The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1890-05-26
THOUSANDS FOR KiTTERY.
The Appropriation Remains In the
Naval Bill.


Naval Bill.
WASHINGTON, May "a. Mr.. Wilson of
Iowa asked and obtained unanimous consent
of the Senate today that Tuesday next, after
the routine morning business, the bill sub
jecting imported liquors to the provisions of
the laws of the several states, shall be taken
up and its consideration continued until dis
posed of.
The naval appropriation bill was taken up
the pending question being on the amend
ment reported from the committee on appro-
priations to strike out the item of $4,000 for
the improvement OF the plant at portsmouth
N. H., navy yard.
Mr.. German called for the yeas and nays.
He said that the item had not been estimat-
ed for by the Navy Department. 1t had been
inserted under peculiar circumstances. 1t
meant a reopening Of the Portsmouth navy
yard and reorganization of the entire sys-
| tenn of the construction of the navy. 1t was
| an extraordinary case. He thought that
the senator from New York [Mr. Hiscockl
was right in saying that it was purely and
deliberately movement to go back to the
old system.
Mr.. Blair opposed the amendment The
| item, he said, had been inserted by the
House. 1t was in the line of the action of
the Navy Department continuously since, as
Wtll DIS U6lUIc, 1909. uO ydLu
bad been constantly in use as place of re-
| pair for the navy, and would be needed for
| that purpose so long as there were any wood
en- vessels connected with the navy. There
was nothing new In the proposition; nothing
strange, nothing secret. nothing having ref
erence to political or other advantages.
There was nothing peculiar in it. The oppo-
sition to it was peculiar, and he denounc-
ed the spirit and motive of that opposition.
1t was Influenced by the monopolistic con-
kro lot art,nir, ,nd 70 %tn
uavy yards, in order that they might in fu-
ture have the building of the war ships of
the country.
Mr.. Allison, chairman of the committee on
appropriations. felt compelled TO make re-
sponse to the "amiable suggestion" of the
senator fromNew Hampshire that the OBJ
ject of the amendment was to place in the
hands of private contractors the construc-
tion of the navy.
Mr.. Blair explained that what he said was
that that was the spirit of the opposition
| He had not intended to attribute any such
| motives to the committee on appropriations.
Mr.. Allison said that the committee had
recommended the striking out Of the items
| in relation to the Portsmouth and Boston
navy yards, because these two propositions
really meant the establishment of two new
navy yards for the construction of iron and
steel ships. That was what they meant.
Boston. Brooklyn, League Island. and Nor
| folk. 1t was manifest that the government
would not maintain those five great estab-
| lishments in such close propinquity to each
| other. The government was entering on the
construction of iron and steel ships. The
construction of these ships required an ex.
| tensive and expensive plant He submitted
| that il was not wise to commit the govern
ment to the establishment of these five navy
yards for the construction of iron and steel
| Ships. He did not know but that Portsmouth
might be selected as the place where those
iron and steel ships should be constructed
He did not know but that it had advantages
superior to those of Brooklyn, League Isl.
and Norfolk, or Boston, but he submitted
| that Congress should not commit itself in
such an indirect way to the decision of that
| question. The government was expending
| large sums of money at the Brooklyn navy
yard. He was not sure but that that expen::
diture should be stopped. and the navy yard
sold. This was great question, which
should not be disposed of in such an indirect
and incomplete way.
| Mr.. Hoar asked Mr.. Allison whether, in
| view of the possibility of the country being
involved in great naval war, there ougni
not 10 be navy yard somewhere nortn OF
| New York where iron and steel vessels
could 60 in to be equipped or repair dam
| ages.
Mr.. Allison replied that he was willing
| tnat tnere should be but he was not willing
lishments for that purpose in New England.
Nor was ne willing to say that Portsmouth
should be the place or that Boston should be
the place, There was no present necessity
for the appropriation. There were great
many people who believed that New London
was better place for navy yard than
| either Boston or Portsmouth. He did not
know how that was, but he thought it i'm
portant not to make an appropriation fol
the purpose until the proper comm ttees OF
Congress and the responsible head of the
| Navy Department asked for it.
| Mr.. Hawley opposed the striking out o1
the items for Portsmouth and Boston. HI
said that he was unusually anxious to know
what the departments of the governments
recommended, but he didn't feel absolutely
obliged to do what they recommended or t
refrain from doing what they. did not recon
done, He didn't know the policy o.
the Navy Department in the matter
or what view 1t took of the future
| Going ON to sneak of the nOssihilitieS of