The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1896-05-02
Mr.. FoLGER's EXPLANATION.
He Says He Was Not An Agent for Armor
Plates and Harvey Matter Did Not Cause
His Resignation.

committee on naval a1IalrS today, made
public the testimony recently taken by it
in secret sessions on the subject of ar
NOR plate, the prices paid therefor, and
the ownership of the patented process Of
manufacture, under the resolution of
Senator Chandler, of December 81, last.
The testimony comprises 42l printed
pages.
The hearing of testimony began Jan.
IS, with Sec. Herbert before the COM
mittee, and the last on April z. with
Commander W. N. Folger.
In the specifications laid before the
committee by Mr.. Chandler was the fol-
lowing with reference to Commander
Folger. whose connection with the armor-
plate men appears to have been carefully
Investigated -
mander W. N. Folger, chief of the orda-
nance bureau, in the navy department in
duced the expedition of the Harvey pat
emit and the adoption of the process in
manufacture Of armor, by the company
organized by Mr.. Harvey, and have an
interest therein; that in January, 1893,
after the first contract had been made
with the company and after the second
contract had been arranged, but before it
had been actually executed, he resigned
as chief of the bureau, and while contin-
uing as commander in the navy, he ac-
cepted employment from the Harvey Co.,
for salary of $4,000 per year and q
bonus of 200 shares Of stock in the COM
pany, and went abroad to negotiate con-
tract with foreign governments for the
use of the Harvey process.
hn71 dor yph M mo
chief of the bureau of ordnance from Feb
urary, 1880, until January l, 1898, IN
der Secretary Tracy began his testimony.
he read q detailed statement in which
he related his conversation with secre-
tary Tracy on the subject of an
idea plate, the subsequent discovery of
Harvey, and the tests to which it was
subjected by the department..
Touching upon his employment by the
Harvey Steel Co., Com. Folger said
that about IS months before he left the
department. he was asked to meet the
directors of the Harvey Co. in New York.
He was asked if he would enter their
employ, but nothing was said as to the
term of service or salary to De received.
No offer of any description of shares or
other remuneration was made prior to
Folger's leaving the department., Jan. /,
1893, nor did any other person in or out
of the Harvey Company make him any
offer of terms, either of shares or money,
before the date of his (FolRer's) leaving
the department.
Commander Folger stated that the
shares of stock when offered and when
he left the company had no selling value
They attained no value until after the
Harvey plate was generally adopted in
Europe, or perhaps, two years after Fol-
ger received them.
Mr.. Folger said that he did not go to
Europe to arrange contracts with foreign
governments, but simply to arrange a
matter IN dispute between the company
and its European agent
In October, 1893. he returned from Eu-
rope, and his request for sea service was
allowed by the navy department Upon
his return in December, 1891, from duty
with the Behring Sea feet, he was INST
by the news of the attack upon his repu-
alton. He asked the secretary of the navy
for an investigation, and was informed
that such action was not called for.
He then called the attention of men,
bars of the house and senate to the mat
ter, and was told that resolution would
be introduced to investigate.
Commander Folger said that ne be-
lieved the armor contract features would
develop nothing but credit for SEQ.
Tracy's administration. He called at
tention to the magnitude of the task of
OlCdulAS q ia UI40 luObAOO anu
principle Of the manufacture OF amor
plate against the united thecincal argu-
ment and unlimited capital of the steel
and armOr firms of the world.
He had, he said, carried the struggling
inventor along and gu" rded the interests
of the United States
Subsequently Mr.. Folger said he left
the department. because ne was run down
from Overw ork and becuse he was at
tackled in the press for having insisted on
having upright turrets on the battleships
instead Of inclined, and the department.
paying no attention to the attack. The
Harvey matter had nothing to do with
his resignation. He was with that COM
pany only five months out of his two
years leave of absence.
Mr.. Folger said that W 18th his "present
light and the notoriety of the thing he
believed he should not have gone into the
Harvey matter. He did not however,
think he had dono any wrong.
Commander Folger said the cost of pro-
duction of armor plate was much less
than the government paid for it. The
great risk of having plate rejected, how
ever, enhanced the cost. His opinion was
that it cost from $3.50 to $500 ton to
manufacture plate.
The success of government plate
would be rroblematical. He thought that
there had misunderstanding between
the Carnegie and the Bethlehem people
with relation to the bids they had made.
In the testimony of SEQ. Herbert it ap-
pears that when SEQ. Tracy made the
contract for armor plate with the Carne
gle in 1890 he agreed to pay the company
the same price paid the Bethlehem peo.
pie, but he allowed the Carnegies two
cents pound extra to indemnify them
against any damages that might be re-
covered for use of the French patent un-
der which the plate was made.
This bonus now aggregates $50, 900
which il still in the hands of the depart
ment Both Secretaries Tracy and Her
bert have refused to pay 1t. The depnrt-
ment is authorized to make further con-
tracts for $3.50 tons of armor.
On this work the contractors have ar
gued that the price will not be in excess
of $3.50 ton for nickel steel, decrease
in the price under existing contracts of
$50 ton. The Harvey process costs
more.
Ex-sec. Tracey corroborated what Sec.
Herbert said.
During the investigation into the cost
of making plate, Mr. Wharton of the
Bethlehem company indicated that the
two concerns in this country-Bethelhem
and Carnegie would not permit the
proposed plan of the government to be-.
successful.