The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-05-15

and development ana imberial distinctions
are on the sea. l am not for vieing with
Great Britain. for entering on the role
of what may be tEiamphaut and warning
power. am for Domestic policy OF dom
mating our own possessions and letting the
wide world wag as X Will shall vote for
| these torpedo boats for harbor defence lib
erally-for twice as MANY as the Naval
Committee has recommended-because
| they have demonstrated by the highest tes-
timony that can be adduced ON the sub
| ject as the cheapestnand best methods OF
local defence
Mr.. Hawley expressed the opinion that
| the naval committee had done what was
| fair and right in recommending five Hol-
| land boats
Mr.. Butler argued in favor OF ten Hol-
land boats.
| Only Five Boats Needed.
| Mr.. Chandler stated that he was not in
| favor of ordering more than five boats at
present, as the Secretary of the Navy had
| recommended that only few be purchased
| at present until more. improvements could
be made.
did the Secretary of the Navy also rec
ommend that We pay s545 per ton for ar
| NOR plate?" asked Mr.. Stewart.
Il am sorry to say that he did, said Mr..
Chandler.
Then l want no more recommendations
from the Secretary of the Navy" said Mr.
Stewart.
Mr.. Hale stated that the Naval Affairs
| Committee favored the Holland torpedo
| boat, and were delighted and surprised
with the success OF the experiments made
He thought 1t best to "go slow on these
eccentric classes of boats" and he argued
against Mr. Stewards amendment He Of
fered to modify the committee amendment
by striking out the words ''if the Secretary
OF the Navy shall deem the same for the
interest OF the naval service so as to
| make the contract for five Holland boats
| unconditional.
Mr.. Stewart accepted the compromise
and withdrew his amendment.
The committee amendment was then
agreed to and the item of $250.000 for the
completion of the equipment of the new
vessels heretofore authorized was increased
| to $500 COO.
Mr. Hale offered an amendment authoriz-
| ing the change of the naval station at Port
| Royal S. c.. to site near Charleston.
After ome-discussion an amendment was
offered by Mr.. Butler extending the right
of choice to the State of North Carolina.
~. H.,
| the best place for the naval station. The
amendment was rejected, and Mr.. Hale's
amendment was agreed to.
Mr.. Chandler then moved an amendment
reducing the number of armored cruisers
provided for in the bill to two and of pro-
tected cruisers from three to two.
Plea for Economy.
He made an argument in support of his
amendment, saying that the ships provided
for in the bill would cost s4s, 200, 600, and
that he thought two of the ships, one to
cost 100000 and the other $4,000, 900,
| might be safely omitted. He thought that
the country was spending too much money
for the Navy and too little for the devel
opment of the merchant marine. The bill
reported for the latter purpose called for
no larger appropriation than would be
necessary for two .frst-elass war vessels.
He hoped that Congress would not adjourn
until that bill from the Committee on
Commerce had been brought to a test in
the Senate and House OF Representatives.
Does the Senator expect that bill 10
be taken up and acted9on this session."
Mr.. Teller asked.
81 have no reason toothink that it will
not be- Mr.. Chandler replied.
Il have not the slightest idea that the
bill is going to be taken up at this ses-
sion.'' Mr.. Teller remarked. Il do not
believe that the Senator has. A. good
many things will be deferred till after the
Presidential campaign"
Il expect" said Mr.. Chandler 1.-The
Senate to act with wisdom and vigor and
energy. / do not think that there is any
reason why We should rush away from
here In thirty days and leave this subject
unattended to. l think that the work of
reviving the merchant marine ought not
to be longer delayed. The bill should be
taken up and acted on. / know of no
purpose on the part OF anyone that it
shall not be acted on at this session."
Mr.. Hale. in charge of the bill. expressed |
his desire to have the consideration OF the |
bill concluded without further delay ard |
his regret that the ship subsidy should |
have been injected into the discussion. lie |
hoped that in consideration OF all the time |
spent on the Naval Appropriation BILL the |
Subsidy bill would not be brought into 1t.
and the Clark case would not be brought |
into IL, and other things would not be |
brought into it, There was quite enough |
in it now to arouse controversy.
Mr.. Chandler remarked ironically that |
the Senator from Maine had been so unus-
ually gracious and temperate flor HIM
that he would accept his admonition and |
withdraw the amendment
Mr. Teller made some comments upon
the Ship Subsidy bill.
Mr. Chandler said that they (meaning
the Republican Sena:ors) dare not bring
it up just before the election"
1T is going to be shunted," he said. ''un-
til after the next election and we shall
get away here probably in month";
Mr.. Tillman renewed Mr.. Chambers
amendment and it was rejected without a
division.
Mr. Mcbride offered an amendment
which was agreed to, for board of naval
officers to determine the desirability OF
locating and constructing a dry dock on
the Columbia River, Oregon.
Finally the bill was reported to the
Senate from the Committee of the Whole.
Mr.. Pettigrew launched out into a polit-
ical harangue. In which he declared that
Mr.. Carnegie had written the steel sched-
ule in the tariff act, that the steel COM
bination was to have many million dollars
of profit out of the armor plate contract,
and that the reason for it was that the
Republican party might secure large
campaign fund.
The bill was then passed without di-
vision.
|