New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1864-06-24
HOW NOT TO BUILD AN IRON-CLAD

l5ned IN Otner columns OF tne uclccls III tDc
construction of the monitor Naubuc now build
ing at Brooklyn. We publish it without know
ing the names of the contractors, nordo we care
to know them. 1t IS enough that the account
handed us. comes over responsible name, has
been submitted To the President, referred by
him to the Secretary Of the Navy, and formed
the basis Of an investigation. We do not know
the result of that inquiry, but we deem it es-
sential to the public welfare that the facts, if
they are facts, should be widely understood.
The questions raised by this statement in
vdvc something more than poor workmanship
or commonplace dishonesty. II all or any con-
siderable part of the allegations arc true, they
disclose systematized aud deliberate fraud in
the building Ola vessel OF war, to the stanch-
ness of which perhaps the honor of the nation,
and certainly hundreds Of lives, are to be in
trusted. Look at few of these statements:
The iron on the bottom of the vessel is alleged
to be Of poor quality, the sheets are Of uneven
thickness and tho thin ones were battered on
the edge to make them appear as thick as the
Others.
The iron Of the boilers, it is asserted is so
inferior that the fanges could not be turned,
and the corners had to be patched.
1t is charged that the water compartments,
meant to insure the safety of the vessel, are so
contrived and arranged as almost certainly to
send her to the bottom. The least carelessness
in admitting the water will flood them, and
when once the water passes certain point,
there are no means of arresting its flow, or OF
preventing it from reaching the hold. In such
circumstances, if the vessel has the least motion,
as she must have unless in perfectly smooth
harbor, nothing can prevent her from becoming
waterloeged, and ultimately sinking.
The deck plank, by the specifications, were to
show surface of six inches each, but it is
charged that they are wider than six inches,
and to make them appear of the required width
the planks are grooyed to initiate cracks.
The rvets in the bottom of the vessel are said
to be so loosely put in that some of them have
been pulled out with the thumb and finger. and
any part OF the bottom, II is asserted, would
instantly be pierced by snag or other obstruc-
ton.
The fantal, which has to support its own
great weight the bearings of the propeller shaft,
the propeller, and the rudder is said to be so
weakly supported 40 to expose the vessel to the
utmost danger in a sea. If anything gives way,
both the rudder and engines will be disabled,
and the ship, of course, rendered helpless.
While some Of these faults may be inherent
in the design Of the Naubuc. Others are charge
able solely to the contractors and builders. To-
gether they disclose condition of affairs, if the
statements be correct, sufficiently alarming.
The class Of vessels known a. monitors have
now been so long on trial, and subject to such
criticism, that their defects are perfectly well
understood, and there is no excuse for repeating
them in new vessels. On the other hand, it ap-
pears from this statement that during the con-
struction Of naval vessel, the Department
exercises no control or supervision over
her builders, and is careless or unable
to prevent the leisurely accomplishment
of extensive and destructive frauds in her work.
manship. Are we to infer that when contract
is once awarded the Navy Department is thence.
forth ignorant of the progress of the vessel
which is its subject, until she is ready to be
turned over into its hands for service II is
true of any ship and it is especially true of an
iron-clad steamship, that she may be built with
numberless defects capable of being concealed
when she is finished, little likely to be detected
by the inspection given her. but which are fatal
to her effectiveness as a vessel of war; Unless,
therefore, the progress Of such vessel is |
watched, the country can have no assurance
that it gets an honestly.built ship. No merchant
rests satisfied with such system.
II is u custom almost or quite universal that |
merchant vessels are under the constant super.
vision, while on the stocks, of an agent Of the |
owner. Is the Navy Department less careful
Yet il it is not, how can such case as this
of the Naubuc occuri
The matter is one in which the public has so
deep an interest that We trust the Department
will communicate the result of its investigation,
and will explain, moreover, why it was neces-
sary that an inquiry should be privately Stimu-
lated, instead Of being made as matter of
course, concerning this and all other vessels
building for the Navy.