The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-05-06
THr pra pArTLrsHIps.

II besins ss look as if Captain Hob- tof.s lcoatcntfon for great navy at an ifnmorssse sseosf is premature, or that such An exeense would not.be justified. On the contrary. there seems to be tenden- cy on the part of weil-informed men to turn back instead of going forward in ths way of building battis-stips. Senator Hale. of Maine, who has the reputation of knowing as much about ship building as most mon. recently said in a speech in the Senate:
 ! may say that if were Secretary should not dare to so and commit the government to the building of another Immense battieship costing $S, S,6oo,ooo The iessons of war between Russia and Japan thus far go to show the vulnerability and the unsafety of those immense and lofty hattieshipG and the undesirability at present of committing ourselves to the further construction of thern- The great ara salient events of the war show how inconplete as an engine of war one of these enormous, high-turreted battle ships Is. If she is struck Below the waterline. and the centre of gravity is disturbed. she turns over like a turtle, and everybody on board is drowned
 There have been several occurrences of late to bear out the, argument made by Senator Hale. These Immense vessels costing millions of dollars each. have proven almost as vulnerable as were the old wooden ships of century ago. There is so much of such vessel above the wstsF and 60 much of It's working and lighting machinery is exposed to the shots of the enemy that 1t is becoming serious question whether the building of these large ships is not serious mis- takes 4 ball or shell which would not seriously in1ure the ships main structure might So damage the working machinery that the vessel would be put out of ser vice until repairs could be made From the experiences of the Federal Monitor in Hampton Roads to the present day. this has frequently occurred. Necessarily all the offensive machinery, as well as much of the working machinery, Is above the water line. and in this day of power ful guns and explosive shells the chances of disabling a vessel which offers such prominent mark to an enemy are largely against the ship.
 Nor 'is this the. greatest danger. In the old naval warfare all the fighting was done above board. or above water. and it was only occasionally that war ship was sent to the bottom by the enemy's guns. Now 1t Is all different. Submarine torpedoes. hidden mines and other underwater devices render the bot tom of a ship as vulnerable as any other portion. The consequence Is that the big ship turns turtle without warning and all on board may be lost, as has more than once happened.
 It may be that naval architecture will either adopt new line or a new impetus will be given to the building of smaller vessels which will be less vulnerable and more effective. The fighting between the Russian and Japanese navies has shown the efficacy of torpedo-boats and boat destroyers. and 1t may be that much more attention will be turned in this direction It has been estimated that our government has spent not less than a5o .oo0.ooo on the larger battle-ships within recent years. and it Is not certain that the investment has been a good one