The daily union., 1852-09-15


MI. BRoDHEAD | still persist 10 my opposition to
this amendment These contractors have second con-
tract, which has been entered into with them By the
Navy Department by which they are allowed 10 use the
dock for three years II they do not put il up WELL how
MIR GWiN They will never put it up so long as they
can get $500 day demunage
| Mr BRODHEAD. We have officers OF the navy
enough, who have nothing else TO do, who supern.
tend this matter and il officers of the navy SUI
perintend it, who Will We have plenty OF those officers
out employment, and they very easily be sent TO
/ Mr. WALKER | wish 10 ask the senator from Cal
ifoa question in regard TO this matter for desire TO
vote understandingly Have the contractors 10 build
this dock agreed 10 deliver at the place where It is TO
Nj GWlN. They are to deliver the materials there
bat this to see that they are properly put together
/ Mr. RUSk There seems 10 be disposition IN regard
to this matter that very sorry 10 see. do not look
upon this appropriation going 10 the contractors
| Mr. GWlN. Ii does not
Mr. RUSK II is an appropriation asked for by the
Navy Department IN order 10 enable them TO take care
oil the property Of the United States
i Mr.. MILLER. VIII the senator from California per-
nit me TO ask him whether that recommendation was
not made before the leasing outoi the dock
Mr GWiN IL l. has no reference at all to the leasing
tractors under their lease until after is put together
and put afoat.
| Mr. CHASE. [ have an amendment 10 offer TO the
amendment. which. think, will obviate all difficulties.
! II is 10 insert instead of the amendment OF the senator
/ from California, the iolowing: t.
eTha the Secretary of the Navy be, and ne is hereby
directed appoint suitable officer
and supernend the construction Of the floating dry dock IN
! California. tH8+
j Mr. BADGER There is no necessity for that amend
menl; for unless provision is made, the Secretary
of the Navy would direct officer Of the navy to al
\ tend 10 IT,
Mr. CHASE. | understood the senator from Cali
ornia to state that this dock has been purchased and
shipped, and that unless person appointed to
superntend the putting together and reception OF IT, de-
murrage would be charged, which would amount TO
great deal more than the salary OF the officer II that be
The sole object to be accomplished undoubtedly ii will
Il hp ed ma d,np M
whatever arise in any quarter hope, therefore.
that my amendment will be adopted
i Mr. RUSK. The authority which would be conferred
by the amendment of the senator from Ohio already
ss, but il is not sufficient to the purpose. The
object is TO send out person to take care OF The govern
ment property in California The Navy Department has
made estimate for il, and, as understand. this is
commended by the Naval Committee OF this body Under
such circumstances, il 10 be strange, passing
strange, that there should be any opposition to IT, know
the appropriations asked for California lage and
cessay they must be large Prices OF labor and every
thing else there are high but look al the returns which
received from California The appropriations for
California in the aggregate from the treasury OF the Uni
ted States to be large, but The returns 10 the general
prosperity OF the United States from California are also
4 large. She is new State, aborng under difficulties,
away from your protecting arm in case OF emergency
trust and hope that this exercise of economy will be
commenced with reference those who have the phys
cal force OF the United States hand to defend them
and will not be extended further 10 California. know
nothing about this business; but the recommendation of
the Secretary of the Navy, the recommendation OF the
Naval Committee of this body, who have had il under
investigation, and my obligations TO the people OF Cali
orna 10 protect them, require me 10 vote Tor this propo
stlon cannot, under my sense OF duty, vote against
Mr. ArCHISON If this were appropriation for the
benefit OF California. and necessary would be the
last TO say word against it but this appropriation
is not for the benefit OF California II Tor the benefit of
person who will be appointed to superniend The
putting together OF this dry y-dock The question now re-
solves itself into ths Is there officer in the navy at
the disposition OF the government who has capacity, and
understanding and common sense enough TO superntend
this work
Mr.. GWIN. would ask the senator whether any Of
hcer oil the navy has ever been appointed to supernend
the putting together Of either OF the three dry docks OF
this description, which have been built in the United
/ States
MI ATCHISoN. do not know anything about
taat
Mr. GWIN. | know that naval officers have not su-
pe,inlended the putting together Of these docks.
4 Mr. ATCHlSON. | know this That you have
naval officer at every naval depot and navy-yard in the
UnIed States who superntends the building OF vessels
i Mr. GWlN; The naval constructors attend TO that.
i Mr. ATCHlSON. Well the officers OF the navy in
command of The yard suPerntend IT, think the proro
son OF the senator from Ohio 10 be entirely
sary, because the Secretary of the Navy order
naval officer there TO superntend the construction OF this
DOCK and that without any additional cost am willing
to vote this Jney to the State OF California, IL you will
give pre,ext for it, am willing to vote this money
for the benefit OF the people OF California, but
able the Secretary Of the Navy to appoint special agent
and give him Sl3,5Oo for this job, when it be done
by an officer OF the navy well as by any supenntend
ent outside OF the navy.
! Mr.. GWlN. The Secretary Of the Navy has himself
spoken this subject in his recommendation. II there
any officer OF the navy who competen, TO have
supernended the work, he would have selected that of
hcer. III officers OF the navy competent 10 superin
tend the putting together OF dock OF this description,
they would have been employed And let say to the
senator from Missouri-for know he is disposed to
strike down my country some are-that the very gen.
ieman who is to be appointed well skilled the busi
ness for which he has been selected and allow
say more, that he is OF the party which the gentle
man from Missouri and belong 10, and is emlneny |
qualified for the station. He is entire stranger me;
out know hs capacity, II officer OF the navy was
TO be designated for the service you would have pay
him extra compensaton and is absolutely necessary,
putting this dock together that OF skill and expe-
rence in such structures should be employed leave IL
to the senator from Rhode Island who sits me,
Mr. JAMEs II dock Of this kind, under the superin.
tendence OF individual ignorant of il, might be ru
ined The object is 10 have man skilled IN this duty
The Secretary of the Navy has recommended who
is eminently qualified for it,
Mr.. MANGUM. | rise TO make another appeal 10 the /
Senate 10 bring these debates to close snd to appeal to
my honorable friend from Missouri to withdraw his op-
position, the nominee for this office is to be Of the same
party with himself.
Mr.. ATCHISON. am decidedly opposed TO this sys- /
tenn OF buying up the democracy BY such things such
be the case tLaughtet
Mr. DAWSON | desire 10 PROFOUND question 10
the HONORABLE senator from California would ask /
hun WHETHER IN every instance naval officer, or
some engineer IN the navy, has not been appointed TO
supeniend the putting together OF these dry docks Have
not Mr.. Baldwin and MIR Sanger, and other civil eng
neers OF the navy who have ben educated for the pur
ose invariably been designated the proper persons
attend TO these matters understand that TO be so and If
be fis