost enor- 
mously in n5en — certainly not less than half a 
million — without so far having obtained anything 
like a decision, and he has expended in six weeks 
ammunition which it took him, perhaps, twenty 
weeks to produce. Italy alone has been for five 
months producing munitions with a clear compre- 
hension of what this type of warfare has become 
and of what is needed for it. The French people 
have devoted their whole energy to the same end. 
Have we any proof that the enemy have done 
more? That they had an advantage over Russia 
in this matter, seeing that Russia can only with 
difficulty obtain supplies from abroad, that her 
industrialisation is not that of the West, that her 
communications and the rolling stock upon her 
railways is not that of the West, we all know. 
But would the higher command in the West 
regard the enemy's supply and accumulation of 
shell as superior to its own ? I doubt it. 
Next we must ask the question, can the pro- 
duction, such as it is, be increased in the West? 
Whether it can be increased in France or in Italy 
may be doubted. Those nations are conscript for 
war and are prepared with their utmost energies. 
That it can be increased in this country is obvious, 
for this country is highly industrialised, and is 
making a great many things, apart from those 
needed for the war. The economic support which 
this country can give to the great alliance demands 
active production in every field. But there is 
obviously a margin for the increased production 
of shell. What that margin is only the 
authorities know. 
Again, can the enemy obtain supplies from 
outside his own territory for the production of 
shell? If he can it is the fault of the blockade. 
That he has got cotton through for his propellant 
explosives we know. Why it has been allowed we 
do not know. But has he also got his material for 
shell? Italy has allowed nothing to go in since 
December, and if the enemy is getting for his pro- 
duction what he cannot find within his own 
boundaries, then it comes in through the North' 
Sea, and the answer to that question is therefore 
political. It will not be discussed here, because it 
IS also highly controversial, and depends upon 
elements in the international problem of which 
no layman has cognisance. 
But the situation is quite clear. If the 
blockade is fully enforced the enemy cannot get 
supplies from outside his own territory, whereas 
the Western Allies can, and do. 
But the production of shell does not only con- 
sist in the supply of shell cases, of copper bands, 
and fuses. It also consists in the high explosive 
for the bursting charge of a large shell. 
Is there a shortage among the Western Allies 
in these high explosives ? 
In order to answer that question it can only 
be suggested that one form of high explosive, and 
one alone, can show some shortage, and that is 
T.N.T. It is not the most violent, but it is the 
safest form. It is that mainly used in the British, 
German, and Austrian services. Its basis is the 
destructive distillation of coal. In tins country 
it has not paid manufacturers and coal-owners iu 
time of peace to produce the raw material for this 
explosive in sufficient quantities. That there is 
any shortage in other forms of high explosive is 
doubtful in the extreme, and no shadow of proof 
that there is any such shortage has appeared. 
Without some evidence, we do well to disbelieve it. 
I repeat that a belated newspaper panic or 
the commoner kind of political rhetoric may, or 
may not, be necessary here as a spur to the produc- 
tion of high explosive shell. One would have hoped 
not. They are not necessary elsewhere. If such 
means are necessary, by all means let them be em- 
ployed for those upon whom they have useful 
effect. But let sober judgment recognise that 
while you cannot have too much of these munitions 
—always supposing that the guns and their 
repair keep pace with the possible rate of dis- 
charge—the probability is against the enemy's 
having in the West a superiority in munitions. 
It is probable — I have not the authority to 
say it is certain — that in this, as in every other 
matter, the more developed and the more active 
nations have the advantage over the enemy. 
Whether this judgment; is right or not only the 
development of the offensive in the West, when it 
takes place, can decide. 
Meanwhile we may note that every very 
hea\7' and successful bombardment in the West, 
followed by an advance, has come frojn the Allies 
and has been against the enemy for weeks and 
months past, while the single example of a con- 
siderable enemy advance — that north of Ypres — 
has taken place, not through superiority of high 
explosive munitions, but through the unexpected 
use of poisonous gases, which novel method is 
now comprehended and met. 
6* 
