The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-03-27

PrtbEHttu II
De noticed that he is one OF the contractors in the
now before the Senate, understand Ga your table
thr contract for the establishment al Kery in which
ms name appears. He had contest with gentleman
by the name OF Dakn as find by the record and they
contested the matter for years and finally find them all
together, and the work divided up.
Well, SIR Mr. John S Gilbert, OF the partners in
the contract Tor the construction OF the California dock
presented his memorial a part of which will read
Your memorialist came 70 Washington during the
with the advertisement of The Navy Department, a
proposition ior building dock for shpoheine, for the
shp-of- f-the-ne is the largest vessel in the service
Mr.. BADGER. Is that for building ship Of the
Mr. BRoDHEAD No; il is for building dock for
and shews that the dock Of Mr. Dakin was not worth
anything intend sir, 10 The evidence Of these
GS Fo s1Sa 81 e sae haI Ihsy went
have made vi 900 000 ii they told the truth; and il fol-
lows further, that if they told the truth in their memo
als me docks whch,hey have constructed are not worth
anything He thea gQps on 10 praise this dock right WELL
and says that Mr.. Dakn's dock is not worth much
Here is the memorial, which any senator see Then
this memorial Of Mr.. Gilbert. must also read you what
ne proposes to construct basin and railway for and then
will show you how much he got:
For basins and railways, TO be used in connexon with
$4,000 ''r'''N = '0'' '''''''''' '''
Now, will read to you how much he did receive,
after Mr.. Dakn had Withdrawn his opposition to him,
and he had Withdrawn his opposition to Mr.. Dakin:
"For balance floating dock Kttery $l37 325 for basin
and one railway, $252, $50"
Now, look at the contract on the table for the establish
ment al Kery. You will find this same gentleman is
one Of the partners in the business for which he and his
associates offered 10 build this basin and railway for
$4,000, thereby getting Congress to pass the act and
them when il was passed they received $50; and
the other gentleman received at Philadelphia 4 059 for
basin and railway and s4o2 ss3 for dock~making in
all the of $sl3, ,742 For the Dock basin and rail
way at Pensacola they received 1921. .937 and for the
dock at California $6I0000-making together SO O7s.-
5s4a pretty good OF money for set Of contract
ors to receive, who excluded competition by claiming
patent.
In his memorial Gilbert condemns Dakin's dock as fol-
lows:
"H important,o observe that dock the plan here
proposed can operate nayyyad where lhe water Is
No expense Tor excavang and keeping open the channel
will be the with all other docks Mr.
reports that the expense of dredging the channel enable
Dakins dock TO ops,ste including orbwork 10 keep the
And yet, sir Dakins dock has been taken and Gilbert
is one OF the partners for constructing it,
/ Now, sir, Mr.. Dakn presented his memorial to Con-
gess IN which be complains that there was violation
OF his contract made for putting dock at Pensacola
he also complains that his original contract violated,
and desires that il may be altered He says that Mr
his plan is decidedly the best, and that the plan OF the
other gentleman ought not TO be adopted" Here is the
memorial Both these gentlemen were well sustained by
scientific gentlemen, as they say
Well s they contested the matter up TO the year 1s47
as find by the record various contests took place be-
the parties represented by these patentees and
their associates Then Congress passed directing
the Secretary OF The Navy 10 TO be constructed at
each OF the yards OF Kery, Philadelphia and Pensacola
a dry-do for ships oi-ihene, and railway at any
such place may be preferred by the Secretary Of the
Navy You perceive that this first act OF 1s47 conferred
discretionary power on The Secretary OF the Navy But,
sir, the contest commenced before him, (Mr Mason and
here his report The subject The commenced
before him, and they refused TO allow the Secretary Of
the Navy to use their patenrght and that is the way
a h,nk 10
The Secretary says;
"Each Of the several plans Of the docks submitted TO the
departments was patented invention, and good faith
would not permit invade that patent, by nsing It,
without of the propreios Therefore the pro.
pr-ios OF the plans OF docks known the balance
Invitations Of the department ia March last do not specify
price at which the right their patents would be
sod 10 tie department"
Mind what an honest report this is:
"And the price contained in their proposals. Tor the
srucon by greatly exceeds the Appropriated
Tor the object TO the three navyas The chief Of the Bn
addressed the proPneuos OF these two plans again called
ae. attention 70 ai' point o. inquiry and requested ,hem
lzsd'
They declined TO make such an arrangement but again
repeated the offer 10 contract for the execution Of the
work The Secretary of the Navy replied that he could
not evade paient-rght, and hence the whole matter
came up again in Congress in 1s4s. But what does the
Secretary OF the Navy say the propriey Of making
these docks
"On the question OF the most suitable plan for dry dock
my opinion officially formed In 1874, in favor o the
permanent dock, as preferable 10 all others, s
changed"
Well. sir then il into Congress. Those gentle
men who had contested the ground before in Congress-
and got their bill passed. leaving II to the discretion OF
the Secretary of the Navy, into Congress again,
and in istS obtained the passage OF an act under which
these contracts made Here is the act, sir author
zing the Secretary OF the Navy, and directing him per-
emptory-for, SIR nothing was lett TO his discreon-to
adopt the plans ol both these gentlemen.
Now, you easily understand how II was done
They got tired OF warning with each other and then they
TO Congress and get the contracts together They
get all the contracts they had been asking for, set
getting the contact Tor the work Kt;ery, another al
phadepla and another al Pensacola all OF them going
California dock Now, this is very EVIDENT and the
must be apparent TO every one, how they obtained
nearly 81 900 600 for each of these structures when their
memorials show that they offered 10 do the work for
$3.50 900 or $3.50 600 So that, il they told the truth
when they get the contracts, they have made
81 900 900. do not know how much they have made;
Judge from the record and do not go out oil the record
Now, Mr. President | think IT is time that Congress
should quit this dock building and abandon this system OF
ing contracts, and refer that business 10 the
tive branches OF the government, 40 that there may be
some responsibility somewhere, there ought to be- II
s business TO pass laws not TO make contracts
think that Mr.. Presioa when Secretary OF the Navy,
complained of this mode OF proceeding the part OF
Congress We charge the Navy Department with $1,000.
600 for drydocks opposition to the recommendation OF
the department. and then 60 before the country com.
planning OF the heavy expenses OF this government aod
opposing wbig administration for doing IT, Sir that is
not right The expenses OF this Navy Department run
up 100000 81. 100000 higher Than ever before
o.d f,o thc IN nj