HC Deb 24 June 1918 vol 107 cc707-8
45. Colonel Sir CHARLES SEELY

asked the Prime Minister what was the date of the meeting of the Army Council which rejected the proposal made by him when Minister of Munitions, at the request of Field-Marshal French, to purchase 5,000 Madsen guns; whether any Report on the gun from the Hythe School of Musketry was laid before the Council; whether the meeting was unanimous; and, if not, who were the members voting for and against the proposal?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Macpherson)

As regards the first part of the question, the matter was not brought before a formal meeting of the Army Council, and the several parts of my hon. and gallant Friend's question do not therefore arise. I should like, however, to explain that at the date referred to the whole subject of the supply of machine guns to our forces was receiving most careful consideration, and was discussed departmentally in the usual manner. Lord French did not ask for a specific number of Madsen guns, but suggested that it should be considered with a view to supplementing the existing supply.

Trials of the gun had been carried out in France at his request, and had favourably impressed the experts at General Headquarters. A trial order of the Madsen gun was actually placed by the War Office, but it proved impossible to deliver the guns. Later the Ministry of Munitions inaugurated arrangements for the manufacture of the gun in this country. By the time the equipment of the factory was nearing completion there was a more urgent need for aeroplane engines; and, further, the deliveries of the other types of machine guns then in use had been largely increased, and the position in this respect was secure. The Field-Marshal agreed that it was undesirable to multiply further the number of types of guns in use, provided the output of the existing types was satisfactory.

For these reasons, it was decided not to make use of the Madsen gun. There was at this time no question of substituting the Madsen gun for any of the existing types, but only of ensuring a sufficient supply for the needs of our forces. So long as it was possible to do this with weapons which had proved efficient, it was considered undesirable to introduce a further type which the experts did not regard as superior to those then in use.