The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-04-17


Gives Notice of an Amendment.
The House yesterday. in Committee Of
the Whole entered upon the consideration
Of the Naval Appropriation bill for the
year ending June 80. 1901. with an agree
ment for fourteen hours Of general debate.
This will bring a vote ON the passage of
the bill probably Thursday afternoon.
Speeches were delivered by Messrs. Foss
of Illinois Cummings Of New York, Kitchin
of North Carolina, briggs of New York,
and Barber Of Pennsylvania, and they we're
all on the bill under consideration, re-
markable contrast with the debate on gen
eral appropriation bills hitherto this ses-
sion.
The bill carries a total of So. 209.si6.
being the largest naval appropriation ever
presented to the American Congress, and
SlS.l09q41 more than the amount Of the
last Naval bill. The increase, Acting
Chairman Foss said. was Chargeabe to the
building I'D OF the American Navy.
The items of the bill are: Pay of the
Navy s13.310.S97; contingent, $4,000;
Bureau of Navigation. S56j i25: Bureau of
Ordnance. S2.SSS.124; Bureau Of Equipment.
SO. 46i 05S: Bureau Of Yards and Docks,
S6OS, 1879; public works yards. ana docks
s.. 797. 467; Naval Academy, S7S9,6s6; Blu
reau of Medicine and Surgery, $22000o;
Bureau Of Supplies and Accounts. S27SL-
/ 2S2. Bureau of Construction and Repairs,
Sc 235 S24; Bureau OF Steam Engineering,
s.. IA. 200; Marine Corps, S2.712S70; in-
crease OF Navy, s16990. 500. Total, $6l,-
POS. 9l6.
Under the last item contracts are au-
thorized for two battleships to cost So
| 500 900 each: three armored cruisers to
! cost s4.2Jo. OO0 each and three protected
cruisers to cost 2.s0O.oo each.
The Armor Question.
The appropriation for armor was about
| 81 600 900. Mr.. Foss said. He explained
the differences Of opinion in the commit
tee on the armor question and stated that
the majority based their recommendation
on the report of the naval authorities that
! it was absolutely necessary to have the
armor at the earliest possible date in order
that the work of constructing ships be
not interfered with.
{ Z
the subject of sheathing the new ships he
said he was strongly in favor Of it, but
/ rad agreed to a compromise. leaving the
! matter in the hands Of the Secretary Of
4 the Navy. II he thought ships should be
locked every nine months instead OF every
1 two years IL might be expensive for The
( country, but his skirts were clear. The
{ evidence before the committee he said.
I in his opinion, was in favor OF shedthed
I vessels. They cost more. but were more
/ valuable. On the question Of building
( ships in the navy yards he said he orig-
/ nally thought that the country could afford
to try that experiment. II would cost
| more than under the contract system. but
he thought that some Of the ships should
be constructed at the navy yards in order
to encourage the laborers in the navy yard
who. BY law. were only required to work
eight hours a day. He did not believe, he
said in limiting the hours Of work in navy
Yards TO eight hours a day and then taking
the work away from them. He was in
favor Of constructing ships in the navy
yards If they were as good as the Oregon
and Massachusetts. even If it did cost
$500 600 or $500. 900 more than by contract
Mr. Cummings thought. however thai
there was no more necessity Of having az
armor plate factory than a Government
nail factory. or a Government pin mill, 81
a ham factory. At S545 per ton the UniteS
States would be paying less for KrupI
armor than any European nation. Tn
/ German Emperor had been struggling fo
years. ne said to surpass the American
Z Navy. and in the German Reichstas 10
day there was a bill pending to iEcreast
the German navy by 100000 tons. fl
thought this was good argument for thi.
country increasing its navy as far as IL!
means would allow. He had always ad
vocated the building up Of the navy.
Mr. Kftchin followed in opposition 10 ia.
nill He wanted ships constructed in tn,
navy yards one at Norfolk. one at Brook
lvn and one at the Mare Island yard HI
said the minority would offer an amend
ment to this effect. also that if the armo
now necessary for the ships in con- tructiol
cannot be bought for what the mnort.
believe 10 be a fair price-say 1925 ton
! one to authorize the Secretary Of the Nav,
to build an armor plate plant Mr. XII
chin criticised the bill for its eXtraya
gance It carried a total OF S13.O0OGCo il
excess of any bill heretofore reported ans
500 coo. eco in excess CT any bill ever re
ported in time OF peace II provided 70
81 900 tons OF new ships and If the sam
/ ratio of increase was kept NJ in siXJeel
years the United States Navy would b
, twice as large as that Of Great Britain.
Mr. briggs Argument.
No other member Of the Naval Commit
= tee being then ready to speak in order T.
prevent the Committee Of the Whole fror
going on with reading of the bill 70
amendment. Mr. briggs WAS given an hou
in which he argued for the building Of va
ships at the navy yards. lie supported hi
nroposi,ion with review Of the situa'io
, i'm Great Britain. where battlsships wer
2 constructed in Government yards NOR
1 cheaply than in private yards. Contiuuu4
. MIR. briggs said that while the specihca
e. tions for ships called for the best ma
b. terials to be had the best materials wef
not used by the shipbuiders. Mr.. tanno
q rose and Mr.. briggs added tina, he mad
. no invidlous comparison nor any disagree
= able charges.
\ Mr.. Cannon enquired OF Mr. briggs VII
$ The Government should not go into all III
D industries that produced the material ua'
= in ships. il it was TO be dead sure tha
d the best materials were to be had. VIII!
u If the Government built ships at the nav
d yard in briggs district. il should not e
out 10 Canuon's district and make b
a steel quarry the lime aud coal. aud e..
Il the timber necessary to build the ships
Mr. briggs replied that he did ro5 tt
- lieyc that the Government should buiid q
its Warships but as a matter Of nation.
; defence IL ought to have shipyards We
n ! r,,,,.5 tho caura as 10 had A s gndiu