[?] British Bomb is the Safe Bomb

April approached there were ounting protests, crackpot and herwise, from all over the against Britain’s H-bomb ex mts near Christmas Island, irst test explosion can be ex [ anytime now. (See article, 18.) in, which takes its role of No. nic Victim seriously, has been g protests since the experi were first mooted over a igo. Each protest has been latically but flatly turned ate March, it was announced Kochi, one of the biggest fishing ports in Japan, that had been selected to sail aze ships into the test area irotest. About the same time, uakers from the UK planned the same. The Japanese suicide it was forbidden by the Jap- Government; nothing more Jen heard from the Quakers, ests have been made (with easons) by Islands territories Jr the Pacific. Latest protest from the American owners of ra, nearest US island to the mas Island base, one was made happier when announced in early April that

natives of the Marquesas have been found suffering from horrible skin diseases caused, it is believed, by their having eaten fish made radio active by the last American nuclear tests in the Pacific.

The strategic necessity for the UK to undertake nuculear experiments has the sympathy of Britishers generally—albeit the degree of en thusiasm is in inverse ratio to the proximity of said Britishers to Christmas Island. Nonetheless, there is a growing awareness that a line must be drawn sooner or later if the Pacific is not to be spotted with large danger areas.

We have been assured repeatedly that there is no more danger from the Christmas H-bomb than from a Guy Fawkes Day cracker; that the radio-active fall-out will be neg ligible; and that it will be only a little bomb anyway.

But no one living within the 1,000miles perimeter around Christmas Island is going to be wildly happy until the British bomb experts pack up and go home, round about next August. In the meantime, where fish is the staple diet, it might not be a bad idea if geiger-counters were added to the kitchen equip ment.