The Birmingham age-herald., 1921-10-24

So much for round figures. Now for. details. In 1914, the production of 75's was negltble and thereswas no regular service of repair. In october, 1918, our workshops were turning out, for this calibre alone. $50 new tubes and 573 repaired. 594 new brakes and 195 repaired, 267 new carriages and 114 repaired. To these must be added shells, more shells and even more more shells. The battle of Champagne and Artois in 1915. lasting two months, cost us 100000 .75 shells an average of t21, 900 day. The bat tle of Verdun and the Somme in 1916, lasting 10 months. cost us more than 43, ,000,0 75 shells--an average of IA, 900 8 day. The offensive of 1918, lasting four months. cost us nearly 33, 900, 900 shells. an average of 272500 a day. We met this increasing ex- penditure. The output of 75 shells at the beginning of the war was the oretically 13,000 a day; as matter of fact 1t was 5000. It rose to 1900 day inlOctober, 1915; to 173,000 in August, 1916 to 2o3,000 in the follow ing November; to 233,000 In May, 1917, which level Is maintained and even exceeded to the end of the war. This increase of production--3.7S3 per cent was obtained under almost hope less conditions brought about by in- vasion. It Is to the everlasting honor of our government, of our Parliament and of our industry that they were able to achieve 1t, in spite of every thing.
 Other Weapons
 But to the first weapon, the 75-the use of which was developed so tre- mendously-it was necessary to add the war weapons of modern warfare, the 105 short, 155 long. 22o, 27o. 2so. 970 APO. Here everything had to be built up from the bottom. Up to the very eve of war experts had discussed the question of quick firing heavy artillery In scientific papers to no result. When war broke out we had t04N pieces of quick firing l55's--and that was all. But follow the expen- ditures from battle to battle: Cham pagne and Artois in 1915 (two months) cost us 510,oo0 rounds of 155, or 5000 a day, and 5.400 rounds of 220. or 900 day. Verdun and the Somme in 1916 (ten months) cost us 5,2S0,0 rounds of 1858, or 17,600 & day, and 413,0o0 rounds or 22os or 1.34S day. The Aisne In 1917 (two months) cost us 2,700,000 rounds of 220s, or 1,343 a day. The Aisne in 1917 (two months) cost us 2,700,o00 rounds of 1858. or 45,- 900 day and 2s7,000 rounds of 220s, or $500 day. For the offensive of 1918 the expenditure reached 6,530.000 rounds of 1858, or 54.416 day.
 This heavy expenditure of heavy shells, as In the case of the 75's, was completely covered by production. The daily output of 1858, which did L, l.. l grown to $500 in September, 1915; to so.ooo in october 1sls; t6 ss,ooe in July 1918. The output of 220s rose from 4s0 In September 1915. to 2,100 In September 1916, and to 3.4oo In April 1917. The total increase was 37S2 per cent for the 75's. was 9S3 per cent for the 1858, and 63s per cent for the 220s And all this, repeat and insist. was after invasion had robbed us of about S5 per cent of our pre-war iron and steel metallurgic resources.
 If we take into account others izes than the 75, the 155 and the 22o, we have during the last period of the war a total daily production of $50, 900 shells, and for the entire war<a total production of soo.oo0.00o projectiles.
 Airplanes in Action
 I do not want to prolong this enumeration. Let me merely add that. In September, 1914, our armies had 140 airplanes in action, and that in October 1918. they had 3,s0s> that at the beginning of the war we were producing s2 month and at the end 2,06S I note that in December, 1916. we had eight tanks and on the day of the armistice 3,400. Finally, let me emphasize the point that this pro- duction for the needs of the French