The Washington herald., 1906-12-31
The Dilemma Of q COMMITTEES.

The House Committee on Military At
fairs may be considered as in the throes
Of a perpleXing question. created by the
unappeasable desire for information on
the part Of some Of the members. Dur
ing the two or three hearings which
were recently given to Brig. Gen. Will
lam Crozier the Chief of Ordnance Of the
army, that officer explained, as is the
custom Of representatives Of the War
Department bureaus every year. the
items in the estimates under his depart
ment, and gave other information TO
satisfy the curiosity Of the committee.
It was to be expected that the hearing
Of Gen. Crozier, who has to do with
trajectOries, muzzle velocities. and initial
penetrations, would be unreIieved by
things interesting, but the committee
early in the hearings had occasion TO sit
up and take notice An admission from
Gen Crozier proved a stimulation where
there has been somnolence.
The subject before the committee was
the item for providing further munitions
Of war, which the Ordnance Department
Of the army is charged to obtain. II de-
veloped that Gen. Crozier had been
awarding contracts for certain materials.
such as ammunition. at prices which rep
resented a p per cent increase over the
cost Of the same supplies turned out at
the government plants. The committee
eagerly asked why Gen. Crozier persisted
in awarding contracts for the materials
when it was possible TO get them al one
quarter less in cost from the arsenaIs,
especially as the government factories
were not operated up 10 their limit Gen.
Crozier explained that "a policy had been
adopted Of encouraging American plants
which were capable Of doing the work.
and which would be needed in event Of
war as reliable sources Of supply. The
government plants could do the work for
much less than it cost to have the same
material made under contract, and II was
known that the so-called rival firms had
some sort OF understanding which
might not amount 10 a combination" in
order to control prices at which com
petitive" bids should be presented All
this had been taken into account by
Gen. Crozier. and he evidently regarded
it as a premium which the government
must pay as a means Of retaining in
operation in this country the private
plants the output of which would be in
dispensable in time Of war. when the
demand for munitions Of battle would far
exceed the capacity Of the arsenals.
The committee at once saw that the
disclosure into which 1t forced Gen.
Crozier placed Itself in something Of a
dilemma. Must the committee go on
record as favoring the method of pur-
chasing army supplies which meant =
per cent increase in expenditures over
what was necessary when the same ma
terial was turned out at government
plants? Should The private domestic es-
adjustments be cut off without more ado
and an economical system introduced
with glory and profit to the authors Of
refOrmatory legislation? Was It safe to
do this in the face Of home interests
which compel a Congressman to protect
the industries and the workingmen of
his constituency? Should the contract
method be abandoned and those re-
sponsible for such action calmly invite
the peril which would come of a GER
tainty in time of war?
Altogether, the situation is fraught
with much menace to the Congressional
conscience which seems to stand be-
tween a sort Of love and duty-a love for
the home industry and duty toward
purely economical administration.