Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-04-17
A FIGHT FOR A NAVY.
Holman Protests Against the Build
ing of Battleships.
OPPOSITION IN HIS OWN PARTY
To the Economy That Extends to Defense
lessness Of Country.
MORE PENSION OFFICE PEcUMAR1T1Es

WASHINGTON, April 16.-After the dis
posal Of routine business to-day, the House
went into committee Ct the whole, Mr.
Shively, of Indiana, in the chair, on the
naval appropriation bill. Mr.. Pendleton,
of West Virginia, opposed the motion made
by Mr.. Holman, to strike from the bill the
clause for the construction Of one armed
cruiser, and also Mr.. Brutelle's amendment
for the construction of two battleships and
torpedo boats.
Mr.. Holman spoke in support Of his
motion. He criticised the appropriations
made for the construction of the navy dur
the past few years, and for the maintenance
of the naval establishment. He asked who
was demanding great navy; who was
asking for it; what class of our people; what
was the emergency that required the e3-
penditure Of this vast sum; what reason for
this building of new ships; who were the
gentlemen afraid of?
Mr.. Holman said that our war vessels
which had been so successful in former wars
were built on the spur of the moment, and
in case Of another war this process could
and would be repeated.
A send-Of for Yankee shrewdncss.
He contended that in a brief space Of
time American ingenuity and American in
dustry could improvise vessels that could
meet the most powerful ships in any navy
in the world. The people OF this country
who wished fer plain Government would
not approve of the policy of taxing them
for a navy which was beyond their needs
Mr. Fellows, Of New York, was glad the
issue had been drawn on this question. He
hoped that the country, through its repre-
sentatives here, would be compelled to
place itself on record at once and forever as
to whether 1t desired to stop the work
which was designed to sustain the honor of
the flag, protect the honor and dignity of
the American name, and which was
measure Of trues economy than any other
that could come before Congress. The
party of which the gentleman from Indiana
(Mr. Holman) and himself were proud to
be members dared not go before the country
on the issue of stopping the building Of an
American navy. [Applause. For every
dollar now expended in the construction Of
an adequate navy 81, 900, 900 would be saved
in the future.
An Oratorical Flight Taken. ..t5
"Give US such naval force" he said, 'tas
will preserve when the hour of trouble
comes Gas come it wilD every star on our
flag with its luster undimmed," Ap-
plause.
Mr.. Watson, of Georgia, saw no necessity
for an increase of the navy. What the peo-
pie Of Georgia wanted, he said, was re-
economy, fair dealing in the
laws and q return to the old Jeffersonian
doctrine Of equal rights.
Mr.. Cummings, of New York, spoke in
favor of the amendment Of the gentleman
from Maine, and against the motion of Mr..
Holman to strike out the clause of the bill
providing for the construction of new
cruiser. What sort Of figure would the
Democratic party cut if it abandoned this
project? Economical it would be; frugal it
would be; but let it draw the line at mig
gardliness. s..a -
Mr.. Baker. of Kansas. opposed the in
creasing of the navy, contending that the
greatest bulwark of American independ-
snce was in the happy homes of the people.
Pending further discussion the committee
rose and the House adjourned.