New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-02-04
END OF WOODEN DRYDOCKS
COMMODORE ENDICoTTs REPORT IS
STRONGLY AGAINST THEM
TIE GREAT ADVANTAGES or MASONRY DOCKS
PRESENTED TO SECRETARY LoNG-AcT1oN

TO BE ASKED FROM CONGRESS.
| lpv TELEGRAPH TO TRrHrNEl
| Washington Feb. 3.-The Tribunes advocacy
! OF masonry drydocks Of permanent character
for the Navy instead Of the dangerous timer
| veneered excavations in which almost prlceleSs
warshps are frequently exposed to destrucu'h'
| at last gives every promise OF reallzauon hucn
! TO the qualification Of the naval adhhsra-
| ,ior ard N the alarm Of the wooden drydock
| LOBBYISTS The end Of the temporary makeshit
structures is emphasized by report from COM
nodore rndicott the naval officer in charge Of
the drydocks which was made to Secretary
| Long to-day. and which viii be forwarded 10
| Congress tomorrow. This report in fuU is az
| follows
Department OF the Navy. Bureau Of Yards ana
DOCKS Washington. u c. Feb 3 ls99
Sir: Congress az It's last session made appropria-
tons for the construction or four tnioI I,,,b
n r., one at the Navy Yard, Boston, Mass; ono
at the Navy Yard League lsianG, rem 4i'I p pY
completed not exceeding $4,000 each. ana me Saa
rotary Of tho Navy vas euIhOfZeu m or Concrete
| faced with granite In such the limit o. COST
S say" You eScrc.ed the discretion given You by no
| law providing for the construction Of sed oocNa,
| Navy Yard. Boston. should he Of granite or con-
| crete faced with granite ~ T.,
| 2 In pursuance Of tho law and your IN
sruct ons hereunder, the bureau prepaLea plauS
and specifications for drydock OF the IdrsDs ~
calling FOR bids for its construction
! granite and also ~ concrete and graMle. inEIlI-
lions for proposals were advertseo D' Ra,, ON
| 1895 and the bids were opened at inc bu''a" OH
g. The lowest bid received was for drydock
constructed Of concrete and stone Hinount III,
$Si2400 and for the pumping ana o,net ma nm S
dock complete. with accessory structure S''-,tv
or $50 500 within the limit fixed by law for the cost
congress has Fixed for 81, s sae4 S Of '4e is s ,@
/ .Io nd drNQOCk
structed for about % per cent additional TO, ne
mansions and eouiprncnt ms fixed by Congress. Tho
result OF this advertisement for proposals Is more
favorable than anticipated. as. from sven IN,
! formation as the Bureau could obtain and from
the cost OF similar work in the past. 1t secmGd 'N-
tremey doubtful that such a dryd0;k eouI9 ~, y"
| contracted for at a cost near the limit hNed oS
8 In the past all the timber drydocks built for
the United States Government have ocen py COL,
tract after p1gS Pt FOR as the tnted stats
| Government have been constructed by daN l%uot
n ny Of mo due c2cy to the method adopted
| in appropriating for the works In partial SUMS
the experience OF the Navy that it has nfen p ond
sole TO compare the relative cost OF uiHs i, nd
! masonry docks of approximately the same Sic anu
o9llt lutn are exceedingly favorable and
dock over a timber drydock to be such as Ia. i, b
| Bureau to again undertake the constTUcuoh OF Or,
timber dydoek for the rned dr SSeSd oSk contd-
cred in connection with the moderate incrtAsffG coSl
now deyelopeG sh2uG B Benf Further argument
nm / beg TO set forth briefly some OF tic IcoS ~
WY IL ~ ~ now recommonding TO Congress the
adysab llty Of reconsdering It's actoii III NY 49,
ISSns mentioned in the beginning Of this Letter
| i'm the act making Appropriation ioI "lc "'''''
vice, approved May l. ls'''
crONE DOCKS CHEAPER IN THE END.
4 timber drydock is a temporary struct-
IRE. and the distinctive material or WhlcA i j.
| milf wood requires very extensive renewal at the
! end of TWENTY-FIVE years amounting IN some III
| stances and in climates. TO pTacucaI J.,
! building While the first cost Of a timber ui!lo'A
&c considerably Jess than that Of masonry dry
| dock the annual expenditure for It's repairs anu
| ,,airtenanee having reference to the drydock
| structure proper, which Is the only proper plaiS
| for connarlson is many times larger ihan that
| Of a masonry dock This IS not mere specu'"''o''
but the condition of the timber drydocks hereto
fore built for the Navy, no one OF whlnh cHc'GGS
! ion wears in age shows that they nave .ar'duE
entered upon period when me s -, Teoijro
terial wood. has Ear dcteriorated as 10 Ia
coneidorable repairs and the repairs already mace
and those pr9ydeSG i9b b nuTPose show that what
! was claimed TO be cheap aocK IS IG'"S P'0''"9
to be SeTy 3nd important consderaton is
that of the stability and safety OF the strncuTt'
SIGN and construction. differing IN depth me on
: Of greater draught is subjected 10 much more IN
| wbinb is the force to be met and provided for
more than any other IN gd g9fev Of such
strcire against this force tending rupture the
| bottom or side decrease with the depth and while
he question Of sta biity and safety Of such dock
may be comparatlye SIM one 10 rr@at i'm
! porrtancc magnitude and risk in the very deep
docks which It Is now cruisers and battle
| sblrs Accidents of this character nave occurred
dncks owned by the Government extending from
| the bursting I'm Of the altar system. as a League
tor,ion Of the floor Of tho dock as at Port Royal
and the partial collapse in the cas" or Drydo'h
DANGER IN TIMBER STRUCTURES.
O nrvdocks are structures about which when
built there should be doubt. and # IS quite safe
n saw that such freedom from risk in the case Of
very deep dock can only he obtained from one pun
Of masonry. A timber drydock. for its in'cGri'F'
depends upon the success Of pinning ~ down 10 me
soil in admitting the water 50 Toy I" ''S l.
terror as to relieve the pressure maklng u - VerE
safety cannot be considered ~ assured. mas"nr!
dock is designed 10 resist the dangerous force re-
ferrcd 10 hove by its own weight and when % o.
signed and vel built making water-ticht struct-
u1 to TIE bgbesf authorities upon the construction
Of drydocks state that The pTstfTenfs gwen The
those drydocfs because OF thSg T9ry in axe
from ten to about sixty-hve years Ine[ nave p@'n
The repairs 70 tho drydock structure proper may ne
! said TO have been insignificant ! ne only 's,slu
crahle individual repair 70 a masonry dr[aock m
The history Of the Navy was TO the ono AZ th' New
York Navy Yard. amounting to abou' $lo'"' dui
orc Of tho two timber drvdocks NJ the NeW-fork
! Yard have cost S171.O00 I'm one instance. alo IN"
other will soon receive an outlay oi E3"V"" 10 !"
pair natural deterioration and substitute ma
6nry Tor timber entrance. sl within an aE" u" zen
Years 49,
/ IT. The records of tho cost Of repairs 10 No
masonry docks have not been compiled WIN Cr.ai
eXactness because Of the difficulty of consuIu
fuliv all the old records In connection Win tnem
hui sufficient has been obtained N show thal Nna'
Is herein stated Is substantially correct
- In consideration Of an the circums' ar cos
the Bureau has thought n 10 be its duty ar this
particular time when n has been found possible 90
contract FOR the construction % a hrst-c'ass con
81
about 81 20 900. and when IN" Department is about
10 enter upon tho construction % three timber dry
docks AZ "A limit OF cost FOR each OF S2s25GO. 10 urge
that the matter be presented for the consideration
| Of Congress with the Departments earnest request
that the law be changed 20 allow of the construc
| ton OF three drydocks OF stone, or concrete and
stone. o. the largest sze2 a. a nmt OF o tb %