Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1896-12-17

due 10 any defect I'm the ship. out 10
conspiracy among private ship-ouilders
to discredit and defame her because she
was built in a maynard
while the rank absurdlty OF such
statement might at first glance seem sum
cent for It's own refutation, yet the high
rank Of its alleged. and thus far not dis
puted source, compels attention.
Now, on my own part | know that
instead OF "conspiring' TO defame the
Texas. ! have always defended her TO
an extent that has made me o9noXious
10 many officers in the navy who were
bitterly opposed to the adoption or Mt.
Johns scheme.
"'When the plans were under considefa-
tion, Secretary whitney. independently o.
the board. invited the judgment OF others
including myself and l examined the
drawings and specifications carefully. My
verdict was that TIE plans were good
symmetrical. and practicable. They might
not be absolutely the best possible. but
they were by odds the best submitted III
| that competition. The scantlings were
light. but their lightness was symmetri-
cal, and. as a whole, her hull construc-
ton involved the best mechanical distri-
button Of minimum weight That had
ever seen. The practice abroad at thd'
time was TO reduce scantlings 10 the
lowest limit OF weight. The steel era was
new, and many designers thought that
because steel had more tensile strength
than iron, thickness could be proportion
ately reduced. and equivalent rightly anu
strength maintained. This led TO eXtraor-
binary demands of armor and armament
on small displacements, and the Texas
and other ships designed at that time
reached the climax OF this tendency,
a. I,..T cd "a aMnnTH0
our usual authorities in certain ships OF
that date.
"'Such was my opinion OF the plans OF
the Texas then, and l have never seen
any reason TO alter it.
MAYNARD COMBINATION.
Returning now to the alleged con
spiracy" against navy-yards. l state en-
phatically that / have never handled the
subject Of navy-yard methods except M
public hearings before committees, anu
once in the Washington Post. making no
secret of my responsibility for the publ
cation. In this l did not attack the guam
ty Of the work done In navy-yards. but
produced a report which had been MADE
by the Navy Department for the House
Committee on Appropriations. showing
that on the basis Of my bids to build the
Raleigh and the Cincinnati. I would nave
built three such ships for what those Two
cost in the navy-yard, and l did TINS 10
meet and overthrow a combination-I VIII
not say conspiracy the New
York. Norfolk. and Mare Island navy
yards against the contract system. Al
the same time | admitted this high cost
was due to the necessary red-tape ana
military methods inseparable from any
and all attempts Of the government 10
operate as a manufacturer.
'Apart from and beyond the foregoing
considerations. I have always and most
strenuously deprecated public criticism
and discussion Of such matters FOR the
reason that they are used abroad 70
handicap our industries in competition Iof
foreign work.
"'For example Ii Hung Chang asked
me. why do the South American repuD-
lies 20 TO England for their shipsT ana
I learned that he was prompted TO TINS
inquiry by the Chinese Government, III
consequence Of the fact that both the
British and German Ministers 10 emma
had called attention to the matter ana
told the Chinese authorities that it was
because good ships could not De puN'
here.
THE armor-plate Investigation, the
alterations Of defective stability, and
many other published criticisms on our
srips. have been paradod by the Eng
iish and Germans In Japan, China, ana
Russia. and their substance translated
and printed IN newspapers there to our
prejudice
car more serious faults prevail in
other naVics but they are never known
10 the public. because it is the policy
TO prevent ill-judged or misconceived
criticism a. such affairs. This policy Is
sound. because. whatever may be the
faults or defects. they certainly can
NOT be made good by printers ink-a con-
viction which i am sure, you snare Win
I'm conclusion, I remark that. while
have long deprecated this tendency.
without saying much about it. | have
been provoked TO this somewhat EN-
rbatic protest by the. fact that Admiral
Brown. as quoted. seems to have reach
"a the climax Of mistake and mischief
VERY respectfully,
"'CHARLES IT. CRAMP.'
Il call particular attention TO what
Mr.. Cramp says about the plans OF tht
Texas The very remarkable qualities
as n seagoing vessel she has demon
strated certainly vindicate his judgment.
/ do not mean TO assert that the Texls
" a model ship She was laid dow
ten years ago. Many Improvements
have been made since, that time I'm tar
ret and water-tsht bulkhead systems
and also in the distribution of battcrie7
What / do mean 10 say is that the Texae
will prove herself ID be a valuable naval
vessel.
ADMIRAL BROWNS CONTROVERSY
AS TO any controversy between Adj
miral Brown and the shp-yards. / have
directed him not 90 talk for publication
e.reafter In relation TO the Texas. and
II is my earnest desire that all naval Of
acers shall pursue a similar course.
especially desire to can attention to whaf
Mr.. Cramp says in his letter about
the effect in foreign countries Of TN
very frequent -cisms upon American
ships By portion OF the American press
/ have direct information. from sources
other than Mr.. Cramps letter. which
bears out his statements. Both China
and Japan are building navies. Our
ship-builders, naturally. desire the Gus
tom OF these two countries am
credibly Informed that certain ship-build-
ers OF other countries. who were com
peting last spring with American ship
builders for contracts with the japanese
Government had collected a large mum
Der Of very sharp criticisms Of Ameri
can ships, and put them all I'm array
before the japanese authorities. for fn
purpose Of showing that we do not know
how 10 build ships in this country
THE press of the country has been
generally loyal 10 the navy. and has
been largely instrumental in its success
ful upbuAding and development; Us ser
vices In this direction cannot be too
heartily acknowledged. l submit Mt
Cramps letter. however for the purpose
OF pointing out 20 some Of our newspaper
friends the unintentional injuries 10 the
American interests that are liable TO re-
suit from eniarginR upon minor mistakes
that may have been committed, even
though al other times full credit boz giyef