The evening times., 1900-02-06

Secretary Long has written letter in
reply 10 an enquiry regarding the report
of the Board on Construction on the pro-
posed purchase of the submarine torpedo
boat Holland. The Secretary believes
that some wrong impressions have gone
abroad concerning the departments atti-
tude toward submarine boats. and hopes
that this letter will correct the misunder-
standing The letter follows;
u have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of your letter of the 25th instant,
relative TO the report of the Board on Cen
struction. and the proposal of the Holland
Torpedo Boat Company to sell to the Gov
ernment its submarine torpedo boat Hol-
land. and build for it another vessel Of
similar type or 10 construct two such new
boats
In reply have to state that the depart
ment has given and will continue TO give
the matter careful attention, feeling that.
although this sort OF vessel is still in eN-
perimental stage. it is entitled, in the in
terest of naval construction and enterprise.
10 thorough consideration. Indeed the de-
partment made contract with the Holland
Company rs long ago as March L. 1898.
for the construction of one of its submarine
boats the Plunger. which has not yet
been finished. although the time for its
completion expired several years ago.
During the Spanish-American war the
department had an examination made Of
the Holland and, after correspondence
with the company, complied with its re-
quest in a-letter TO it. dated May g. lS9S
to order board to witness a trial of that
boat Ia accordance with the recommenda-
tion of the Board on Construction certain
requirements were named which the boat
ought to fulfill
1t was found however. that this trial
could not be made by the company as soon
as expected. and. under date of June Is.
1885, the requirements aforesaid were some
what modified. as set forth in a letter 10
the company of that date. in which was
embodied the following clause. to-wit:
II t. TO be distinctly understood. howeycs. tnal
l.c Department Is To be- at no expense account
az said tests aside from furnishing thC Whitehead
torpedo tor u-r during the same nor does tho
department.. hl Cou~euting 10 witness such tHI-
sHr. JU-f-. Iu ANY way commit itself as TO Us
fr'ure action concerning the Holland Submarine
At
The board selected by the department
Was lhg Board OF Inspection and Survey.
The ,riaI was made November u 1898
The boa. was then found deficient in
several respects. After correspondence
with the company 81 was decided that the
board should witness a further trial al d
fhis. afsor several postponemeuts. was
made November o. 1898. II was then found
thal he boat made a very creditahle SNOW
ing, ana, under date OF the 23d OF that
month. the company submitted is propo-
sal above mentioned.
You are In error in the impression ihat
ihe members of the Board on Construction.
10 which this WnoC matter was referred
and no more competent board could be Sc
lecfCd-arC hostile to the adoption o. any
form OF submarine boat for the naval SER
vice. 1 am sure that with better Know
edge OF them and of their faithful dis
charge CT any duty assigned them you viii
gladly recall your suggestion that they
have made al unfair and unjust report
Tney are cautious not TO re omme Id
haste IN this matter until the interests Of
The Government are properly guarded ~
securing the best practicable development.
The report OF the majority of the board,
which is less favorable to the company
han hat Ct the Chief Constructor. WhO is
member OF the board. simply recon
mendS thar no further contract be made
until the company shall have made some
satisfactory settlement concerning the de
livery OF the submarine beat Plunge,
above referred to, the contract for whicn
required lis completion within twelve
months from March l.. 1885.
Under that contract the sum Cf Sga.-
.i6.50 has already been paid The majority
report suggests that when the PIunger
matter shall have been satisfactorily ad-
iuSted il viii be time enough TO consider
The company's present proposal aud that
in case Of such adjustment the depart
ment viii be justified. il the law permits
in making contract. under proper guaran-
ices and specifications, for one vessel OF
ihe larger size offered by the company, and
IA thus aiding In the development Of The
submarine boats.
The question raised by the board is
simply one as to the wisdom Of making
contracts for more than one of these boats
under present circumstances. In this con-
Hection it should be borne in mind. as
appears from the above-quoted extract
from the Departments letter of juno Il
1898 that the requirements suggested by
The Department for fulfllment by ihe
Holland were not Of the nature of am
agreement 10 accept her if she should meet
them. and that therefore. the Government
IN Hbl bitla HuutI no oDilSdliOn 10 bGN
her because OF her performance Of them
hul is not i'm any way committed Il such
an obligation.
The majority of the Board on Ccnstruc-
lion purpOsely refrained from any criti-
clsm or discussion of the merits of the |
Holland. or Of the possibilities of subma- /
rine boats in general but il is difficult To /
escape their conclusion that it would not
be profitable business transaction to buy
the Holland at the same price. $40. 600 !
for which The company offers to build new
and larger boats.
In view of the matters herein set forth
J am convinced that you will see that the
action of The Board on Construction has
l.een misapprehended by you and that the
interests OF the Holland Torpedo Boat CoIi-
pany are noj unjustly affected by its rec
ommendati0ns The department by no
means regards the matter as concluded
hut holds il i'm abeyance for the present
desiring additional light. 1t is possible
hat this may b. derived from the further
tests which. it is reported, are to be made
Of the Holland in this city at an early
date
tn Alleged PiekpOcket.