The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-07-29
ARMoR PLATE IN GERMANY.
4 Report on Its Manufacture by Con
sui General Guenther.

Writing from Frankfort TO the state De-
partment on the subject Of the msnafae-
ture of armor plate in Germany. Richard
Gueuther. United States Consul General.
says:
In the report Of the Committee en- Nava!
Affairs OF the German Parliament. let
ter was read from Barren Won Ssumrn. one
oi the armor plate manufacturers. which
ne SAID he was compelled TO write In con-
sequence OF statements in the new spapers.
u ne business profits OF the Krupp and
munger WORKS CT aTtnor plates. he said,
had been stated at 81 SIS. OCO. The r,e,y
armored ships required 40 600 tons of
armcr material at cost OF s26 se4 600.
Therefore, even il It were taken for grant
ed that half Of the price constituted a
clear profit this would only amount to
S13.32S eco. which. divided over sixteen
years. would be $751;. 600 annually, or sfi6,-
500 for each concern.
The manufacture OF armor plate. rs
continued. was very difficult within
twenty years the method Of manufacturing
has had to be renewed three times. The
least mistake results in rejection. which
imposes heavy loss. For years the prices
for armcr plates had not been raised. al
though wages and cost Of raw material
had doubled
I'm answer to this letter. 1t was argued
based upon the estimates for new vessels
and remodcling. for the next sixteen Yeas
would amount to the sum of s5l. sS0 009.
not to $26.S94. 600. IT, therefore-as would
seem to be admitted in the letter-hait
were net profit this would amount
to S309l0. O0u. which would be de-
rived by only two firms. net profit
consisting Of half OF the contract price was
exorbitant. termination Of the monopoly
either By the establishment OF works by
the Empire or by participation of reliable
competitors. was urged. The enquiry was
also made whether the nickel steel armor
OF those vessels which had to be replaced
could not again be used.
THE representatives of the Government
replied that an answer to this question
could not be given at present, inasmuch as
the condemnation of old armored ships so
far had not applied to nickeI-steel arnored
ones, but only to common iron-armored
ships, and these arnlors are no longer used
The monopoly question was of great impor-
lance TO the Navy Department; such mo-
nopolies existed not only for armor plate.
but also for guns and ammunition. The
manufacture by the Empire would be an
enormous undertaking; furthermore, ID was
rot certain whether the profits on aruor
plate were realty as high, as they APP
peared, when the capital invested is taken
into consideration. The aim OF the De-
partment was to create competition and to
break the monopolies.
The speaker was of the opinion that this
could be done all the more il by the pas
sage OF the bill permanent business for
| shipbuilders were guaranteed.
Zone OF the members said tiIat it had
been recently stated in Parliament that
England was building her ships 90 per
cent cheaper than other countries. II this
we're so. It world make a difference Of
! $59,024,0C0 to Germany on her new and
| remodeled ships. The representative OF the
German Government replied that the rea-
| son might be that the English shlpyards
were well appointed in every particular,
that material and coal were somewhat
cheaper in England. and especially that
keener competition existed in England be-
tween the shipbuilders.'