The age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1897-1902, 1897-12-05
COSTLY CHANGES.
Enormous Losses Caused in Keeping Armies
Up TO Date.
From the Philadelphia Press.

From the Philadelphia Press.
In MO private business and in mo other
branch of the government service are
such enormous losses possible as in the
army and navy.
When a new gun or a new system of
fortification lis devised the Old Is aIban-
doned forever. and the value which it
represented as a total loss.
The British navy, not long ago. de-
clared obsolete a certain type Of torpedo.
In doing so 1t discarded torpedoss which
had cost 1t about 100000 pounds, or $780,
0O0
The costlleSt charge which the govern
ment of the United States ever made was
when lit discarded this Misunderstanding
rifle for the breech-loader, and the
Smooth-bore cannon for the rifled gun ait
the end eff the civil war. The heavy ord
nanc- discarded at that time represented
an Investment of of many mllionS-it
would be difficult ITO say just how much
The discarded muskets were about a mil
lion and a half In number, and their cost
had been from $12 to $1S. AT an average
of SIS they wer@ worth, originally, $22,-
SOC, 000
OF this sum about one-third or one
quarter was recovered by the sale of the
guns to other nations in time of war;
50 the actual loss to the government was
$15,O00.0O0. These guns, 1t is true, had
been used in the war, and presumably
the government had got 100000 worth
OF service out of them; but they wers in
good condition and might have been
used by our Ettle standing army OF 25,
900 men for half a century III the style
had not changed i-e=~
The Springfield rifle cost a Mite more
than the old-style musket. 1t was re-
placed by magazine gun of small cali
bre and high velocity. The old guns
were mot discarded when the new ones
came in. They are "as good as gold"
says Gen. Flagler, the chief of ordnance
Of the army. They we've put through the
armory, where al worn parts were re-
placed, and 80 per cent. of them were
restored, to prime condition They will
be kept in reserve for use in time of
trouble The officers of the government
will not even say how many of them
there are, for fear foreign nations should
base ON that information an estimate of
our fighting resources.
This ordnance, Like the muskets. had
seen good service. and, besides it's orig
fnal cost was comparatively small. An
old eight-lnch smooth bore cost about
$1,000, while an eight -inch modern rifle
gun costs $4,000 There is an amazing
difference I'm the efficiency of the two,
however The old smoclah-bore was a
fty-six-pounder, and used ten and one
half pounds of powder. The modern gun
of the same caliber is a 300-pounder,
and uses 1876 pounds of powder.
When the navy department adopted a
over to the naval militia. There were
more than 5000 of them, and they were
worth about $4,000 Even If there had
been no militia to equip, the loss by this
change would have been comparatively
small. There are ten Thousand of the
new rifles, including those for the ma
rine corps, and they cost about $175000
AT Itba end of the war the navy depart
ment did nit forthwith tumble overheard
the old cast-iron cannon and substitute
the modern built-up gun. The change
has been gradual and some of the old
gums are still in use on our ships or war.
Nor were the wooden ships of the old
navy discarded, except as they wore out.
The ships of -llhe new navy are of this
very latest design, and cost $3.50, 900 to
IS, 000, 900 each. 1t us not likely that condi-
tions will arise that will render them
entirely obsodtte. AS for our feur-inch
to thirteen-inch guns, which cost the
government from 81, 500 to 100000 each, the
only changes likely to occur are in their
mechanism, and thssa are small COM
pared with the total cost of the gun. Still
any day some genius may come to the
front with wholly new construction
wh'c CHI will leave millions of dollars
worth of heavy ordnance practically use
D5Ss ON our hands.