Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1914-01-21

Vi tue dTSeudlS VIII not permit the gov
eminent to do the. manufacturing
itself.
Questions for Business Man.
/ Why should the war department pay
the Bethlehem Steel company or the
other private manufacturers $3.50 for
a S.S-inch shrapnel when it can. and
I Is. manufacturing the identical article
| IN its own arsenals for 1874?
I Linger just a moment over these
figures. Mr.. Reader; it is your money
! that is being spent here. Seventeen
/ dollars and fifty cents is more than
! twice s7.94, The government could
manufacture two shrapnels for the
I price it Is paying the ammunition ring
for one. and have S1.62 remaining on
each transaction.
And the government is not intend
ing TO buy simply a small supply OF
ammunition of this character. The
program of the war department calls
for S20.OO0.OOO worth Of field artillery
ammunition. 100000 worth this
year and the remaining S14.O0OOOO in
succeeding years. The program OF the
war department also calls for S11.OOO,-
600 worth of field artillery vehicles
manufacturing at Rock Island arsenal
at a cost at least % per cent lower
than the prices OF the ammunition
ring.
Were a business man in Uncle Sans
place. would he give this S31.OOO,OOO
order to private manufacturers, or
would he enlarge his own plants and
save from 20 to 40 per cent on that I
% r.. r. fhr,u ha
able TO take care of himself?
Brigadier General William Crozier, !
chief of ordnance, testified before the |
appropriations committee he could |
save 25 per cent by manufacturing
field artillery equipment, of which the I
government intends TO purchase $11,-
100000 worth. in the government ar
senals. and before the military affairs
committee that he could save So per
cent on field artillery ammunition, of
which the war department intends to
purchase S20.OOO.0OO worth.
Ball cartridges. calibre 80. for the
regulation service rifles, were made
at the Frankford arsenal in 1912 for
S26.95 per 1000. including all over
head charges. For the same cart
ridge private manufacturers are re-
ceiving $500
Why should the government pay .
private manufacturers $1,7OS for a
three-inch caisson when it is manu-
featuring the identical article at Rock
island arsenal for $1,0S1, all overhead
included?
Why should the government pay
private manufacturers S3,26S for
-hree-inch gun carriage when it is
the same thing at-the
Rock Island arsenal for S2,341?
That the ring of private manufac-
urers Is outrageously overcharging
he government for munitions of war.
S revealed beyond successful contra
fiction in a table prepared by Colonel
ieorge Montgomery. commandant at
Trankford arsenal. Philadelphia.
The figures indicate that the gov
rnment can save from 90 to 80 per
ent on army contracts running into
of dollars annually, by in {
reasing the capacity of the govern |
nent arsenals and doing all Of its
wn manufacturing of war materials. {
The report shows that on orders s
or ammunition given to Frankford 4
rsenal instead OF private manufac- {
1rers between July l, 1912, and April q
3. 1913. amounting to S1.90O.OG4O5. b
he government saved $979,s4O.94. or L
early one-half the amount of the or c
er. Il
In other words, had this contract r
cen given to the ring OF private am a
lunition manufacturers. the same o
mount OF ammunition would have cost
ne government s2.S79, 9O4.99, or S979.- u
40 az more than In cost the govern 4
tent TO fill the order itself. These s.
alculations are based ON the cost OF n
ie ammunition manufactured in the II
rsenal. as compared with the latest
1ntract prices for the same article s.
REQUIRED from outside manufacturers. a
The total arsenal costs include 10 U
sr cent TO cover administration, de- q
recitation. insurance and interest a.
larges. Here are a few typical COM p
lrisons shown in the report which 3
institute an unanswerable argument ol
by the government should enlarge -