The Washington times., 1909-01-22
Writer for February Nc
Cures Declares Third of
Budget Thrown Away.
SAYS SENATOR HALE
LARGELY TO BLAME
Asserts That Government Loses
Thousands by Every Warship
1t Builds Itself.

Purporting TO show that $4,000. 900 of
the 2l2R000,00O naval appropriation Is
wasted. and that gigantic INCOMPETENCE
are responsible, George Kibbe Turner
gives a severe .sho,k TO the Navy De
partment in an article published in Nc
Clure 8 Magazine &c. February.
AT the outset, ne says that the COS,
OF the navy this year. S122. 900. 900. is
twice the sum which it cost TO run the
entire Federal Government just before
the civil war. If 1T keeps on at the
present rate. twenty five years from
now it viii cost annually as much as
the Federal Government does now-two-
thirds of a billion dollars a year. Turn
err has figures which he says proves
that one of the world uavies, twice as
strong FOR actual warfare as ours, Is
maintained for S400JJ000 less than is
the United States navy. Laying blame
for much OF the inCOmpetency at the
door Of Senator Hale. chairman OF the
Naval Committee, the writer says,
Waste at Yards.
''The Kiuery (MeJ Navy Yard, at the
home of Senator Hale in the matter OF
location. is something ike HelTs Gate,
from navigators standpoint. 4 81, 250,-
90 drydOck has been built at Ports
mouth, a position practically inland,
because no battles,E.u captain dares 10
go up TO it, The Mare Island Navy
Yard. for which Mr.. Perkins, Of Cali
fornia, has secured Sl3, 10000 is mae
cessible for big bittIeshlps. some six
feet of water being licking. Thirteen
millions have been spent on the League
Island Navy Yard, at Philadelphia,
through the efforts OF Senator PeurOse,
a.. ra.a- r. Has
after a battle could not reach the navy
yard, twenty-uIne feet OF water being
the most given at any tide. We have
twelve navy yards, ana I'VE or them
have not the principal thing navy
yard IS built fora dTydOCk big enOug
TO hold the battleshlps we are now
building. Two Of them have docks
which no battleship can reach at any
tide. Three others haE costly docks cut
OF from the sea by snoal water. which
battleships can only cross at certain
times OF the tide
In Case of War.
.Is war should break out tomorrow.
there would be no plaoe in the United
States where O fleet u ships could be
repaired after o battle The great New
York navy yard, inventoTying $50. 100000,
stands today without one dry dock cap
able Of holding the Dreadnougdt type
Of battIeship, which viii from this time
On form the nucleus Ol our fleet
Turner gives most startling figures
on the cost OF maintaining the Southern
navy yards Ia proportion 10 the work
done in them $. ). Mcclure, publish
pr of the magazine, who was FL Wash
ingUou today, said 20 The Times that
getting together the material Cor these
statistics was one OF the most difficult
tasks ne had ever undertaken; but
every statement had been tseted and
.Ha a.aHH ga. I'd
Southern Navy Yards
Beginning with the charge that the
Southern navy yards lie under the dOu-
bic misfortune of being IN Democratic
territory and IN a geographic position
unsuited for such Adjustments, Mr..
Turner writes:
New Orleans, for example, was so
unfortunate as to secure but 81, 040 Oh
worth OF work iu the naval year Of 1907.
The cost Of maintaining this station
during the year was Ssltlis -. while
sos 35l % more YVES expended with rare
optimism, on improvements. There
and enlisted men stationed about this
establishment during that IneYentful
year; while $4,000 worth of marines
guarded IL day aEa night
KEY West ia 1907 had an unusually
I busy year IT d Sl,lZ6l8 worth Of
work, against S3,r9.94 the year before
. Its maintenance charges amounted 10
SIS9, 9lS.22, but it secured only $40 100 "a
for improvements. IL was. however
cared for by S1S,Ss236 worth Of naval
officers and sailors, and guarded by Sl2,-
90 worth OF maTlTeS
"CharIest0n-estabI iu Ig1l-w8s
not prepared TO work iu 1891 1t cost
Sll3EUS2 10 maintain it iu the latter
year and 1913 1874 tC improve IL. There
were S3s.4s3.3G WOrtI Of officers and
$1,000 worth of marines on the grounds,
Port Royal. which IS oEteusibly aban-
doned. contributed S7SIs9 worth of
work The cost of maintaining this for
mer navy yard iu 1907 was $50 Cos 81. au0
SS,J.6.3l was spent in improving IL. There