The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-06-22

Il
more scssost No. ihpSitlnt but shall not dwell
upon them IN detsiloi Tbereiis one however, Of So
much importance hat must moi pass il II Is
this: that the seoonaldoa pneseais means for its
own repair, by taking out the sections one at time
on others for the papssss sheseas no feasible plan
Tor gepair.ng the balance dock has been suggested
aao would a al events rsqars'to do H. s'ruet-
| come now To consider, Mr. Chairman, the tssti.
Inony which has been adduced in reference TO these
The statement principally relied on by the adyo-
ealss Q, ne balance dock is that thai dock has been
adopted Py companies and goyernments abroad.
There is no sort Of evidence whatever produced that
any foreign sorsr"nsni has adopted Il; but il ap-
pears 10 have been built for Commercial purposss In
two ports in EuroPe-Hayre and Amsterdam. You
will hnd, Mr.. Chairman, that floating docks OF a
similar construction have been In use In those
tries for upwards OF century, and the new ones
recently built, il 10 probable the improvements, IL
any, IN the balance dock, may have been adopted
bot this circumstances affords evidence Of the SUI
perioriy Of Inc balance dock over the sectional,
which understand has never yet been presented,
and - not known N those countries. But the test
OF the merit. Of these forisn balance docks com
pared with the sectional dock in New York, was
presented before The Naval Commilise, ia The cer-
neato OF the owners OF the Hayrs line Of packet
ships, Mesars, Fox & Liyingston who have had
vessels doeked 10 both docks and who say thar
they greatly prefer The sectional dock. But slll
better tsst--sytneing, perhaps, the most exusordi-
mary unanraity ofopinon ever before exhibited up
on my siminf suhject-ls 10 be found in the opin-
ions ofthe ship builders, ship wrighs, and shin
owners Of die city OF New York, (the only place
where the two docks arc used near each oihsr who
all unit, with scarcely an exception In declaring in
memorials 10 Congress, that they clearly and de-
eidediy prefer the sectional dock not only to the
oaianee dpok, but also 20 all other plans of dry
dock whatever. cslithe attention OF the House
most especially 10 this remarkable fact-uu the
persons who practically use dry-docks, who know
their good and bad qualities from their own
personal practical experimental 10 man, most
decidedly prefer the sectional dock to any 9th
e. plan whatever. 10 not this better, safer more
reliable testimony for this House TO act upon, than
any otherl Is IL not Just the kind Of testimony we
want 70 guide us on such question: Is Il not more
sensible 10 rely on IL than on the preudices Of those
who are welded 10 old systems IL il not safer 10
act upon II than upon the theoretical specuations or
the theoretical objections OF those who having some
interest OF their own TO serve project 10 push
Onward, beset the halls Of Congress, persecu,s the
members with their constituents and make all their
spitaf out Of their SANDERS and attacks upon this
great and practically sueeessful Improvement IL il
not wiser TO adopt plan like this ACTUALLY ied upon
tho largest scale and preferred 10 all others by the
whole community, rather than To risk large sums Of
money upon projects tired as vet only on a small
cale, and on that scsIe declared by sound PRACTICAL
Judges 10 be greatly INFERIOR
IL isa tith, which doubt not win be readily ac-
knowiedged by large portion Of the House that
he advocates Of the balance dock, abandoning the
PRESENTATION OF the inents ofthefr own plan, have
spent most Of their efforts in attscking The sectional
lock, and ondeavoring TO create distru in H. and it
due 10 the advocates OF the latter plan TO say that
they have adopted an entirely different course In
pursuing tins siBdictiye policy, a M Gilbert who
appears 20 be the principal person thrust forward in
Sis inyidsous manner, has flooded these halls with
II asf IN In.-- a n
lerto misead and deceive ms House and serve his
own purposes, has Been guilty Of u,tering several
deiberuto falsehoods, Of which | shall proceed NJ
Ince % convict him Beyond the possibility OF escape
Mr. Chairman, fhave noted down on paper the false
hoods and their Retaliation, so as TO present them
clearly and specifically! y ,'-.
L. The fhN mirspr presentation made by Gilbert,
which shsi notice e mis-: In article pabished in
the Washington Union, on the 17th OF March last
under his own hand, he stated that seven of the
tanks Of the sectional dock in New York were
u~enty-four feet wide each and that one was thirty
ak feet wido--she object OF which was to show q
deficiency ofiftins power derived from the tanks,
and to infor that they should be deeper than pro.
posed aScesAln amount o. power being claimed by
thso psoP ssscs o. ne tanks snch a. they were.
In,s nssssSes M 49, rsh,sd By .hsprodoction
thAs he hsd msAsasd she tanks, and that seven Of
hem were hiAstee6 feettwp inchss wide, and one
was twencysx ret eight incbss Vide
2. The second representation which shall
notice is contained in an article signed by Gilbert
last republished ih'the Union, IN which he states
that the owners of the sectional dock claimed a
lifting power Of 1870 tons In their publications on
the subject whereas fhetrdtl, Is they claimed only
!, $50 tons. x This representation was made to
help out an attempt to show deficiency Of the lift
ing capacity Of the dock In its practical operation in
raising the Henry Clay and steamship Great
Britain. q y , : l'1''iH .".,. "a.
g. The third ,risrepr eseniaiion which 7 shall no.
lice is the assertion that the ship Henry Clay, lately
raised on the sectional dock, weighed only $50
IONS, and exhausted the lifting power Of the dock;
ing power, but the following certificate from Messrs
Brown e. Bell, eminent rshipbuilders in New
York, shows that the said ship weighs LOGS tons,
Viz: ." 49,
"Toht proprittors Of he sectional destins dock:
"GssrLfMfs In compliance with your request we have
made caldnatior OF the weight Of e ship Henry Clay
which was lately your dock. :aB5t #' lt| / -
Her actual average dranght of she left the dock
sssss and %' ss Gps q ballast
and 7dh inches Allowing a lbs 10 the cubic foot
q salt water she weighed o6' tons quarters and 4so
{ go - h0o''s'peeuoH BiaowN BELL.
4, The fourth misrepresentation of Gilbert which
shall notice ID his assertion that the sectional dock
has upset. This is utterly faes; the following ex-
tract from certificates signed by all the New York
shp-builders proves that no accidents of any kind
ever happened to it. They cay as follows, viz:
give years practical working and raising many large
ships and sectional dock without any
dent occurring tot my ship upon it, clearly demon
The opinion Of Messrs Jeryis and Allen, distin-
guished civil engineers heretofore alluded to- is con-
elusive that The sectional dock is more stable than
the balance dock. 't."'''"
5. The GJlh misrepresentation made by Gilbert
which, shaH notice is an assertion that the section
al dock has 10 be fastened 10 pier stead it, and
keep from apsettnsr On this point addressed n
letter for Information to the chief engineer of the b
reau of yards and docks, who rshtes the falsehood
In the following letter in reply,viz:
stn Your letter Sf This date Is received ind ID repy TO
the questions contained therein have to state. that the
tonal dock at New York secured to pier ny vertlcal
posts attached 10 the dock passing hroug booms which
fastened to the pier II have frequently visited This
Dock end have often witnessed the operation raising
large merchant ships Twas always my impression that
these sliding posts aud boons adopted and used
very tohtenient mode Of oorg the dock and preventing
all chatting against the pier tile dock and falls with
sh.t, ia Na,u V,rI, ..l,. ~