The daily Gate City and constitution-Democrat. (Keokuk, Iowa) 1916-1922, 1918-01-10

partment was tnaC IL aDaHuoHeu ~
old Springfield and didn't adopt tn
British enfield, which American rae
tories were making in large quan
titles.
This criticism" said Chamberlain
grows out Of the fact that men II
environments haven't got rifles yet
/ Baker declared every man in can
| torment who ought to have a rifle
has one.
| II think you're wrong about that,
said Chamberlain. General Crozief
Testified it would be February 10 De,
fore all the men would have rifles.
| And have letters to prove inc
men haven't all got rifles To-Day
said Mcclellan.
! IL don't want to stress the point,
said Baker. II think 1t is relatively
unimportant."
Baker declared criticism Of the
ordnance department for 1nefhclency
was not justified.
1T isn't inefficient to get some
thing better than you started OUT 70
get. The war was not on us. 1t was
in Europe. We had time to make the
necessary changes to get a better
rifle. Meanwhile we had on hand an
adequate supply Of modern rifles Tor
all our troops" >,
"You say the war was not on US,
broke in Senator Wadsworth. 1t was
on us to an extent that made 1t nee
essary to send men to France VINO
had never fired a rifle"
Baker declared there are always
green men in new armies.
Replying to Senator Weeks CRIT
icism that there was too much
- - in get.
ting rifles, Baker said changes made
in the rifle to get a better weapon
is not a technicality Weeks said the
war department hasn't taken advant-
age Of the full rifle making capacity
of the country even now.
Eve could make about $4,000 rifles
a day." said Weeks. 1--WE are getting
only seven thousand"
II again call your attention to the
fact that the war was three thousand
miles from our door," said Baker.
1T makes no difference whether
it was ten thousand miles or one mile
away said Weeks. THE fact re-
mains that we didn't take advantage
of manufacture in this country OF a
rifle which millions Of English sol
diers are using satisfactorily"
Because they can't get any bet
ter" interrupted Baker.
isn't it true that they didn't try
to get better gun because theirs
was thoroughly satisfactory" asked
Weeks.
at was not thoroughly satisfac-
tory said Baker. They've changed
their ammunition. The enemy is at
their door. They haven't time to inn
prove their rifle. We did"
Senator New asked Baker whether
James W. Gerard, then ambassador
to Germany. had notified this gov
eminent in May, 1916, that Germany
planned renewal of submarine war
fare.
Baker said if he had received such
information he must regard it as
confidential and not discuss it.
Gerard states it publicly in his
have been good time to settle
about the kind of rifle we were going
to have?"
.'Ten years before would have been
a good time" said Baker. You
must also remember that in May,
1916, we were relying on definite
assurances from the German govern
ment that 1t would not renew u boat
warfare"
"And the word Of the German gov
eminent was accepted against that
of our own ambassador" asked New.
Baker replied that congress and
the president evidently relied oo
Germany's word.
"And so nothing was done by the
war department." asked New.
Quite the contrary" replied
Baker 1--WE used every officer and
dollar in studying the European stu
alton"
But no. machine gun was adopt
ed? ?" went on New.
THAT is not accurate" declared
Baker "a machine gun was adopt
ed"
Were steps taken to get the coun-
try's manufacturers ready for what
ever might happen?" asked New.