On Tuesday M. Messimy virtually admitted the truth of all
M. Humbert had said. From 1900 to 1905 Germany had spent £28,000,000 on her Army, as compared with £11,250,000 in France. From 1906 to 1910 Germany had spent £37,200,000, while France had spent £19,000,000. From 1911 to 1913 Germany had spent £23,400,000, France £16,500,000. In artillery France had 2,504 guns ; by the end of 1917 she would have 3,020. Germany bad at present, 3,370, and a distinct superiority in large-calibre weapons. The 75 mm. gun of the French Army was superior to the corresponding weapon in Germany. Five guns for use against dirigibles would be ready this year ; next year there would be thirty-five. Germany was far ahead of France in engineering material Lack of money had prevented the organization of telegraphic communication between the forts. Wireless telegraphy was also in a bad way. The German wireless station at Metz was much more powerful than the French frontier station. With regard to boots, the men of the active Army would need to have a new pair and a pair already worn on the day of mobilization. The reserve stock of boots required renewal. Frequently the demands of successive Ministers of War had been refused on the intervention of the Minister of Finance. The Senate decided at the end of the debate that the Army Committee should report to the House next October on the whole subject. The Report is not, we must admit, pleasant reading for the friends of France or of peace, but in all pro- bability it is unnecessarily pessimistic. Frenchmen are always inclined to force the note somewhat when disclosures as to Governmental neglect have to be made.
Previous page
