The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1917-12-31
Ante Laxity Towards Ma
tiOnal Defense BObS Up.
Crozier Tells How Congress Re-
iected Plea for Guns.
WAR SEC. ALSO OPPOSED HIM
Inquiry Board Again Hears
About Lewis Gun Fuss.
Proven Inferior in Border Serv.
ice, Says Ordnance Chief.

Washington, Dec. 31.-Major Cen
eral Crozier, army ordnance chlef, to-
day gave to the senate committee IN
vestigating the conduct of the war, his
side of the reasons for artillery short
age and of the celebrated controversy
over the Lewis machine gun. Re-
sponsibility for artillery shortage, the
general said. lay with the whole
country, and he showed how every
effort of his to get larger appropria-
tons for artillery in times of peace
was overruled by the secretary of
war and by congress.
The British and French govern
ments. he showed by official records,
had of themselves offered to supply
General Pershing's forces with ar
tillery, and he gave statements from
abroad to show that the allies were
able to do it because they had sur
plus.
Il am not attempting to excuse the
situation that requires US to depend on
our friends for heavy artillery" said
General Crozier, but the responsibility
rests on the whole country"
Asked for 81, 2OO,OOO-Got $4,000.
How he had, during previous years
often asked congress for larger ap-
preparations for artillery and that he
and other army heads many times
called the cOuntry's attention to the
need for more artillery, was related
by the general
InlS is plain statement or the
case" said General CrOZier, citing one
, instance before the war in which a
modest program of artillery appro-
priations calling for $1,2OO.O00 was
cut in half by direction of the secre-
tary of war and then further reduced
by congress to 100000" No consid-
cradle appropriation. he said. was
/ made for heavy artillery until 1916.
Appropriations in preceding years
were absolutely inadequate.
Machine guns. General Crozier said
were never expected to become such
| an important weapon. but the Ger
mans, realizing better than any one
else their great future, proceeded to
secure them in quantities. Turning to
the charges that prejudices had kept
the Lewis gun out of American equip
/ ment, General CroZier detailed the
official reports of the department.
Tested Lewis Gun.
The first offer, to his knowledge
was received May 2, 1912, when the
Automatic Arms Co. asked for a spe-
cial test. The correspondence showed
that the ordnance board offered a reg
ular test with ammunition furnished
by the government No test followed
but on March 5, 1913, another Lewis
gun was offered for test which was
held at the Springfield arsenal. The
cause the boards report showed the
Lewis gun damned 206 times, had 35
parts broken and Is parts required
/ replacement, while the Vickers gun
damned only % times and had nc
parts broken. The board held the
Lewis gun inferior to the Vickers OF
Bennett Mercier.
No other Lewis gun, Crozier said
was submitted for a test until April
| 1916. The war department previously
asked for a Lewis gun to test, but
the Savage Arms company stated none
was ava liable. In the tests of April
| 1915, General Crozier said the manu-
/ facturers withdrew the gun because
it was said, they were not in condi-
/ ton.
All the boards formed to test ma
| chine guns, General Crozier pointed
out, were not subject to his juris-
j 6iction. The board in April, 1916
| found the Lewis gun had many desir-
able features and offered to again test
| it when perfected. He produced a
/ letter from President A. E. Borie of
| the Savage Arms company, stating
! that the boards action had been "en-
| tirely impartial"
In the summer of 1916, General