Page:EB1922 - Volume 30.djvu/118

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

to the extent of closing the markets to the sale of calves for slaughter and of forbidding the sale of veal. Though the measures had the approval of all the farmers' organizations they were systematically evaded and were wholly without effect in checking the increasing slaughter of calves. Again, the orders that forbade the use of barley and wheat for feeding stock in 1917 and 1918 were not observed whenever the farmer was in any real difficulty about getting food for animals. No farmer will see live stock starve and the agricultural conscience was salved by a consideration of the extraordinary mixtures of waste material that were being purveyed as cattle-food at higher prices than the farmer was allowed to receive for his sound wheat and barley. Again, in the rationing of the self-producer, the regulations declaring that a farmer might only retain so many of the pigs he killed at home, or so much of the poultry, milk, butter or cheese he produced, were simply ignored. It is impossible to enforce such regulations except by a system of espionage and inspection that is impossible in war-time for lack of men. Rationing was carried out most successfully in Great Britain, and the great force behind it was the public sense of its need and the feeling that it was being administered with perfect fairness and no favour. Nor was the pinch of scarcity ever severe enough to break down the general moral; the people at large did feel hungry and were irked by the restrictions in their diet, but they could carry on and were not impelled to illicit traffic in order to obtain food. But since the farmer saw no dire need he felt no particular compulsion to change his ordinary way of living. It is not that the farmer is less patriotic than his fellow-men, but the war was far away from his countryside, and he is an individualist by temperament and habit, less subject to the crowd suggestion that draws the city dwellers into a common action, and with his accustomed routine as the most compelling factor in his psychology.

Should the occasion ever again arise it will be well to recognize that the agricultural community cannot be driven or subjected to the external control that proved successful enough with other industries; it must be organized from within to cooperate with the State. In this particular case agriculturists felt that their importance to the nation had been ignored in the early years of the war, and when the time came to regiment them in the common effort there was always a tinge of opposition in their attitude to the measures that were then forced upon them.

Speaking broadly, it may be said that, whatever criticism may be passed on the working of the control of prices in the United Kingdom during the war period, whatever may have been the defects in the system that have been noted above, these faults were inherent in the nature of the task and were not products of the administration. The farming community often felt itself oppressed, the consuming public often regarded itself as exploited, individual hardships were inflicted and in other cases ill-deserved profits were lightly piled up, but the control did work and did prevent an intolerable state of war between consumers and producers. Control there had to be, and one may look back upon it as a reasonably successful improvisation, characterized by the national qualities of fair play and compromise.

AICARD, JEAN FRANCOIS VICTOR (1848-1921), French poet and dramatist (see 1.434), published after 1910 a collection of poems for children (1912) and Hollande, Algerie (1913), as well as various volumes of war poetry, a novel Arlette des Mayans (1917), and two volumes of adventure stories, Un Bandit a la Française and its sequel Le fameux chevalier Gaspard de Besse, both in 1919. He died in Paris May 13 1921.

AINLEY, HENRY (1879- ), English actor, was born at Leeds Aug. 21 1879, and was educated for business; but a meeting with George Alexander and an engagement for a "walking-on" part turned his thoughts to the stage, and he joined F. R. Benson's touring company for two years. He then appeared at the Lyceum theatre, London, in 1900 as Gloucester in Henry V., and in 1902 at the St. James's theatre as Paolo in Stephen Phillips's Paolo and Francesco. He played Orlando in As You Like It both at the Comedy theatre in 1906 and at His Majesty's theatre in 1907. In 1910 he appeared there again in many Shakespearean parts, and in 1914 he played Leontes and Malvolio in Granville Barker's production of The Winter's Tale and Twelfth Night at the Savoy theatre. After serving during the World War he began management at the St. James's theatre with Tolstoy's Reparation in 1919, following it up by a production of Julius Caesar early in 1920. In 1921 he played Prospero in The Tempest at the Aldwych theatre, and John Beal in Lord Dunsany's If.

AIR BOMBS. Although the Hague declaration of Oct. 18 1907 contained a clause prohibiting, for a period extending till the next peace conference, the "discharge of projectiles and explosives from balloons or by other new methods of a similar nature," this declaration was only ratified by Great Britain, Austria-Hungary, the United States and Turkey. France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and Spain did not sign it, and it was therefore regarded as "practically without force" (British official Land Warfare, 1912, p. 24). The only limiting condition of aerial bombardment was, therefore, that applying to all bombardments, viz.: The prohibition of bombardments of undefended localities. The word "undefended" was not more closely defined; and it could be, and by some far-seeing authorities was, presumed that aerial bombardment of localities would certainly figure as an element of the "next Great War."

In the article Air Defence will be found an account of the principles of defence against air bombardment, as they were evolved in the World War of 1914-8. The present article deals with the bombs themselves, as material weapons, and with their accessories. Projectiles dropped from aircraft, officially termed "Aerial Bombs," may be classified as High Explosive Bombs (H.E. bombs), Incendiary Bombs, and Bomb Parachute Flares. /. High Explosive Bombs. The principal use ol H.E. bombs is to destroy material of all kinds; they are also used occasionally against personnel. They are a species of common shell, but differ from gun shells as, owing to the absence of shock of discharge, their envelopes require less strength, and consequently the proportion of weight of charge to weight of projectile is higher. With regard to their striking energy, bombs and gun shells, when fired at high angles, are comparable; but the striking energy of low-trajectory gun shells, other things being equal, is far beyond that of bombs dropped even from an extreme height. The field of action of a bomb is not re- stricted, as is that of a gun shell, by its extreme range, but depends upon the flying capacity of the aircraft employed ; but the ballistic conditions under which a gun is used give an accuracy of fire which, in the case of bombs dropped from aircraft, is reduced to a minimum. High explosive bombs are classified as Light Case and Heavy Case. Light case bombs, pear-shaped receptacles of mild steel, weighing when filled from 16 Ib. to too lb., were made in great numbers in the early years of the World War. They were all of the same type. The case was made in two parts; the heavier, the nose end, was a hemi- spherical casting; the body was conoidal, tapering towards the tail end and the two parts were joined by an angle steel ring. In the 6s-lb. bomb, for example, the nose end was -25 in. and the body 064 in. thick. As time went on the type developed; fig. I shows a Filled Amatol -lb. bomb made of mild steel, -128 in. thick in the body and in- creasing to -375 in. in the nose. It carries 140 lb. of 40/60 amatol.