The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1900-02-08
LONG DEFENDS
/. BUREAU CHIEFS
In Their Rejection Of the RoI-
land Submarine Boat.
STILL IN EXPERIMENTAL STAGE
Contract for the Construction Of PIunger
awarded In SO UniuItIl,d.
GOVERNMENT PAID NEARLY $lOO, 900.
10 Agreement 10 Accept Eollsni Boat Has Ever
teen Made Why Board Mas MOI CrI,cssi
the Cons ruCtOn Of The Boal.

Washington Feb. S.-Secretary Long
has received many letters from cranks
and other enthusiasts on tho subject
of submarine navigation. assailing the
recommendation OF the naval bureau
chiefs against the purchase OF the Hol-
land boat, which ran nearly four knots
an hour submerged on Long Island
Sound last fall. but which i'm the opin-
ion of the experts is yet only an ex-
pertinent, involving some good princi-
pies which may in lime be embodied in
practical instrument OF war. To one
OF the most reasonable of the letter
writers. Secretary Long has made "A
reply. trayeIsing the whole subject,
from which the following extracts are
daken:
The department has given and will
continue 20 give the matter careful at
tention, feeling that although this sort
Uf vessel is still in an experimental
stage, IL is entitled. I'm the interest OF
naval construction and enterprise, TO
thorough consideration. Indeed, the
uepaI tment made a contract with the
Holland company as long ago as March
l., 1895, for the construction OF one OF
its submarine boats, the Pluager which
has not yet been finished. although the
time fer it's completion expired several
years ago.
f"During the Spanish-American war
the department had an examination
made of the Holland and after corre-
spondence with the company, complied
with It's request in a letter TO IT, dated
May 3, 1898, 10 order b ard TO wit
ness a trial OF thai boat In accord
ance with the recommendation of the
board on construction certain require
ments were named which the boat
ought 10 fuifll. IL was found, how
ever, that this trial could not be made
by the company as soon as expected.
CAS- "A matter OF fact, IL was not made
until November 8. 1892
You are In error in the impression
that the members OF the board OF con-
structi0n TO which this whole matter
was rcferred-and no more cOmpetent
board could be selected-are hostile to
The adoption OF any form Of submarine
boat for the naval service. j am sure
that, with better knowledge OF them,
and Of their faithful discharge OF any
duty assigned to them. you will glad
ly recall your suggestion that they
have made, an unfair and unjust re-
port They are cautious not to rec
ommend haste In this matter until the
interests OF the government are proper
~ guarded by securing the best prac-
teal development. The report OF the
majority of the board. which is less ia
yorable TO the company than that OF
the chief constructor. who is mem
Der Of the board, simply recommends
that no further contract be made until
the company shall have made some
satisfactory settlement concerning the
delivery OF the submarine boat Plum
ger. above referred 10, the contract
for which required its completion
within II months from March ~ 1895
Under that contract the sum of Sgg ZIG 80
has already been paid. The majority
report suggests that when the Plunger
matter shall have been :, kfactorily
adjusted. it will be time enough To
consider the company's present pro-
posal and that, in case of such ad-
justment, the department Will be jus
titled, " the law permits. In making a
contract, under proper guarantees and
specifications, for one vessel of the
large size offered by the company and
in thus aiding in the development of
the submarine boats.
The question raised by the board. is
simply one as to the wisdom of maxi
ing contracts for more than one of
these boats under present circumstan-
ces. In this connection Il should be
borne in mind. as appears from the
above quoted extract from the depart
ments letter of June Is, 1898. that the
requirements suggested by the depart
ment for fulhllment by the Holland
We're not of the nature OF an agree
ment DO accept her if she should meet
them, and that, therefore, the govern
ment is not only under no obligation TO
buy her, because of her performance
of them, but is not in any way commit
ted TO such an obligation.
The majority OF the board on con-
struction purposely refrained from any
criticism or discussion OF the merits OF
the Holland. or OF the possibilities OF
submarine boats i'm general bur II ia
difficult to escape it's conclusion that IL
would not be profitable business
transaction To buy the Holland al the
same price ($l7O.00O) for which the COM
pany offers to build new and larger
-