Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1882-07-06


Mr.. Robson, of New Jersey, also
opposed the amendment. It's adop
ton would be declaration that the
United States should have no Navy
to protect its commerce or vindicate
it's honor.
Mir. Atkins expressed hope that
the gentleman would not say that
the country had no Navy now.
MIR Robeson replied that the re
port of the naval committee showed
that it now had no Navy at all, COM
parable to the navies of other coun-
tries. The present Navy was OF
wood and it required as large a
yearly expenditure to keep it in re>
pair as it would cost to commence
building a new Navy"
Mr.. Hewitt, of New York-"Do
you say that we have no iron clads?
Mr.. Robeson-''There are fourteen
iron~clads, but they are not cruising
ships"
Mr.. Blount, of Georgia, COM
mented on the enormous expendl-
ture which would be necessary to
build up Navy that would compare
with the navies of the European
Powers.
Mr.. Belmont, of New York, ex-
pressed his non-concurrence with
the former statement of Mr.. Robe
son, that the presence of United
States iron>clad in the port of Callao
would have prevented the dismem-
berment of Peru. With the diplo-
natic pol ~ of the State Depart
ment hundred iron-clads would not
have had that effect That policy
had contrived in TIE short space of
six months not only to gamble away.
the influence of the United States in
South America, but actually to open
the way to direct European interfer-
ence, by giving the color of necessity
to that interference. In this ccn~
nection he reviewed briefly the &C
ton OF Messrs. Evarts and Blaine,
commenting unfavorably on the lat
ter, and expres sing his desire for a
verdict of the House on such stew
ardsbip.
In concluding his remarks on the
policy of Mr. Evarts' administration,
Mr. Belmont said that the country
had never learned the extent of the
responsibility, financial or political,
which Mir. Eear had so lightly ac-
cepted for the United States. His
political campaign had not brought
p sace to South America, nor honor to
the State Dep 4rtment. As to MIR.
Blaine's policy Mr. Belmont referred
to the TT cognltion of CIlderon, and
said it was perfectly clear that Min
lster Hurlbut had looked upon Peru
and the credit industrial as allied.
His Instructions authorized him IN
that view. Shipherd aud Senator
Blair had made, fh4iy .sG'phs eRa"0a
July, 1881. Up to that mo-
ment the diplomacy of the
State Department as to South Amer
lea had been comparatively intel
iigible. After that all logic and
consistency vanished Shepherds
conduct had been explained on the
theory that he labored uuder inde>
Unable hallucination. Lunatic ne
might be, but ii so, he was the luna>
tic who had been supported and
advised in such manner that he met
with nothing but cordislity and con>
fdence.
Referring to the Landrean claim
Mr.. Belmont said that that claim. as
urged on the 4th of August and 10Th
of December, 1881, became very
awkward obstacle in the way of peace
between Chill and Peru, and belit-
tied and degraded the position of
the United States in those negotia-
tions. The government, instead of
being an impartial arbiter, became
speculative operator upon the
helplessness of Peru and the
fears of Chill. It was not difficult
to conceive circumstances in which
a necessity might be created for the
building of a large Navy, when the
House might be absolutely COM
PEELED to make appropriations that
would dwarf those in the present
bill, but the diplomacy of this gov>
ernment, from March to December,
1881, had gone far enough in the ins
terest OF claimants and spectators
upon Peruvian territory. This
course had prevented the proper and
legitimate aid of the United States
from being felt, and from preventing
the ACKNOWLEDGMENT of Peru. He
would not say that there was a de,
liberate purpose to bring things to
such pass. He simply stated and
summed up the results of that
dip omacy.
Mr.. Harris, of Massachusetts, said
his own views and those of the naval
committee were in favor of the sub
stitute to provide for the building of
ten new wooden vessels of war, but
he yielded to the desire of the ap-
preparation committee, and would
only move an amendment to the
pending paragraph, which appropri>
ates $1,750,000 to the bureau of con
struction and repairs. The amend
ment is that any portion of that sum
not required for the purposes speci-
fed may be applied toward the con
struc'ion of two new cruising vessels
of war, the size, armament and mate
rial of which it provides for.
MIR. Blount, of Georgia, made
point of order that the amendment
provided for new Legislation and was
not IN orier on the appropriation bill.
After long discussion on the point
OF order, the question was sub
mitted to the committee, and was
overruled.
The discussion of the amendment
itself was the proceeded with.
Mr. Ellis, of Louisiana, declared
himself heart and soul with the
naval committee in its efforts to re>