The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1898-02-23
The Naval Fighting Strength
of the United States.

Of the United States.
The possibility of serious interna,
tional complications. growing out of
the recent destruction of our battle
ship Maine, in the harbor of Havana,
naturally arouses fresh interest in the
fighting strength Of our American
naval outfit.
Of course the frightful disaster
which has overtaken the Maine,
whether due to Spanish foul pay or to
some internal accident, tends TO
weaken public confidence in the se-
curity afforded by our battleships,
and to bring distrust upon the entire
white squadron Nor is this to be
easily avoided when the country is
suddenly confronted with the specta-
Gle of seeing one Of its gigantic iron,
clads converted into mere doll rags
by reason Of some mysterious explo
sion. In such mishaps as the one
which now confronts us, is it not
proper to apply the old adage and
judge of the entire squadron by the
power of resistance which the Maine
has manifested, or rather failed to
manifest?
While this question is bound to
arise in the public mind, it is well to
note that the Maine, although costing
the government somewhere in the
neighborhood of $2.500.000, does
not appear in the catalogue of our
first class battleships Since its total
displacement aggregated only 6,682
tons, its proper designation is that
of second class battleship. Our
first class battleships. with the ton
mage in each case, are nine in num-
ber as follows: The Kenkucky, H..
525 tons the Kearsage, IL. .525 tons;
the Illinois, II, ,525 the Alabama. H.
525; the Wisconsin, 1926; the
Iowa. II, 40; the Oregon, l0,2SS !;
the Indiana, 1928 and the Massa.
chusetts, 10,288.
To summarize the fighting strength
of the white squadron. it includes
nine first class battleships, two Sec
ond- class battleships. two armored
cruisers, thirteen protected cruisers,
three unprotected cruisers, one ar
mored ram, six doub'e-turreted moni.
tors, thirteen single turreted moni-
tors, ten gunboats. elk composite
gunboats, three special class gun
boats, twenty two steel torpedo boats,
one wooden torpedo boat, FIVE iron
cruising vessels. eleven sailing yes
sells, six tugs. eight wooden steam
vessels and six wooden sailing ves-
sells. In the aggregate there are l4l
different naval pieces in the white
squadron, only fourteen Of which are
obsolete and unfit for service in the
event of war. So far as the resistive
power of our battleships is concern
ed, it is safe to say that in spite of
the disastrous experience OF the
Maine, there is no country on the
globe which can boast of superior
engines of war. Of course, such
countries az Great Britain and France
are provided with more of them. but
they are not of better workmanship.
But what of Spain naval outfit.
This question is certainly pertinent
in this connection. Most of Spsin's
naval engines are out of date She
has only one frstclass battleship
which is worthy of the name-the
Pelaya-and even this falls consider
ably short of our smallest one, its
displacement being only $500 tons
One apparent advantage which Spain's
feet has over ours, is in the number of
armored cruisers While ber feet con.
tains seven of these cruisers, ours
contains only two, viz, the New
York and the BROOKLYN but this
advantage is partially overcome by
the superior equipment of our cruis-
ers. The New York and Brooklyn
carry seventy.four monster guns the
Spanish cruisers carry 2O8 smaller
and inferior ones On good authority,
the statement is made that Spain has
no sea-going coast-deferse ships,
while this country has six. carrying
thirty heavy guns and fifty-two light
guns. Of non-sea going coast. de
tenders. Spain has only two, while
this country ia credited with four
teen. Of protection and non protec-
ton cruisers. Spain mas only FIVE,
while the United States has sixteen.
In the number Of gunboals and tor
pedo boats available for use in the
event of hosti!ities, the United States
is also ahead of Spain.
From this hasty review of the two
conodrops r. ia evident thet tho