Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-08-02
A WEAK BACKED DOLPHIN
POINTS IN THE CONTROVERSY
OVER ROACH'S LAST BOAT.

The Naval Advisory Boards Claims OF
the Vessels StRunchness and IrOnical
Review OF the Censure of the Board
of Examiners - Secretary Whitney's
Views in the Matter.
WASHINGTON, Aug. 1.-Secretary
Whitney this afternoon made public the
criticisms of the naval advisory board
upon the report of the Dolphin board Of
examiners, together with the reply of the
latter in regard to the delay in giving out
the criticisms. The Secretary remarked
to-day that the naval advisory board de-
chned to unite with MIN in
asking for trials; that he ap-
pointed the examining board and
initiated the examination; that naval
custom and proprietv required him TO
send the criticisms for their reply before
making them public; that the reply was
received only Yesterday, and he there
upon yesterday ordered both documents
to be given to the preSs to-day.
SURPRISED AT THE REPORT.
He also yesterday addressed to Admiral
Simpson the following letter:
NAVY DEPARTMENT,
WASHINGTON, July 81, 1888.
IR.-I acknowledge the receipt of the COM
munication of the naval advisory board of
July 10, covering the criticisms of the report
OF the examining board upon the Dolphin,
with request that the Same should be given
equal publicity with their report. | have
caused The same to be printed. and send you
herewith 20 copies for such use as you may
choose TO make Of them, and shall give the
matter to the newspapers Tomorrow. can
but express my surprise that your board
should have certified q vessel TO me for ac-
ceptance with 50 many admitted defects as
are shown by the report TO have existed.
Very respectfully,
W. G. WHITNEY,
Secretary of the Navy.
To Rear a d1airal E. Simpson, Q. s. NJ, PreSi-
dent of NdUaI Adois0ry Board.
LENGTHY REPORTS.
The statement submitted by the naval
advisory board makes 40 printed pages
(equal to about 10 ordinary newspaper
cOiumns) }, and the rejOinder Of the board
of examiners is about one-fourth as long.
The advisory board begin their statement
by quoting in eXtensO the criticisms of the
examiners on the structural strength OF
the Dolphin. They say:
The above statements clearly bring against
the Dolphin a most serious charge of struc-
tural weakness. due to faulty design and ag-
gravated by deficient workmanship. The al
legged evidence in support of this charge con-
ssts Of
/. Vibrations of the structure while under
full speed.
2. Heating of two crank pins on two sue
cessive occasions.
This evidence is presented and distinctly at
tributed to lack Of structural strength, yet in
closing their report they state that they regret
that the matter rests upon opinion, and moth
ing short of a trial at sea for some time IN
rough weather can satisfactorily determine
her stength or weakness.
ASSERTING sTAUNCHNEss.
We now propose to show that the Dolphin
is strong. staunch vessel, and that the above
opinion was formed in the utter absence of
positive evidence, and could not be derived
from an examination Of the facts.
The showing which followed is elabo-
rate and technical and concludes with an
affirmation that, compared with other YES
sells, the Dolphin is exceptionally strong
structurally. In regard to the speed of
the vessel the advisory board say that
the speed being dependent upon the de-
sign of the vessel it was not included in
any stipulatiOns in the contract and that
the whole responsibility for it rests upon
the designers.
THE REJOINDER.
The examining board, in their rej0in-
der, say that the defense of the vessel
and her builder by the advisory board is
as good as could be made under the cir
cumstances, but from some Of the facts
stated they draw very different conclu-
sions. The examiners reiterate their for
mer assertion that the vessel is weak
structurally, without regard to what she
ought to have been by her design, and
that she shows weakness beyond what is
properly chargeable to her plans.