The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-02-26
A Gunboat for the Lakes.

A bill is before Congress for the con-
struction of a gunboat on the great lakes
to take the place of the Michigan. This
Anticipated side-wheeler, though still sea.
worthy, is obsolete, having been built more
than half a century ago. She is said to
have been our first iron warship, and Ger.
tainly she is "of little or no value as a
vessel OF war" according to Secretary
LoNG's current report on her.
Her Captain, too, Lieut. Commander
RICHARD RUSH, says that on account of
her breadth she cannot go through the
Welland Canal into Lake Ontario. which is
therefore left without any war vessel at
all. She Is used. when the season favors,
for surveying and for drilling the naval
militia of Ohio, Michigan. and Illinois, but
is clumsy, inconvenient, and of course un.
suited to give the drill needed by modern
vessels. Being an old.time paddle wheeler,
she could easily be made helpless by a
slight attack. and. in short, she is wholly
untitled for the duties of wal and is scarcely
fit for those of peace.
But could we build n substitute for the
Michigan on the Great Lakes without VIC.
lating the treaty made at Washington in
April, 1917, by Acting Secretary RICHARD
Rush and Minister BAGoTi We have
been so sensitive in observing this agree
ment that, a few years ago. when a Michi-
gan shipyard put in the lowest Of the bids
for the construction of the Bancroft, it was
refused, although that vessel was not to be
maintained " at all on the Great Lakes.
to use the treaty word. but would have
1na- sA~f D., a.
and by way of the St. Lawrence around to
Annapolis as a practice vessel for the naval
cadets. Precisely the same considerations,
still later. caused the rejection of a low bid
from a different Michigan shipyard for the
building of one of the new composite gum
boats, not to be stationed on the lakes.
hut to be delivered on our Atlantic coast.
In both cases the vessels would have been
armed only after leaving the lakes.
This extreme carefulness not to infringe
upon the treaty presumably had a double
motive, because not only are we DESTROYS
to. keep all international agreements, but
inthis particular case such m observance
is largely for our interest. Great Britain,
commanding the entrance Of the st. Law.
renee, and with her Dominion canals. has
lit ilculS VI StlliIIk SCOTtS OF Small gun
boats and torpedo craft into the great
lakes, and also has scores of them to send.
We, on the other hand, now have very
few that could go there, even were not
the whole Of the lower St. Lawrence in
British possession. The recent troubles of
the Yantic, one of our few fourth.raters, in
trying this trip, will be remembered Thus
it seems clearly for our interest, at present,
to have the treaty rigidly observed.
The Senate Naval Committee, however,
has come to the conclusion that the building
of n substitute for the Michigan would not
Contravene the terms of the Rush BaRot
treaty. This agreement Is very precise:
THE naval force to b. maintained upon the Ameri.
can lakes by his Majesty and the Government of the
United States shall henceforth he confined to the fol.
lowing vessels on each side, that is;
ION Lake ontario. TO one vessel not exceeding 100
tons burden, and armed with one IS. pound cannon.
ION the upper lakes. to two vessels not exceeding
like burden each, and armed with like force.
"On the waters OF Lake ~ChamplAin. TO one vessel
not exceeding like burden. and armed with like force.
IAN other armed vessels on these lakes shall be
forthwith dismantled. and no other vessel OF war
shall then be built or armed"
The Michigan exceeds the requirement
in both respects. She is somewhere, we
think, from $50 to o tons, on the old sys.
TEN of measurement. She also carries a
battery of four 3~0-pounders instead of one
~1s-pounder, besides five smaller pieces. 1t
appears from the documents of the De-
partment of State that the British Min.
lister, Mr.. PAcKENHAM, protested when the
Michigan wa built and armed. The re-
joinder of Mr.. MASON, then Secretary of
the Navy, to whom the matter was referred,
was that he was not aware that the Michi.
gan exceeded what we were entitled to
under the agreement.
We do not maintain any other war vessel
on the lakes, and are entitled by treaty to