The Sunday herald. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1866-1887, 1886-02-28
OUR NAVY YARD.
Report OF the Civilian Member OF tho Navy Yard
Commission-rhe Beat and Cheapest Work Done
Here-1nterview With Architect Mullett,

Report OF the Civilian Member OF tho Navy Yard
Commission-The Beat and Cheapest Work Done
Here-Intcr.iew With Architect Muilett,
The Senate ana the House seem to be engaged in
a competitive attempt TO destroy the usefulness OF
the navy yards and throw the construction OF ships,
engines, machinery, and guns into the hands OF
private establishments In America and England.
The Hawley committee In the Senate reports In
favor OF constructing ships engines, aud machinery
In private yards in this country, and the House Com
mttee on Naval Affairs Ia said to have agreed,
through the influence OF MIR. Hewitt, In recommends
Ing the purchase OF engines ana machinery Tor our
own ships In England. Recognizing the Importance
OF Keeping the Washington Navy Yard at work In
the several branches OF construction steam engineer
ing, and repairs The SUNDAY HERALD Interviewed
yesterday number OF Navy officials, also Mr.. A. d.
Muleit, the Civil Commissioner Of the Navy Yard
Commission, which examined critically the condi-
ton OF every navy yard In the country aud every
private establishment In the fall OF 1888.
l asked Mr.. Mullett whether the work done in the
navy yards in connection with boilers and machinery
equal to that done In the private yards In this
country. He responded unhesltatlngly that the
navy yard work was superior to that done In private
yards.
"What about the cost?" asked.
"The Government can produce work." he replied,
"as cheap as contractors even with the eighthour law
In force The contractors add least twenty per cent
to cost for pront This would consume the difference
tween eight and ten hours labor, to say nothing Of
the interest on the cost OF plant and the wear and
tear. When tho private establishments come to
adopt the elght-hour schedule, which they will do
sooner or later, the Government can produce the
work cheaper"
"whst about Hewltt's statement that English
built engines superior to those built In this
try, and that vessels which we drive but fourteen
knots per hour could be driven by English engines
at speed Of eighteen knots per hour 2" asked.
"That Is all bosn," replied Mr.. Mullett. "Amerl-
can machinery Of all kinds is equal to that OF Eng
land, and in many cases superior. There Ia hardly
| machine shop In Great Britain that has not got
some American machinery in 1t. Butif Mr.. Hewitt'a
| statement were true, 30 much the more reason why
we should establish workshops In our navy yards
where the best work could be done. The idea Of de-
pending upon foreign country for the engines to
drive our war ships is revolving"
"where, in your opnlon,"I asked, "should the
work OF constructing war ships, machinery. cables,
anchors, and ordnance be done9"
"Except the ships AMI rope and wire cables, 1,
ought all to be done In the Washington Navy Yard
II you will consult my report Civil Commis ssoneI
Of the Navy Yard Commission you will find there
my recommendations on this subje and will add
that Capts. Luce and Iorlng with other members Of
the Commission agreed with me-"
| Turning to this report, lind that the Commits
sion reported In favor OF having tho work of repairs
steam engineering, and equipment done at the
| Washington Navy Yard.
| I also Interviewed several officers Of the Navy
including both line and star officers Their senti
| ment was unanimous In favor Of doing work OF al
classes at the Washington Navy Yard, except con
structlon and repairs Of the largest vessels. They
said we had better plant at the Washington Navy
Yard for the construction of engines, machinery,
and ordnance than any private establishment In the
country.
On turning to the report OF the Civil Commissioner
on Navy Yards, published In the Annual Report OF
the Secretary Of the Navy for 1884, {pages 400 ant
1917 ind the following emphatic language, whlct
dlsposes OF Senator Hawley's so-called economic
objection to doing Government work In Government
yards:
Prominent among them Ia unquestionaby the gen
eral but mistaken idea that the Government canno
idea that tends to lessen exeron and to excuse mis-
management. 1t is unquestionably true, and fo
obvious reasons, that the Government must expent
In checks, balances, and supervision more none,
than would be expended for similar purposes In pri
vate life, but is not true that the work Itself can
private parties, II competent and honorable oiicer
are placed in charge and given proper authority, fol
the reason that the construction account In navl
yards s relieved of many expenses that must bt
met by the private ship-bulder, who must to tn,
cost of his material and labor add interest on th
capital invested taxes insurance, office rent and thu
estimated depreciation of his plant, all Of which
expenditures that are not charged, fairly charge
the cost of work In navy yards for the
that navy yards must be maintained whether utillzet
or not Still less is 1t true that the cost OF the worl
ls greater when calculated on the basis of the ap
preparation therefor as the private builder must alst
add TO the above repairs Of all kinds dredging, tn,
salaries of superintendents draughtsmen, clerks
messengers, compensation for his own services, in
cidentals, etc. all OF which being paid for out o
special appropriations are not charged to the cost
cost OF maintaining the yard It will, therefore, b.
seen that there is very great margin of cost In ia
yor OF ship.building In navy yards as against con
|, tractor.
But tits claimed that the eght-hour law neutraIze
these advantages and makes 1t cheaper to contract
than to build, but this is neither true, nor would
be, even II true, reasonable, much less satisfac
tory excuse, for the contractor must add for hi
profits to tue total cost Of his work. as above stated
than 20 per cent II, therefore, 1t be admitted tina
there Is loss of 90 per cent. of labor under thislaw
innate profit; work should, indeed, be produced &C
much below the market price that the difference
cost and value would be equal to the cost
sessed by the yard being 80 great. That this can b
done with proper management when there Is a fai
amount OF work to be performed is unquestinnable
and there Is no good reason to doubt that such re
suits have been attained In the Washington yart
several times during the past niteen years, and als
yards, as will be seen by reference to the tables &C
companying the report Of the Commissioner. Th'
eght-hOur law Is not, therefore, the cause OF tn
excessive cost of work performed In navy yards bu
resolves itself upon full understanding OF 1T
IN fact 'q but resa Of the
furnish, by entering into competition, any excuse Il
contractors for overworking their employees o
reducing their wages In order to compete with tn
superior advantages that have shown the Govern
ment to possess. The eight-hour law has, therefore
little or no bearing upon the real merits Of the
under discussion.
"what about the English system OF building wa
vessels by contract?" asked Mr.. Mullett.
"YOu will ind that subject thoroughly dlscusse
In my oflcial report" he replied. "rhere are hty
two private yards In England capable Of construc,
ing the largest war vessels. England's reasons 70
constructing SO large portion Of her neets by
tract have not been, as generally supposed, froI
motives Of economy but to stimulate her private shiI
yards"
SIS the system Of building war vessels by privat
contract on the increase In Rngland?" asked.
"Just the reverse" reported Mr.. Mullett. "Yo
Will ind the facts stated in my report 10 be as To-
lows: From 1850 to 1879 thirty-seven armed vessel
were built, of which twenty-five were built by cor
tract and twelve by the yards. From 1872 to 1879
decided change took place In favor Of construction
navy yards, seven being built In the yards and six
private establishments. This change OF policy ha
since then become so marked that out Of fourtee
armored ships launched since 1879 but one has bee
built by private parties"
"what did you say about this subject In your re
port 2" asked.
"Here is what said,n Mr.. Mullett replied, quot
ing from the book: "The percentage OF all vesseli
armored and unarmored, built In English navy yard
prior to December, 1870, was but thlrty-slx; froI
that date TO 1851 1t increased to seventyone, ana
much greater degree in the importance Of the vei
sells than In the numbers, which seems to indicate
purpose OF relying In future upon her own yards"
"What about the capacity Of the Washingto
Navy Yard?"I asked.
"rhe Washington Yard is the place where all tn
work OF steam engineering, ordinary repairs, chai
I cables, anchors, and equipment should be done.
has every appliance for navy yard except a suits
BILE dry-dock. Work can be done here cheaper an
better, In my opinion, than In private yards"
A CHARHUMORlST.
II Derrick Dodd, or George Peck, or any othe
celebrated humorist, had tried his level best,
! could not have succeeded In writing on the subjeS
q funnier article than was written last week b