The Birmingham age-herald., 1907-12-26
CRITICISING WARSHIPS
Washington Special to the New York

l Washington Special to the New 1ork i Sun.
 Bureau chiefs of the navy department and other officials of the naval establish ment are not likely to let pass unnotieed the criticisms directed against the present method of determining plans for the con- struction of armorclads. These criticisms, made by Henry Reuterdahl, the marine l artist, in an article in McClure's Nigga zine. and by officers of the service, are | beeing discussed with great interest in naval circles. For the present however, there is a disposition on the part of the 1 officers most concerned to avoid any pub l lie comment on the subject, but it is realized that the whole question Will De aired in. Congress when the naval appro- priation bill comes up for discussion, ana the officers are withholding their ann munition until that time
 In an informal way some of the most prominent officers of the navy depart ment. and the naval service were willing to express views in regard to the strlc- lures of Mir. Reuterdahl, who, py the way. is a passenger on one of the pattie- ships now on their way to the ffclhc | under command of Rear Admiral EVahs The general tenor of the remarks made by these officers is condemnatory or MT | Reuterdahl, the main contention oeinB l that he is not familiar enough with ms l subject to give competent criticism. It was pointed out today that associate membership in the United States NaVai l institute. which MT. Reuterdahl holds, could be obtained by the payment or l few dollars Attention was called also 1 to the fact that MT. Reuterdahl IS the l American representative of "f1ghtihs 1 Ships" the British naval annual, whleh does not agree with his opinion or Amer ican naval construction.
 In the face of all this resentment or MT. Reuterdahl's attack there Is, now l ever, an almost general willingness TO admit that naval construction in the United States has not reached perfection 1 But side by side with this admission is l the contention that every effort Is De- | ing made to correct mistakes. Many na- val officers are dissatisfied with the pres | ent bureau rule, which, the say, brings nothing but compromise in the plans TOT new vessels. One bureau demands more | space for machinery: another seeks Tightening of the vessel in some respects to permit a heavier allotment of armor | and armament; another fights against all | lowing too much space for coal and ma 1 chinery and too much weight Tor guns l When these and more warning elements come together harmony can be obtained | only by compromising their differences None gets what he demands and all l are dissatisfied.
 l It was this aspect of the case whlch Rear Admiral George w. Melville IS sup posed to have had in mind when he de- nounced the present bureau system. Ao- miral Melville, now retired, was for many years the engineer-in-chief of the navy and for part of that period was hlenh- | Der of the board of construction. He was known as an open fighter, frank Ill exnressing his views and filled with an honest purpose to give to the navy the best ships in the world. While Aomiri Melville is being criticized by his former 1 colleagues of the naval administration l and the charge is made that he has Vio- 1 lated naval regulation in speaking so |
 system, the knowledge that he spoHe | from the heart has had its influence | here. and there is no disposition, accord- | ing to what was said at the navy depart ment today, to call him to account TOT | his unconventional remarks.
 1 Secretary of the Navy Metcalf said TO- day in the course of an informal con- | la MT ReItPr- dahrs criticism that when he took the naval portfolio he called on officers or the navy to make known to him their views as to Improvements that could be made In the construction and the main- tenance of the fleet. To his surprise few line officers took advcntage of this invi- tation. Subsequently there was com plaint that our battleships were defec- tive; in that most of the thick armor belt. intended to protect the vitals of the ships was below the water line. Secre- tary Metcalf said that these complaints had been made by several high ranking sea-going officers, but these very of flcers, after reports on the subject had | been submitted to them, declared that | they were convinced that no mistake had been made in placing the armor belt so low.
 In defending the low position of the armor belt MT. Metcalf said it was true that when ship was loaded with pro- visions, stores, coal and ammunition barely six inches of the armor belt was above the water line. as MT. Reuterdahl had pointed out. But, he said, ships would not go into action loaded so deep ly. Admiral Togo had an extremely small supply of provisions and stores on board, while on the Russian ships every bit of available space was filled, thus mak- ing them extremely deep in the water.
 In Washington it is difficult to find opinion which is not resentful to MT. Reu- terdahl's criticism. but this is not strange in view of the fact that nearly every officer of the naval establishment sta- toned here is part of the bureau system which Mir Reuterdahl has attacked. The bureau system. holds it's own in spite of efforts to dislodge it.
 
 HOW INDIANS POISON ARROWS.
 From the Denver Field and Farm.
 An old Cherokee Indian recently gave awav the secret how the Indians of olden