New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1870-05-19

staff officers to receive pay according to their relative
rank as specified in the general order Of the Navy De-
Mr.: WAsHBURN explained that this ANIMAL salary
Il dimbished the pay Of the Admiral d sss Of Vice.
Admirals at sea, 1888. and on shore, s2,lS3 &c.
said that the rates did not exclude allowances for travel
ing expenses to officers when sent on special duty
officers, declaring that he did not sympathze with the
movement against them: They had done their duty well
Alabama by the navy was alluded to- he was inclined to
instance the case Of Mosby who had been operating all
not been captured by the army.
After further discussion the amendment offered by Mr.
Mr.. HALE moved as additional provisO that nothing
in the bill shall be construed to give to any staff officer
line officer of corresponding rank. Agreed to.
The, The amendment offered last night by Mr. Washburn
CWis.) as amended to-day, was agreed to-
next was for the ay OF s hs petty
aondns en for he oce o m ana at an
average pay Of $500 each per annuIn, 81, $4,000.
ber Of mem to He repcd to the arSnmen Of Mr.
Dawes last night to the effect that the United States
s Ss Of Te h G9 as T he strength Of the
saying that there was no probability OF the armies eyer
could ever come in conflict with the navy OF foreign
Power therefore there was no analogy betwe9n Ine
TO the relative cost Of the British and American
Mr. MYERS Rep., PENN also contradicted the state
ment of Mr. Dawes and reminded him Of the great dis
parity between wages in the United states and England
Mr. DAWES Rep., Mass) defended his statements Of
last night, giving Admiral Porter as his authority; lie
pair and showed that in the Of the United States
BTtsh Navy SEQ per man Tho mistake of the gentleman
from California was in dividing the total cost OF each
that system Of calculation taking 1900 as the number
of men and officers in the American Navy the cost per
Of the American Navy was $3.50, and Of the British
MI scoFiiELD Rep, PENN advocated the amend.
men proposed by Mir Sargent. 1t was recommended by
the Navy Department and was necessary, unless some
vessels OF the fleet were withdrawn and laid up 1t was
the same old problem that all countries had endeavOred
to solve, how to have large and effective navy IN time
peace. Complaints had been made OF The large number
of officers That number had been fixed by law If Con
Stead Of scoding them all the time, if they were
many graduates from the penitentsry SO if they did not
meant the thew should soy to the Secretary Of the Navy
Cali home some of your sqadrons lay up some OF your
department he made the scapegoat all the time for the
Alter f"f further discussion by Mr. wAsHBURN Wis.,
against the amendment and by Mr. ONIELL in favor OF
on motion of Mr. WAsHBURN Wis., an item Of $685.
600 inserted for contingent expenses Of the Navy De
partment. .
bill offering and discussing amendments OF no public in
After dsposing of nine pages of the bill, the Commit
EVENING SESSION.
The Committee of the Whole, at - O'clock,
THE NAVAL APPROPRIATION BILL
one by Mr. SARGENT Rep CALI to increase the appro-
pration for gpowder from $4,000 to 100000 He said
that the hand unusually low. The amend
ment was opposed by Mr.. WASHBURNE (Rep., WIS.,,
and was rejected
MIR SARGENT moved to increase the appropriation for
labor at the Maynard from $4,000 to $.0JO0 in con
necton with the Ordnance Bureau The estimate OF the
| Bureau was 800 600.
Mr.. DAWES Q.ep., Mass) opposed the amendment, and
expressed the hope OF the number OF navyyards bee
soon reduced to three the Atlantic coast and one ON
the Pacific Coast II shpsof-war were TO he bt mere
after, they should DC put AT private snip uS' "'io
| they could I've built quicker ana CHEAPER
Mr. MlERS lt.cp, Ienh suppoIitu tIe alhclIne ~