The use of chemical weapons was encouaged twice in the Civil War. A letter to the War Department from John Doughty proposed the use of chlorine shells to drive the Confederate Army from its positions. Doughty included a detailed drawing of the shell with his letter. Another American, Forrest Shepherd of New Haven, also proposed a chemical weapon attack against the Confederates. Shepherd's proposal involved hydrogen chloride, an attack that would have likely been non-lethal but may have succeeded in driving soldiers from their positions.
Niether proposal seems to have been looked at, at all. Doughty's letter was found in a pile of old civil war letters in 1964.
Now WI either idea had been used? The cholrine shell was a hard metal plate with a clay shell atop it, so it would break on impact and not from firing, so it may have worked. Shepherd's idea was not deadly, but would be like tear gasing the confederates.
What is the impact if either, or both, ideas are used?
Niether proposal seems to have been looked at, at all. Doughty's letter was found in a pile of old civil war letters in 1964.
Now WI either idea had been used? The cholrine shell was a hard metal plate with a clay shell atop it, so it would break on impact and not from firing, so it may have worked. Shepherd's idea was not deadly, but would be like tear gasing the confederates.
What is the impact if either, or both, ideas are used?