Found the 1892 Chief of Ordnance Report, it was digitized by Google, but that is not where it was found. Checking out the link more before posting it. However, the following is what I was digging for. The endorsement of the Krag Jorgensen by the Board On Magazine Arms, which was in this report.

  (You need to Login
  (You need to Login
  (You need to Login
  (You need to Login

After re-reading this report, I have a couple takeaways that may be old news to some.

From page 111, eighth paragraph, when discussing the improved Mauser "being employed to facilitate rapid charging of the magazine, though not essential thereto." Here the board recognized that the Mauser could be loaded faster, but it wasn't a big deal to them. They seemed equally concerned about single loading as they were about loading the magazine or maybe even more so.

On page 112 it is indicated that the Krag Jorgensen could handle both "flanged" or "rimless" shells. A gun of each type
went through trials and they both "appear to be of equal merit". They went with the "flanged head". This was "on account of the difficulties that might possibly attend the use of the" rimless head.

Of course the Springfield Model of 1903 could be rapidly loaded with a stripper clip and used rimless ammunition. Hindsight is 20/20.

The 1903 Springfield maintained the 'single-shot virtues' of the Krag.

A 1903 Springfield has a magazine cut-off and a hidden flat spring, that bears on the bottom of the left locking-lug, to hold the bolt open for single loading.

Two comments: 

One, the Army had a history of designing their rifles to succeed in the most recent war.  The Krag would have been just the ticket at the Little Big Horn or when chasing the Apaches.

Two, the early trials of machine guns (and Gatlings, Nordenfelts, etc.) indicated that flanged (rimmed) cartridges caused fewer extraction problems during rapid & prolonged firing than did the grooved (rimless) cartridges.  That may be why our Krags use rimmed cases.

Some other flanged cartridge designs of the era that lasted longer includes the British .303 and the Russian 7.62x54R. The British round lasted at least into the 1960's in military service. The Russian round is still soldiering on today....unbelievable. The flanged American round was left behind almost immediately, comparatively speaking.

Continuing on with the Ordnance Report in year ending 6/30/1893, the rifle and cartridge design had to be further defined. The "manufacture of the .45 caliber rifle was brought to a close during the month of June" (6/1893). The magazine rifle was not ready for manufacture yet and the smokeless powder for the cartridge still had to be figured out. It must have been a tenuous time stopping the manufacture of a rifle before being ready to start another, although they were tooling up for the new rifle. Also, they were, by law, required to reconsider American designs and continued with trials during this fiscal year. Below is from the 1893 report dealing with the issues of the new magazine rifle.

  (You need to Login
  (You need to Login
  (You need to Login
  (You need to Login

Sorry, this may appear to be a history lesson. For me it is more of a history discovery and I've posted as I discovered it. But it sure looks like it would be very frustrating to have a design (albeit foreign) submitted for approval, having a law passed to reconsider designs by Americans (some with no merit), retooling for the design of the endorsed design, working out problems of design, working out ammunition issues, having high ranking military officials thinking the .45 Springfield being good enough. There can be some correlation made today with the Beretta designed M9 pistol, but only so far.
Anyway, following from the 1894 Ordnance Report dealing with American inventors.

  (You need to Login
  (You need to Login