The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-02-16
BLuNDERs, on WORSE.

BLGNOEHS, OM WOhSEs
 The frequent talk about the Govern nent doing the canal work reminds The Portland oregonian that "the seem Ing impossibility of the Governments ever performing any kind of task at a cost even approximating that at which the work could be done by pri- ,vate. bidder. has again been illustrated in costly manner When plans for the sister battleships Connecticut and Louisiana were completed it was de- cided to build one at the Government navy yard in New York, and the other by contract with the Newport News Shipbuilding Company. The final re- turns are all In now and show that the Governments built vessel, which Is du- plicate in every respect of her sister ship, cost $359, ,429 more than the other. As the private concern undoubtedly made good profit on Its work. 1t is safe to say that the actual cost or building the vessel in private yard was upwards of s1,000.0o0 less than the cost in a Government yard"
 HC oECSou-du di aSv NHNN o-~~N weIl-nigh impossible in connection with work of this kind, but if 1t is not graft or hold up we can See no way to explain it except by the admission that the Government is incompetent to take charge of and carry on public work. As our contemporary admits, it is not to be supposed that the pri- vete company did not make a good profit on their job. A private corpora ton which has the knowledge and ca- pacity to build battieship Is not like ly to fall down in .ts estimates and not make any profit on such a large contract. Yet here Is difference of nearly $SS0.000 In the cost of building two vessels which are described as duplicates of each other" If the Government was not held up, or if there was not a good lot of graft in the job. then we must set the Government down as utterly incompetent to superintend its work.
 Another incident or job entirely dis credftable to the Government Is too re- cent to have been forgotten. It will be that a. Government dry dock was needed at Manila. or was supposed to be needed. Instead of get ting the materials together on the spot and building the dock where 1t was to remain, the Government decided to have 1t built at home and lowed to Manila. This was a blunder but not the worst. When bids were called for 1t was found that 1t would cost about $15,000 more to build the dock on the Pacific coast than would be the cost of hav- ing it constructed on the Atlantic coast, but 1t was also aseertained that it would cost S1O0,000 more to tow the finished dock from an Atlantic port than from a Pacific one.
 These were the figures, yet our Gov ernment for reasons of it's own gave the job to the bidder on this side. Then when the dock was finished 1t was lowed to Manila at an enormous expense in money and months of time. during which 1t was in constant dan ger and when 1t veached it's oestina- tion it was not in good condition, ow- ing to the strain of the long voyage. We do not know just how much this fatuity or incompetence cost, but 1t was much over sIO0.0Oo. .-
 These two instances. if there were no more, ought to prove that our pres ent Government is not fitted to take charge of job. If 1t has blundered as paIpably in the two cases we have mentioned. what could 1t be expected to do if 1t should undertake the job of building the Panama Canal? That would br the greatest feat for graft CTS and hold-up artists the country has ever seen, and it has witnessed q num- Der of them. Even if it should finally let out the entire work by contract there is no certainty that the country would not be made to pay two prices for the job.