The evening times., 1900-02-06
THE SUBMARINE BOATS
Secretary Long Replies to an En-
Quiry Concerning Them.
lie Explains the Action of the Naval
Board on Construction Regarding
The Recent Propositions of the
Holland Company-NO Hostility
to the New Type of War Graft.


Secretary Long has written a letter in
reply to an enquiry regarding the report
of the Board on Construction on the pro-
posed purchase Of the submarine torpedo
boat Holland The Secretary believes
that some wrong impressions have gone
abroad concerning the departments atti-
tude toward submarine boats. and hopes
that this letter will correct the misunder-
standing. The letter follows:
Il have the honor 10 acknowledge the
receipt of your letter OF the 25th instant,
relative TO the report of the Board on Con
struction. and the proposal of the Holland
Torpedo Boat Company to sell to the Gov
ernment its submarine torpedo boat Hol-
land. and build for it another vessel OF
similar type, or TO construct two st.ch new
boats
In reply have to state that the depart
ment has given and will continue TO give
the matter careful attention, feeling that,
although this sort of vessel is still in eX-
perimental stage It is entitled. in the in
terest of naval construction and enterprise.
TO thorough consideration. Indeed the de-
partment made contract with the Holland
Company as long ago as March u, 1895,
for the construction OF one Of its submarine
boats. the Plunger, which has not yet
been finished. although the time for its
completion expired several years ago.
During the Spanish-American war the
department had an examination made Of
the Holland. and. after correspondence
with the company, complied with its re-
quest in a-letter TO il, dated May g. 1895
TO order "a board to witness trial of that
boat. In accordance with the recommenda-
tiOn of the Board on Construction certain
requirements were named which the boat
ought to fulfill
1t was found however. that this trial
could not be made by the company as soon
as expected, and. under date Of June Is.
1898. the requirements aforesaid were some
what modified. as set forth ia a letter 10
the company of that date. in which was
embodied the following clause. to-wit:
II b tp De- distinctly understood. however. tElt
ibc Department Is to be- 1t mo- cxpcu-p on account
ur -Iid tests. aside from furnishing tbo Whitehead
torpedo Tor u-u during the same. nor docs the
department.. hl Cuu-cutiuE 20 witucS- such fur
fHrr tests. ru amy way commit itself a~ tv i5s
tH'Hrr action concerning the Holland submarine
The board selected by the department
was che Board Of Inspection and Survey
The ,rial was made November y. 1895
The boat was then found deficient i'll
several respects After correspondence
with The company, DO was decided that the
board should witness a further trial, an
this. af.er several postpouymeuts was
made November o. 1899. Il was then found
that the boat made "a very creditable SHOW
lus, and. under date of the 23d of that
month. the company submitted its propo-
sal above mentioned.
You are Ia error In the impression that
'hc members of The Board on Construction.
Io which this whole matter was referred
and 70 more competent board could be Sc
lectcu-arc hostile to the adoption Of any
form OF submarine boat for the naval ser
vice. 4 am sure that with better krow!-
edge OF them and OF their faithful dis
charge Cf any duty assigned them. you viii
gladly recall your suggestion that they
have made an unfair and unjust report
"Tney are cautious not TO re Omme Id
haste iu This matter until the interests of
the Government are properly guarded iy
securing the best practicable development.
The report Of the majority OF the board
which Is less favorable to the company
lnan that Ct the Chief Constructor who is
member Of the board. simply recon-
mendS that nJ further contract be made
satisfactory settlement concerning the de
livery OF the submarine beat Plunge
above referred to- the contract for whicn
required Its completion within twelve
months from March L. 1895
Under that contract the sum OF 20 e.
1850 has already been paid The majority
report suggests that when the PIunger
matter shall have been satisfactorily ad-
Justed 10 viii be time enough to consider
the companys present proposal and that
M ease or such adjustment the depart
ment viii be justified, If the law permits
IN making contract. under proper guaran-
ices ana Specifications, for one vessel OF
The larger size offered by the company. and
in thus aiding I'm the development Of the
submarine boats.
The question raised by the board Is
simply one as to the wisdom OF making
contracts for more than one Of these boats
under present circumstances In this con-
uection it Should be borne in mind as
appears from the above-quoted extract
from the Departments letter Of June Is
1888. that the requirements suggested by
The Department for fulhlment BY The
Holland were not Of the nature of an
agreement 10 accept her il she should meet
them. and that. therefore the Government
is not only under no obligation to buy
her because Of her performance Of them
hui IS not I'M any way committed q such
The majority of the Board on Ccnstruc-
lion purposely refrained from any criti-
cism OF discussion of the merits Of the
Holland. or Of the possibilities of sub.ua-
rine boats In general. but il is difficult to
escape their conclusion that il would MOI
be q profitable business transaction to buy
the Holland at the same price. $40 600
for which the company offers to build new
and larger boats
In view Of the matters herein set forth
am convinced that you will see that the
action Of The Board on Construction mas
leen mis1pprChended by you and that me
interests uf the Holland Torpedo Boat Com
pany are NOT uuiustly affected by its rec
concentrations The department by no
means regards the matter as concluded.
hut holds 10 in abeyance for the present.
desiring additional light It is possible
hat this may be derived from the further
tests which. IL is reported, are to be made
Of tho Holland in this city at an early
date
IN Alleged PfcLpocLet.