The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-07-17
Refusal to Raise the Price Above $500
Ton, Senate Amendment Being
Heartily Concurred In.
JERRY SIMPSONS NEW POINT
EXPLAINS THE SECRET OBJECT OF
THE RECENT WAR SCAREs.
Started, He Says, by COnspirators TO
Force United states to Pay Big
Money for ArmOr.

WASHINGTON, July 16.-The House to-
day agreed to the partial conference report
on the general deficiency appropriation bill
and then concurred IN the Senate amend
Tnent fixing the limit of cost OF arnaor plate
Tor the three battle ships now building at
$500 a ton. This was the main point still in
dispute between the two houses. A strong
effort was made to induce the House to
agree to a substitute proposition fixing the
limit at $500, as recommended by the secre-
tary of the navy. but after three hours
debate the House, by vote of 142 to As,
concurred in the Senate amendment.
Messrs Stone (Rep., Pennsylvania, DaIzeu
(Rep., Pennsylvania) and Boutelle (Rep.,
Maine) Supported the $500 proposition, which
was opposed by Messrs. King Dem, Utah),
Underwood (Dem., Aabama), Barlow (Pop.,
Colorado), Simpson (Pop., Kansas), Gaines
(Dem., Tennessee) Wheeler (Dem Ala
bama), Sayers (Dem., Texas and Cannon
aRep., Illinois.) On motion of Mr.. Brod-
erick, of Kansas, the Senate resolution di-
rectinG the secretary of war to issue 1000
tents for the use of the Grand Army en-
campment at Leavenworth Kan, next Oc-
tober was adopted.
Mr.. Cannon then called up the conference
report on the general deficiency bill, which
meantime had been agreed to by the Senate.
The House concurred in the Senate amend
ment appropriatin,g $1,000 for removing OBJ
structions in the Kootenai river, Montana.
When the armor plate amendment was
reached Mr.. Cannon moved that the House
insist on its disagreement and Mr.. W. A
Stone (Rep., Pennsylvania moved to con-
cur with an amendment in the nature of a
substitute proposition by the terms of
which the cost of the armor plate for the
three battIa ShinS was fncrea sed frnr1 80 4O7
300 to $3,210.000 and the limit of cost of the
armor from $500 to $500. Mr.. Boutelle, the
chairman of the committee on naval affairs
of the last House, took the floor in sup
port Of Mr. Stones motion, He explained
at length the history of the controversy
over the price or armor plate.
lie pointed out the refusal of the armor
plate companies to bid under the provision
or the last naval appropriation bill limiting
the. cost to $500 per ton, the proposition OF
the Illinois Steel Company TO furnish all
the armor for twenty years 1t $240 per ton
and the recommendation of the secretary of
the navy for an authorization for new bias
with limit of cost OF $500 per ton.
Did not one of these companies furnish
the Russian government with arnor at $249
per ton?' asked Mr.. Barlow, OF California.
THAT is a chestnut" replied Mr.. Boutele.
But III roast ii again for the gentiemans
BENEFIT benefit, -, - ,,,, a.,
roasted" replied Mr. Barlow
Mr. Boutelle denounced the proposition
to have the government enter on the man
count and expressed the opinion that to
manufacture armor plate would cost the
government from 80 per cent. to Is per
Boutele argued that the prices paid by
foreign governments for armor furnished
conclusive evidence that 1t could not be
manufactured for $780,
Mr.. King (Dem., Utah in opposing Mr..
Stones motion declared that 1t would be
longer with the Carnegie Company which
investigation proved had foisted on the
government fraudulent and improper work.
"Rascals" and ''scoundrels' were the terms
he used in characterizing this company.
Mr.. Dalzell lRep., Pa supported the
amendment. The question at the base of
this discussion, he contended, whether
or not Congress desired to authorize the
completion of the three battle ships now
on the stocks. If it did the secretary of
the navy must be empowered TO pay
enough to secure armor. 1t had been dem
at the price authorized by the Senate
amendment.
lHerbert) now the private attorney of the
Carnegie Steel Company" asked Mr.. King.
7 do not know replied Mr.. Dalzell. but
I should hesitate to entertain such a sug-
gestion about one who is not here to speak
for himself
Mr. w A Stone (Rep, Pa.) defended
the Carnegie Company.
Mr.. Simpson (Pop., Kan.) insisted that
there was pool of all the armor-plate
manufacturing companies of the world and
charged that a conspiracy was in progress
to coerce Congress into surrendering to
organized greed as represented by these
companies. The two war scares now run
ming in the newspapers, he said, made up
part of this conspiracy.
The debate was concluded by Mr.. Can
non, who expressed the opinion that the
Senate would never agree to any PROPOSE
ton fixing the limit of cost at more
than $500.
Mr. Stone attempted at this point to Sc
cure an adjournment and thus delay ac-
ton, but his motion was voted down. Mr..
Savers then moved concurrence in the SEN
ate amendment. On a rising vote there
was plainly large majority for the mo-
ton anu Mr.. Boutelle demanded the ayes
and nays.
1.-The record may be valuable when the
next Cuban resolution is brought i'm he
cried. Again Mr.. Stone moved to adjourn.
Mr. Bailey, of Texas, made the point that
the motion was dilatory and was sustained
by the speaker. Mr.. Sayerss motion to
concur was carried. 142 TO 40. The bill was
sent to further conference. The House
then, at A;35, adjourned until Monday.