The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-04-18
DEBATE ON NAVAL BILL
SPEECHES BY REPRESENTATIVES,
DAYTON, WHEELER AND OTHERS.
COlIOquy Between the West virginian
and the Kentuckian on the
ArmOr Plate Question.

WASHINGTON, April 1.-THE second
days debate on the naval appropriation
bill in the House to-day was confined close
ly to the subject matter of the bill and was
as rule devoid of interesting features.
The questions of armor plate and the build
ing of war ships I'm government yards, as
on yesterday, attracted most attention.
General debate was closed to-day and to-
morrow the bill will be read for amend
ment under the fve-minute rule.
Mr.. Dayton, of West Virginia, a member
of the naval committee, the first speaker,
contended that the naval programme out
lined in the bill was not an extravagant
one He said it not liberal as it
should have been and predicted that larger
appropriations would be required in the
future He opposed the building Of war
ships in government yards.
Mr. Wheeler, of Kentucky, asked If there
was not a lobby here to defeat the PROPOSE
ton TO build ships in government yards.
''I never heard of such LOBBY" replied
Mr.. Dayton. 1.-The only lobby 1 have seen
was the lobby of naval constructors. if it
could be called lobby, arguing In favor
of the proposition 1 oppose"
ment of government armor plate factory.
The government had as well go into coal
mining or the production of any other
products which 1t must buy
Mr. Wheeler asked IL the manufacturers
of armor plate had ever furnished Congress
the data on which the cost of armor plate
could be determined.
"When 1 buy suit of Clothes replied
Mr.. Dayton, II do not require the tailor to
furnish me the cost of cloth. thread, but
tons tailoring, ETC., and hope to God the
time will never come when the American
government shall compel manufacturers
to furnish such details simply to crafty
what consider an impertinent curiosity"
Ibid not the government fine the manu-
facturers for furnishing defective armor?"
asked Mr.. Wheeler.
mot defective armor; repned MI Dai-
zell of Pennsylvania. who interposed to re-
ply THAT armor was per cent. better than
the required tests.
WAS it not full of blowholes?"
Not enough to hurt anything" replied
Mr.. Dalzell. II will discuss the matter
later"
One of the strong reasons urged by Mr.
Dayton against the government emparking
liz the manufacture of armor was the pos
sibility that, in a few years, the whole
scheme of defending ships might change.
Already a naval expert had suggested COM
pressed cotton as substitute for armor.
Mr. Vandever of Missouri, also men,
Der of the naval committee who signed the
minority report, advocated government
ermor mandatory ana the pulldlng OF
ships in government yards.
MIR Fitzgerald, of New York, argued in
favor of the building ships in government
yards.
the naval committee. concluded the debate
for the day. He criticised severely the rule
of the House which prohibited members
from making public the floor what was
done and said behind committee doors and
declared himself in favor of compelling
committees to open their doors to the press.
The most vicious Legislation was Matched
behind closed doors He had no insinuation
TO make against the committee of which he
was a member he said, but he thought the
practice a bad one. He also opposed, he
said the appointment of men with special
interests TO serve on committees. Their de-
sire TO serve their constituents, he said,
outweighed their duty 10 their country.
viction. to a government armor plate fac
tory and the building of ships in govern
ment yards. but when II came TO surrender
ing some OF his convictions or submitting
TO highway robbery he would let some of
the former go. He was convinced from
what he had been able to learn that the
profit on armor plate was from $50 to 200
per cent Mr. Wheeler said he had In his
possession a letter 10 prove that Krupp
armor could be produced cheaper than
Harveyized armor, but he was not at lib
erty to use IL.
Mr. Wheeler created something of a sem
sation by expressing the opinion that IAN
officer in the uniform OF the United States
was responsible for the armor plate trust
He did not name the officer and was not
questioned TO who he meant. General
debate was then closed.
A joint resolution was adopted authoriz-
ing the secretary of the interior 10 exhibit
the printing relics at the New York print
ing exposition, May TO June 2. At $50 D.
m the House adjourned