The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1900-06-17
----e-a3 r~S----------------
THE PORT ROYAL STATION.
Some of the Reasons why 1t should
Not BE Removed.

Some of the Reasons why 1t should
Not BE Removed.
Editor Morning News An amendment
to the naval appropriation bill was passed
during the last days of the armor plate
fight, which proposes the abandonment
of the navy yard at Port Royal. S. c.,
with its mammoth dock, brick and steel
machine shops. wharves, storehouses, bar
racks, hospitals, officers quarters and
numerous other buildings.
The act now provides that the $500 000
which the bill, as first framed. set aside
for the further improvements at Port
Royal, shall be used for building another
similar plant at Charleston, If the Secre-
tary of the Navy shall see fit.
There is rottenness behind this PROPOSE
tion-astounding TO those who know the
facts-at this time we will pass over the
cunning political trickery, and the Slick
manipulations by which certain Charles
ton commercial interests secured the pass
age of this measure But we call at
tention to the fact that the chief of the
Bureau of Yards and Docks addressed to
the Secretary of the Navy a letter which
expresses and urges Charlestons claims
and which was sent to the Senate Com
mittee on Naval Affairs with the Secre-
tary's Endorsement.
1t may not be surprising that the Secre-
tary accepted without question the facts
as stated by his chief of bureau but I'M
fortunately, he thereby gave currency to
a Misrepresentation absolutely false in
detail and in IFS general impression.
We will take up the leading statements
one by one and show the shallowness Of
the grounds taken for this move:
l. THE dry dock was constructed in
1S94-'95 at a cost of $40, 1900. and there
has been expended upon the body of the
dock over $500 for repairs"
Four of the five other timber docks
have cost from 5000 10 $50, 900 per year
for repairs as compared with Port Roy
ais average of 5000 AS 10 the original
cost of the dock-it was less than for any
other dock the government has built since
1888: moreover. it is one of the largest
docks on either coast.
2. Its history, for a period beginning
even before it's completion, has been
series of accidents in the way of failure
of portions of the structure it
is now in such condition that a satisfac
tory rebuilding in concrete or stone. or
both, necessary to render il entirely safe,
will involve the expenditure of such
large sum of money as to bring its costs
to about 81, 100000.
First, as to the series of accidents in
the way of failure of portions of the
structure" Wishing TO get official in
formation, we requested the Secretary of
the Navy to give us access to all the
facts relating to this dock. The request
was granted, and we make the following
statement upon the results of our inves-
tigation:
No structural weaknesses Of any mate
rial consequence have developed since the
acceptance of the dock by the govern
ment. The accidents have been slight
tn W. 10 c
to the integrity of any important element
of the dock.
The foundation of the Port Royal dock
is of extraordinary firmness, and bears
without any perceptible give the weight
of the heaviest battleships,
Next-'It is now in such a condition"
etc. II is now in such a condition ~ 10
render it entirely safe to dock therein any
vessel of the navy. When the Indiana was
sent to the dock at Halifax, and there
strained. she might have been safely
locked at Port Royal S. c.
Again as to the rebuilding of the dock
in stone end concrete. Although this Ia at
present the most valuable timber dock on
the coast the Importance of its situation,
as the only dock from Hatteras to Flori-
da. demands that 1t should be given the
permanency which stone will afford.
The cost of such rebuilding we are told
twill involve the expenditure of such
large sum of money as to bring its cost
to about 81. 900, COO" But this is not such
a large sum" for concrete dock enlarged
as is proposed i'm the plans for rebuilding
The cost of the masonry docks now owned
by the government was as follows:
Boston .......................... 972,17 q
Norfolk DO "
New York ...........'.'''''''''''' 5'L0S49S %
Mare Island ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. Z,f1- ~ Us
THE original cost of the Port Royal dock
was $40 437. o. which. with the $4,000 ID
ditionaI asked for, making a total OF 1919,
i27 90, will build a dock longer, wider AMI
deeper than the largest of the above. In
the 1899 reports the department congrat-
ulates itself that the contracts for ma
eonrv docks to be built at Boston and
portsmouth have been let under most fav
orable conditions for the government md
that they are to cost $l,0lS,4 400 and $l,OS9-
600. respectively .
riouslv considers abandoning the Port
ROYAL dock rather than to rebuild IT In
concrete on a splendid foundation at
comparatively small expense, and in the
same breath proposes spending double
the sum an the experiment Of building
dock somewhere "at or near the city of
Charleston"
g. During the year the Mayor of the
city or charleston suBStSteu tHt PlNPiAS-
ty of transferring the naval station TO
that city, from Port Royal, stating among
other things. the facilities for transporta-
ton to the interior the proximity of
large commercial city, the convenience
OF obtaining at all times skilled labor of
all classes, and abundance Of fresh wa
ter. etc. advantages which are lacking
at Port Royal"
That Charleston's Mayor painted his
clty's facilities In glowing colors is nat
ural; but that this chief of bureau could
in the face of the facts. add advantages
which are lacking at Port Royal" can
only be explained by the fact that he is
either ignorant of or misrepreseuting the
facts. n,.lNy.
Transportation.
The Port Royal naval station IL 2h
miles below the terminus OF the Charles
ton anw Western Carolina Railroad, and