The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1898-06-03
Warships Are Cheaper,

Warships Are Cheaper.
Between 5000 900 and 100000 seems a
pretty good price TO pay for battle ship.
| especially when ii is taken into considera-
/ ton that this price includes merely the
! cost Of the hull and machinery and not
| that OF the armor plate or OF the arma-
/ ment, and there is also the cost OF main
tenance, which Is no inconsiderable sum.
There has been fall in the price OF bat
! teShlps since We began building them
eight years ago. Our policy has been to
! build all of our war ships in this country,
| and since that policy was inaugurated the
! price OF construction has fallen, until now
/ II is littleif any greater than the price
/ charged for similar work abroad; while,
! indeed, We believe that there is no SINH
/ lar work. and that American-built bat
! tleships are the best in the world.
The new appropriation made by the
! present congress provides for three bat
/ tleShips. whose cost, NOT exceeding arm
| ament. shall be not more than S,oooOR
| each. This figure is ample. The belief
| Of the navy department is that when the
bids are opened it will be found that they
| are well below thar sum. and this in
| spite Of the fact that there are only three
! ship yards in the country that can build
! such ve~As, and one is likely to be
awarded to each. These yards are locat-
| ed at Philadelphia, San Francisco and
! Newport News.
The first Of our vessels Of this class
were the Indiana. Massachusetts and Ore
gon, the contracts for which were award
ed in 1890. The first two of these were
built in Philadelphia and the Oregon at
San Francisco. Then such work was new
to American ship builders, who had no
experience in battle ship construction.
IL ~
$3.50 tons; the Indiana and Massachusetts
contract price was 81 020 900 each, and that
of the Oregon 50, $50 900. This was a cost
of $50 per ton for the first two and $6Ol
ton for the Oregon. Three years later a
contract for another battleship was
awarded. This was for the Iowa. Cramp
agreed to build it for So, 100000. and as the
gross tonnage was 1924 tons, this was at
the rate of s479 a ton-a decrease of 16
per cent. In 1896 contracts were award
ed for the Alabama. Illinois, Kentucky
and Kearsarge. Cramp agreed TO build
the Alabama for 81 $50 900 and the New
port News company to construct the other
three for 50 $50, 900 for the Illinois and 81
$50. 600 each for the Kentucky and kear-
sarge The first two of these had a gross
tonnage of $500 and the latter Of GS31.
This meant a price of 1888 for the Alal'a-
ma per ton 1891 per ton fer the Illinois,
ard 5000 for the Kentucky and Kerr
sarge. Taking the highest price, we find
that the cost of construction lad dec cas-
ed in the three years since the building OF
the Iowa by 10 per cent. ITO.' The six veal rs
the decrease was from $50 per ron 10 1888
per ton, or SO per cent. 1t is reasonable
to suppose that when the new contracts
are awarded a further decrease Will be
shown.
There are many reasons for this reduc-
ton in the cost of the construction of cur
battleships The decrease in the price Of
steel is one of the greatest. Improved
methods of manufacturing steel have re-
duced the price so that ship builders now
pay only about 215 or 8 cents a pound for
steel for which they paid cents eight
years ago. Steel can be bought in the
United States just as cheap as It could be
bought if 1t was imported from England
duty free and as steel eats up a bout che
half the cost of the construction of ships
il can be easily seen what saving there
has been made in this respect.
Not only is the material cheaper, but the
labor is cheaper. This does not mean that
wages have decreased. AS matter of
fact skilled naval constructors are paid
more than they were when we fist be-
gan to construct battleships. But the la
Dor is more productive. With the in
crease in wages there has been an in
crease in productivity. it being an cXcIn-
pliication Of the well known economic
principal that the best paid labor is the
cheapest in the end. The result is that in
spite of the higher wages paid in this
country we can now manufacture war
ships for about the same price as we
should have to pay if our ships were
built abroad.
Another important item is that the ship
builders are more used to their work.
They have the plans-thousands of then
that were used in the construction Of the
other battleships. Many OF them can he
used or need but slight modii cations. If,
as has been stated by sle naval depart
ment officials in the dispatches of Mon
day, the new ships are to be Of The same
type as the Illinois and Wisconsin, there
need be but small expense for new pans.
And It is true that the ship5uildArs, tav-
ing greater practice in their work, are
able to figure more closely on the cost Of
the work that they will have TO do
When the American shipbulders first
began the work of building the nav navy
they had 70 overcome great difficulties
They were without experience and they
were forced TO learn the trade from the
beginning. There was nothing TO do but
to experiment. 1t is delicate work to con-
stuct one OF these great engines of war
and the waste of time, labor and material
was great But today they are proficient.
ana Cramp IS building war ships for Js-
pan. and is said TO have a contract 10
build some for Russia. These contracts
were won in omen competition with the
great shipbulders OF all the rest OF the
world.
Ships cannot be quickly built. We have
shown that q merchant vessel can be con-
verted into a gunboat within few days.
But this is not true of the building OF bat
tie ships. Three years is the time allowed
for the contraction of one OF these. How
quickly could We do this in time Of war?
The system Of governmental inspection IS
at present the greatest cause Of delay.
All the materials used must be subjected
to numerous long and expensive tests.
One set OF inspectors inspects the work q
other inspectors. and there IS good deal
Of red tape-much more than there IS IN
any other country This IS well enough
In time OF peace but IN time Of war com
rnercial inspections would answer and de-
tails might be left largely 70 the contrac-
tors who would certainly use care in
their work. One of the government naval
constructors has estimated that a. least
one half OF the time could he saved by Do
ing way with the present numerous IN
sDecttons ard the abolition a red tape.
This IS now done IN England. II would re-
duca The time TO eighteen months. and IN
der pressure Il would therefore oesats 70
say that II war with a formitsh'e power
r7aaA n necessary we could add three
battIeshius a year 20 our navy. Tor there
ars three big yards
There are scores y iron works through
ont the country that could g into RE
construction OF torpedo and gun boets.
and we could probably build 6fty Or more
IN six months Il they used the pans of
former boats