The Savannah morning news., 1900-07-04
THE NAVAL STATION MATTER.

Charleston, through the News and Cou-
rier, is having an Interesting time with
the story sent out from Washington that
it is her purpose to "gouge the govern
ment" in the purchase of a site for the
proposed naavl station. That paper says
that the story has obtained a wide circula-
ton, and is being industriously used by
the enemies of Charleston. But who gave
the story circulation? Who ever heard
of it until il appeared in the News and
Courier? Why did the News and Courier
publish it if it had no foundation? What
was its object in giving it circulation? Has
it any authority for saying that the story
would ever have appeared in print if it
had not printed it? 1t is amusing that
the News and Courier wastes so much
space in pointing out the injury the cir
culation of this story is doing Charles
ton, while it keeps in the background the
fact that the story would never have been
circulated. in all probability if it had not
picked it up in Washington and published
it.
But perhaps the News and Courier had
reasons for thinking that there was some
truth in it, and thought 1t advisable to
publish it. and thus head off any attempt
to ''gouge the government" Ii says: 1--WE
feel sure that any attempt that shall be
made in Charlesto to impose upon the
government in the matter of a site for the
naval station will be defeated. We know
of at least of two available sites that are
not in the hands of any speculative syndi-
cate" We are glad to know that there
are two sites that are not in the hands
of persons who have no intention to
"gouge the government" Does the News
and Courier wish to be understood that
there are other sites, and that they are
in the hands of persons who are prepared
to 'gouge the government IL they get
chance TO do so? 1t would be interesting
to have an answer to this question, be-
cause ii might disclose the fact that the
story about gouging the government.
which is causing the News and Courier
so much unrest, did not after all originate
in Savannah but in Charleston.
The News and Courier says that its sug-
gestion that the story originated in sa-
vannah appears to be well founded, but it
gives no reason for thinking it we'll found
ed, except a statement from its Washing
ton correspondent that the opponents of
Charleston intends to throw every obstacle
in the way of Charleston's getting the sta
ton, and a statement from our Washing
ton correspondent. that Savannah has of
fered the government site for the station
fgAl - 49,
either of these things justihes its sugges-
ton. The News and Courier. however, evil
IDENTIFY wants to think 1t does, and il pro
ceeds to say, virtually, that It understands
Savannah's little game" Savannah, &C
cording TO the News and Courier cannot
get the station under the present bill, but
she hopes to prevent Charleston from get
ting il, and then, in the course of time
make an effort TO get it herself.
II may be that the News and Courier
is 'onto the little game of Savannah.
but if so, that paper is much better in
formed than the average citizen of this
city. We know of no offer TO the govern
ment of a free site for a naval station.
nor of any movement to get the naval sta
ton in the event that the naval board re-
ports against Charleston, but we do know
that SavanEahs advantages for the station
are much superior 10 those of Charleston
or any other place on the South Atlantic
coast. While it is true that Savannah
is several miles from the sea on a fresh
water river the fresh water is the very
thing to cleanse the bottoms Of vessels
of barnacles. Charleston may have as
much water on her bar between the jetties
as Savannah has on her bar. but how
about the depth OF water on Charleston's
bar just beyond her jetties? And. II the
station should be located at Charleston,
how does that city propose to supply e