Washington sentinel., 1854-04-07

Mr. Chairman, perhaps, if we could understand
each other about the amount OF naval preparation
necessary to protect our commerce. there might
be no dispute In regard to il. That is all we want
iorce sumcicnt to protect our commerce and the
rights OF our citizens in every part of the globe
II Mr.. Jefferson had at one time been oeposed
to the navy, Hhough do not believe he ever was1
for the authority which the gentleman cited was
against the naval Doard-if he had been opposed
TO the navy in the early period of his life he saw
enough in the course Of his administration 10 con.
vince him that il was wrong policy; for he aaer
wards advocated a navy.
Mr.. Jefferson, in message, July 10, 1907, in
relation TO gun-boats and their efficiency for bar
| Dor defence, closes with these words:
| at must be superfuous to observe that mi.
species Of naval armament is proposed merely for
defensive operations; that ii can have bur IittIe
effect towards protecting our commerce in the
| open seas, even on our own coast"
! On December %, 1906 under reference of the
Presidents message, the Naval Committee pro.
! posed vote Of $660,000 TO enable the President
to cause 10 be built six line-ofbattle ships
On December u 1905, the Secretary or the NAVY
in reply 10 the Naval Committee Of the House.
presented statement of the additional number Of
omcers and seamen which, in the opinion of the
the additional annual expenditure of So 662 9l9 81.
Mr. Chairman, will gentlemen still quote Mr.. JEFF
ierson as opposed TO proper and reasonably navy!
Inc man question appears 10 be nor, whether
me continuance Of our commerce can be expected
without more naval force TO protect H. and whether
such continuance is of sufficient value 10 the
country TO justify the requisite expenditure.
But come again 10 the question: What is a
euincient navy 70 protect our commerce2 an
swer, SIR It IS navy sufficient to deter other ma
liohs rom attacking It. In this case more strong
ly, perhaps, than in any other, we see the wisdom
OF the Old adage that "preventon is better than
cure. By weakness you invite aggression from
other nations, as in the period from 1900 to 1872
ana you nave afterwards, to obtain satisfaction for
such attacks, by expensive negotiations, and per-
haps by war, and the loss Of immense amounts of
money, property, and valuable lives If we pro-
vide ourselves with sufficient naval armament
70 command respect from other nations, we there
by prevent these aggressions, and save all this
treasure 10 the country and preserve the lives of
valuable citizens. II.
Mr.. Chairman, / stated the other day, when
made speech upon this subject what loss we
are supposed TO have sustained for the want of an
appropriation of few hundred thousand dollars
previous TO the war Of 1872 That loss amounted
TO greatly over $l00,O00000, and all for the reason
that we did not make provision for building few
more vessels Of war;
How came those aggressions to be made upon
our commerce by France, the indemnify for which
is now demanded of the Congress of the United
STATES! II was because we did not have a force
sufficient to protect the rights Of our citizens II
was because by our weakness we invited aggres-
sion.
! do not know exactly how far The gentleman
from Missouri disagrees with us, except that he
Will not vote for the bill. He stated that he was
IN favor OF sufficient navy for the protection of
our commerce, and he wanted naval policy So
DO |, but il would be we'll first for the gentleman
to develope his views, give us his policy say how
many cruisers he wishes, of what description,
with what armament, and with what force Until
ne does that, do not know how far he disagrees
with us. .71
With these ships added, our navy will not be
greater than it has been heretofore Il is not pro-
posed to make an increase Of our naval force for
the purpose of offensive operations, but simply
and solely to prepare ourselves for the contin.
gency IN which we are placed, to act upon the de-
enslve and to guard the rights of our citizens and
protect our commerce.
II IS stated by somebody, do not know who,
mat the government is now paying So, 600 day
for q steamboatto keep reinforcsments from going
to the relief of Captain Walker. Now, sir, II we
are obliged to pay $4,000 day for steamboat for
TINS purpose what is the reason? Ii is because
you have an insufficient navy. That is an addi.
tional reason why we should pass this BILL
Now, sir, as stated in the outset, twas not nv
intention TO address the committee upon this sub
Ject, except in reply to the arguments of the hon.
orable gentleman from Missouri. honestly be-
Lsve that common prudence requires that we
should build these vessels; and as no other argu.
ment has been advanced in opposition TO it. will
take my seat without OBTAINING the committee
further. =