Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-02-23
jects seriatinn and states his general concfu-
stans as follows:

-
sians as follows:
Comparison Not Unfavorable.
TN the above the bureau has con-
sidered the causes OF delay, and has also
mentioned in part the steps which 1t has
taken. in so far as work under its cog
nizance is concerned, to diminish such de-
lays Notwithstanding all the difficulties
which have been mentioned and the state
Of the art in this country, the bureau 10
Of the opinion that the period actually oc-
cupied from the time orders are given TO
build a vessel until the time that ship
is ready for commission in actual service
compares not unfavorably with the best
results obtained In foreign countries. name
ly, England and Germany. The greater
apparent speed OF ship construction IN
England is due to the fact that time Is
usually reckoned from the time the keel
Is laid until delivery OF q contract-built
snip Such vessels are delivered In very
subjected to their trials and supplied with
their guns and mountings and q large
amount OF their equipage at the govern
nent dock yards. The actual time from
the date OF contract to the date OF hrst
commissioning Of the English battle ship
Russell Ito be commissioned this month";
Is four years and one month, and that Is
the time which should be compared with
the period Of construction usually given
for our vessels, which averages for the
ten battle ships already completed four
years and eight months. In the German
navy the battle ship Wittelsbach, the keel
OF which was laid September 80. 1899, aud
which was probably ordered several months
previous to that date, has not yet been
placed In service. She recently ran
aground while on her trial and is under
stood not to be ready for regular service
yet
Practically Relieved Of Penalties.
"13. In this connection the bureau desires
to point out that the desire Of the govern
ment in the past for the early delivery Of
vessels, and inexperience in the time re-
Quired for the completion Of the largest
types. has led to the fixing of an inadequate
contract time for their completion. Thus.
the earliest battle ships Of the Indiana class
had the contract time for completion fixed
at thirty-six months, which was followed
for all the battle ships and larger cruisers
up to 1898. when the desire for rapid con-
struct1on, following the Spanish-American
war, led to the cutting down of the con-
tract time for the Maine class to thirty-two
months, notwithstanding the fact that no
battle ship for the government had been
completed within a period of less than four
years from the date of the contract. In
the case of the Maine. the only vessel of
the class yet completed, the elapsed time
from the date Of the contract to date of
commissioning is four years and three
months. The proposition, therefore, Of the
bureau OF navigation that a bonus should
be offered to the contractors has virtually
already been tried. in that contract time
OF completion which was very short has
been fixed upon, together with penalties for
failure to complete in the contract time.
The result Of this has been that the con-
tractors have practically always been re-
heVed OF penalties owing to failures of the
government to deliver armor or ordnance
or to the inability Of the contractors to get
structural materials, r to changes made
Whlch delayed the work. and. indeed, has
resulted In suits against the government
Tor large sums. based upon the claim that
the contractors would have been able to
complete the ship in the contract time
specihed had not the government caused
oelay by the non-delivery Of armor, etc.
Offer Of a Bonus.
IA. 1t therefore becomes a matter Of
careful consideration what should be the
contract period for completion fixed in the
contract. In the opinion Of this bureau
such time should be adequate for construc-
ton. and therefore should be such as to
enable the government to impose the pen
alties called for by the contract in case of
delay by the contractors, provided it had
itself fulfilled the requirements as to de-
livery Of armor and ordnance necessary to
complete the work. The policy of Offering
bonus for completion at an earlier date
than the time called for by the contract
would be not unlikely to involve the govern
ment in suits for the payment Of such
bonuses without the vessel being FASTENED
in delivery in case there should be any
delay on the part Of the government or
failure to deliver at early date the ar
NOR, ordnance and other things which the
government has to furnish in order to COM
plete the contract.
Contractors Jealous.
'15. In conclusion, the bureau believes
that as far as the delays on the part Of the
government are concerned this bureau has
taken all such steps as are possible for
work under its cognizance to avoid such de-
lays in the future. and also believes that in
general contractors for government vessels
have used and are using the very best eff
forts within their several means and abili-
ties to complete their contracts in the short
est practical time, an object which is most
obviously to their own advantage in re-
ducng the final cost"