The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1859-01-22

A CARD
1t is not unknown to the reading public that sue
cessf competition for the contract of the machinery for
the sloop being built the navy-yard has
been made the subject of unjust criticism and gross mis-
representation.
We feel due to professional and business rcputn
ton to make apan statement OF facts the truth of which
hold ourselves personally responsible to substantate
by iucontrovertible evidence,
When, in the month of September last, the bids
opened for the machinery for the ship known the Grit
fifth it was found that the only bid submitted was by
VIM Norris.
The Navy Department, finding that there had been
competition because such information necessary
to enable bidders to propose had been furnished by Mr.
Griffith TO Mr.. Norris and TO else, directed an nd
Yersement to issue inviting proposals. and furnished at
the time the mdship section and side elevation
the ship.
sr Griffith although the agent of the government
refused afford any information to bidders alleging
reason that he had approved Mr. Norriss plans, and
would have communication with any else the
subject
On the 4th of November the plans were by the Secre
tary of the Navy submitted to board of four engineers
two of whom reported in favor of plans, and two
whilst not disproving, thought those of Mr., Norris
equal
The plans of Mr. Norris according to the reports con-
tanning radical defects the Secretary invoked the counsel
of two of the most eminent engineers in the CORPS and
they unhesatngly pronounced in favor and pointed
out clearly the of Mr. Norris drawings, which
were of character so important and glaing excite
in their minds surprise that any engineer of competency
should have been willing to hazard his reputation by APP
proving them
The department the ship to be constructed by
gentleman not attached TO the service willing to
allow the greatest latitude Investigation and requested
the attendance Of three engineers not members of the
government corps of whom reported 10 our favor,
and the remaining two gave Mr. Norriss plans the pref
erence but did not condemn ours
It is, however, worthy of remark that the most aject
appeals made at least two of the members of the
board in the Norris behalf before they reached Washing
ton to enter upon the discharge. of their duties.
1t will be observed that the drawings submitted
to nine engineers five Of whom represented in favor,
and four in favor of Mr. Norris and yet oyey to
our plans.
After the investigation had closed, we were asked to
state the rate OF speed which would guaranty to
accomplish and at we liked it sixteen miles per
hour with forfeiture of SIS 900 in of failure
but without increasing the price first named for Che
work. II
short time before The award was made, Mr.: Norris
preferred charges against the engineer in chief for hav
ing furnished US With copies of his plans, sc. To this
replied by aidayiis denying the allegations stating
at the time that il ly means complimentary
to experience of sixteen years aud the construction OF
than three hundred steamers to suppose thai we
would copy much less improperly obtain, plans or draw
ings from one who had never constructed marine
CINE of any kind The Secretary OF the Navy in making
his decision carefully reviewed the testimony against the
engneer-n-chief and in support of the charges made,
and did find the shadow of evidence to sustain
Mr. Norris in his position.
The award was accordingly made First, because of
the superiority of plans decided by majority OF
those to whom the proposals had been submitted, With
out being condemned by any one; and secondly, be-
Cause were the lowest bidders for the work. taking
into the account the rate OF speed guaranteed BY us
Which, by the department considered desideratum
The facts thus stated are susceptible Of proof as wen as