National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1886-01-23
THE CRISIS IN NAVAL ArrAlRs.


tho Marine Force from Hopeless De-
cadence.
II the widespread and earnest interest
now prevailing in regard to the naval needs
OF the country fails TO produce an energetic
policy on the part Of Congress and the
executive, reconstruction Of our navy may
as well be given up as an imposslbillty. It
cannot be denied that the siowness of the
new administration In dealing with the
four ships authorized by the last Congress
is causing much impatience on the part Of
the public. Doubtless the Secretary of the
Navy and his advisers have good reasons
Tor their dilatory policy, but they have not
been made public. Probably II Congress
should inquire the causes OF delay--and IL
Is understood that certain senators contem-
plate an early inquiry in that direction-the
answer would be that the department de-
sires TO exhaust all available sources of
information before deciding upon the style
and character Of the ships II WIN build.
Ihis is well enough, provided IL Is not
overdone. With the immense force Of OK
perts that the Secretary has at his command
he certainly ought to be able TO exhaust all
really valuable sources Of information with
in one year.
Many Americans have an idea that the
English, French, and other great naval
powers have reduced modern ship construc.
ton to an exact science, so that our con-
structors have nothing to do but learn
what their models are, and copy them In
order to have perfect war ships,
But any one who reads the discussions
constantly going on in those countries
must see that the European experts them
selves differ widely on questions Of type,
size, structure, armature, armament, in
short. nnnrlV a1a II Al.
subject; so that II our constructors copy
any particular model they will do little
more than make themselves party to a
heated controversy.
In England furious war Of words IA
being waged between Sir Edward Reed and
bis followers on one side and Sir Nathaniel
Barnaby, Mr.. w. II. White, and their
school on the other over the most material
and vital matters connected with armored
construction, with no prospect of solution
engagement. In France similar disagree
ment among experts exists.
The unavoidable conclusion from these
facts is that naval architecture Is In an ex-
detrimental or speculative stage, and is
likely to remain SO until warfare on large
scale subjects the various types of ships TO a
crucial test. Therefore II would seem that
IL the United States Is TO have new navy
at all It would be best to go about It with
u,
walt Tor the European experts to get
through with a controversy which bids fair
to last as long as peace lasts.
The English, French, and other Euro
pean governments do not wait for their ex-
perts TO agree before venturing TO build
new ships. On the contrary they are at
work all the time. The average expendl-
ture OF the British government on new con-
struction has been upwards of $12,000,000
n fnR -
France put $14,OOO,060 10000, 900 francsI
into new ships for her navy.
Thus far our government has appropri-
ated In three years four and half millions
Tor new construction. Two and half mil
lions OF this money was appropriated in
1883 and has produced four ships which are
pretty well advanced. One Of these ships,
the Dolphin, can hardly be ranked as a
man-of-war In consequence Of the unpro-
tected arrangement OF her machinery and
her small battery-power, but the other three
will compare favorably with the average Of
unarmored cruisers Of other powers The
other two millions was appropriated by
the last Congress toward building
four more ships, and though nearly
eight months have elapsed since this
appropriation became actually available,
nothing has been done that Is visible to
the public eye.
has been done in the department, and that
plans for the proposed new ships and their
machinery are well along In the bureaus OF
construction and steam engineering. But
there Is no certainty as to when these plans
will be given out for proposals under the
law, or when the actual work Of building
the vessels will begin.
The angry controversy which sprang up
at the beginning of this administration be-
N atar n.N1 lob.
10 say the least, unfortunate, In that Ii
tended to shake the confidence of the
public In the ability Of American builders
TO make good ships, and to create the i'm
preston that partisan feeling was to be per-
mitted to interfere with the Interests of the
navy. But this controversy has to great
extent subsidized, and 1t is to be hoped that
Its bad, effects will soon wear Off.
The transfer of the control of the naval
appropriation bill to the committee on
naval affairs by the new rules was a step
in the right direction, provided that COM
mittee proves itself capable of handling
the subject with proper intelligence and
vigor. 1t is to be hoped that such will be
the outcome. The recommendations of the
chief constructor embodied in his annual
report afford sound practical basis for
the committee to work upon, and perhaps
no wiser course could be followed than that
gramme in bulk. The chief constructors
term Will expire soon, but as his reappoint-
ment is expected by men Of all parties, and
VIII probably be unopposed, there need be
no speculation as to possible results of a
change in the construction bureau.
There have been symptoms of lack of
hearty accord between the Secretary and
the bureau OF steam engineering, but IL Is
TO be hoped that better counsels will pre-
vail, and that eventually Commodore Lor-
ing VIII be permitted to give to the country
the full benefits Of his fine abilities and his
mature experience. The friends and organs
OF the Secretary have apparently left no
weakness or shortcoming of the bureau as
now organized uneXposed, while the friends
OF the bureau have defended IL with doubt
less equal candor and vigor. Our columns
have been opened to both, but we deprecate
the controversy as not calculated toreassure
the public or benefit the service, and we
hope 1t will be abandoned. The true way
to carry on controversy OF this kind is by
friendly competition in producing actual
results, not by wordy warfare In the news
papers.
So far as the navy is concerned we have
no politics and know no parties. We shall
be as ready to support Mr.. Whitney In any
positive, practical policy as we would Re-
publican Secretary, and We believe that our
feeling In this respect is generally shared
by the Republican membership of both
houses Of Congress. We offer this general
review of the situation because 1t seems to
us timely. AS the discussion of naval affairs
proceeds In Congress we shall, from time
to time, give space in our columns to the
Of well-known experts, both
in the navy itself and in civil life, whose
services we have secured.
Our columns will be cordially open to
any one possessing practical knowledge
officers of the navy or others--who may de-
sire to give Congress and the public the
benefit Of their views and suggestions.