The San Francisco call., 1898-08-08
WHY WARSHIPS SHOULD BE
 SHEATHED.

Dry Dock No. 3 at the Brooklyn Navy Yard Is at last reported fit for, use and our battle ships will at last be able to dock and have their bottoms cleaned and painted after a delay of more than one year.
 There are only three drydocks in this country capable of admitting our large battle ships, but only one-that at Port Orchard-has been serviceable, while the Port Royal dock appears to be somewhat shaky besides having insufficient depth of water, and the Brooklyn dock has been undergoing rebuilding since May last year at a cost of nearly $170, 900 to make 1t fit for use.
 Luck or Providence has favored our navy during the present war, for a chance shot from the enemy might have made any one of our battle ships useless for further service until the one dock, ruined by criminal neglect of duty on the part of Government officials, could be put in condition to take in the disabled craft. AS it is, the ships have been in tropical waters for months and the damage, through pitting of the plates from corro- sion, is a serious matter, besides their inability to move about with anywhere near their calculated speed, notwithstand- ing the vast quantities of coal consumed.
 The experiences gained through the U
 ably to Congress in both houses, some members of which have hitherto opposed recommendations of the Navy Depart ment officials in the lines or increased efficiency of the navy. One of the most important recommendations Ignored mas been that of sheathfng certain VeSselS, the great speeds of which depended mainly upon the clean condition or thelr bottoms. In 1884 when the increase or the navy received serious attention rom Con. eress it was recommended that some or the new ships should be sheathed for pro- lection to the ships, as a measure or econ omy in the use ot coal ana e,aitaIt5 aH to maintain the speeds tndehnltely.
 Chandler then Secretary or the Navy, vigorously opposed this recommendatlon, claiming that with our docking I~acIlltles ~ there was no need of sheathed vessels and that mo holes would be bored Tn the bottoms of the new ships by ms or1ers' except by direction of an act or con gress" At the time this subject was s9 slInmarily disposed of, Great Britain ana other navies had already number or sheathed ships af1oat, notwithstanding the the world, and the naval powers nave eone on and "bored the bottoms of ships fIII of holes''-that is, Sheathed thousands of tons and thereby maintained the speed of & t6a ships and saved vast sums in coal hills Tn 1890 an act was passed by Con Sress which in an equivocal way, per mitted the. sheathing or two son1e new deuht euht to fbe mind of the Secretary as 10 10 the meaning of said act, and Inc gl1nboats were not Sheathed. it Ino , enIv during the past two years, through the persistent efforts. of the pres ent chief constructor that, six composite cunboots of 1000 tons each have been built D ud fhese constitute all the vessels we have M in the navy which need not dock dock twice or oftener yearly in order to Keep un their speed at a reasonable expend- Tn 1889 Chief Constructor Hichborn sub r,itted a report to the Navy Department mnon the importance and need of sheathed ships. He enumerated vessels of foreign na I,ies thus protected against fouling and norros,on. and independent of docks cap 2 ble of cruising all over the world if nec- essary and always competent to get up to tbeir original speeds. The list was a long one hut since then the number has vastly increased and it now appears to be the Fvad policy of foreign naval powers to Seo+be ali vessels intended for foreign stations. The following table. shows the Smmber and tonnage of sheathed vessels ~, the several navies built or in course of lnian,'strnction III at the beginning of 1898: