The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1896-04-04
7HE THREE MONTHS, LIuIr.
A Novel Restriction Placed Upon Contract
ing for the NcN XcaaeIa.

ing for the New Vessels.
WASHINGTON. April 3.-There is one provision
in the Navy Appropriation bill as passed by thu
House which Is wholly unusual, and is attract
ing some attention to It's possible workings. II
10 that the contracts for the construction Of
the vessels herein provided for shall be mad,
within ninety days from the passage of thi'
act" The question arises whether the Senate
will concur in that restriction as to time.
1t will be observed that It is not declared tina
the ships must all be planned and bids called
for within ninety days. but that, in addition
the bids must be received, opened, Judged of
any hearings or disputes heard. the final modifi.
cations OF details completed. and the contracts
completed within that time.
This is n shorter time than has ever yet
elapsed in any contracts either for armored
vessels or torpedo boats, the two classes now
authorized. The date OF the act authorizing
the Indiana class was juno 80. 1890. and the
contracts were signed Nov. Is and 10 follow
Ing. The two dates in the case of the Iowa were
July 10, 1892, and Feb. IL, 1893, respectively.
In the case of the Kearsarge and the Kentucky,
the authorization was March 9, 1895. and the
BIDS were not even opened before Nov. 30. The
contract for the armored cruiser New York was
signed Aug. Is. 1890. and she had been au-
thoriZed nearly two years before. namely, Sept.
z. 1858. The dates for the Monterey were still
further apart, namely. March 3. 1887, and June
H.. 1889. Those for the Katahdin were very
widely separated. March ., 1880. and Jan. 2S.
1881. Those, for the brooklyn were July 10.
lsg". and Feb. II. 1893.
II nuw We turn to torpedo boats, we find the
dates for the Cusning to he Aug. 3, 1886, and
March l, 1883. and for the Ericsson. June 30.
ts20; and oct. =, lsol: For the three boats
1894. and May 3. IsD5. For the two building at
Bristol and the one at seattle. authorized March
2otlas year. contracts were not awarded unit!
the latter part of the year.
Thus in every case, both Of battle ships and
longer time bet ween the date of the act author
Ting the vessels and the signing OF the contract
for them ,h iI The a1I pending bill proposes: And
number of vessels. nineteen in all, no fewer than
four OF them being iirst-class ironciads.
The question therefore arises whether 1t is
well to make a wholly new departure in Iegisla-
tiqn 10y atixing so rigid a period for transactinG
property be left to the discretion of the depart
meat OF the Government which Is expected to
lp PtHakia after aS Gi de,aii f. There Gannot be the
quite AS anxious as Congress can be to have the
various vessels laid down and work begun upon
them at The earliest practicable day. What pos
sible gain, therefore,, there is in making the
limitation spoken Of it is difficult TO see. On
the other hand. it can readily be understood that
circumstances might arise making ii highly de-
sirahIe to postpone either the completion OF the
plans or the decision upon or award Of contracts
Tor "A few days. and that this perhaps could not
be done under the imperative restriction pro-
posed, as Congress would not then be in session.
I IItNI llV llNNOIl u ~ z Y
sad. the Navy Department may feel Justified in
considering that duplicates of the Kentucky and
kear .arge VII be called for. 1t cannot. Of
course. 20 ahead on the sumpt that either
the number or the character of the battle ships
or the torpedo boats Will he left by the Senate
prcci. ely as now. Only last year the Senate not
only struck ont a battle ship and nine torpedo
boats called for by the House bill. but it added
six vessels OF an entirely new and unexpected
class. composite gunboats: but there was no
time limit within which contracts for all these
vessels should be completed. The House, too.
eventually accepted The Senate's programme us
IA substitute for its own.
In the present instance we can conceive of the
Senate's substituting monitors for some of the
provisions made by the House, or altering tho
displaccmcnts or types of the vessels proposed.
But If no such changes should he made. il
would he fair to suppose that battle ships some
thing ike the kearsargew were meant. And yet,
while this fact would make the planning easier,
and thus give more time for bidders To make NJ
their minds before the three months should cx-
atoms of the Old plans. In the matter of tur-
rrtS. for example, there is a doubt in the minds
OF some officers whether the superpOsrd turrets
are better than the separate. A Board is to cX-
anime that point. and there are even To be some
practical TX perimcnts bearing on 1t II: Indian
Head.
This is an example of the sort of inquiry that
might lie made by the Navy Department purely
in the public interest. Then there is the qucs-
tion Of boilers for the torpel" boats, fuel for
and So on, IL is therefore worth think
linz of whether the department would not be- IL
competent judge of how much time should be
expended IN proper preparations before inviting
bids on the vessels and of when the contracts
should be signed.