The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1913-09-18
DOBSOARELATES
FACTS TO A NEW
ORLEANS PAPER
SENDS A COMMUNICATION TO
THE ITEM DEALING WITH THE
FALSE STATEMENTS CONTAIN
ED IN THE TIMES DEMocRAT.

President C. z. Dobson of the Com
mercial Association has sent the fol-
| lowing communication to the New Or
leans Item, in which he deals with the
gulf coast navy yard situation:
Copy
| Pensacola, Fla, Sept. Is, 1913.
Editor, The Item, New Orleans, La
/ I wrote to the editor of the Times
Democrat recently commenting on a
| news item and an editorial in his pa
| per- which did not, in my opinion, give
/ the full and unbiased statement re-
garding gulf coast navy yard location
| which his readers have a right to ex-
pect
| Another article entitled. Craving
Dock Is a Possibility at New Orleans,
| appeared recently in the Times Demo
crat This is equally lacking as full
and frank statement. The argument
against Pensacola in this article is
based largely on the So called McCann
report, made in 1889 The following
| from the recent Edwards board re-
port disposes Of that: 1.-THE examina-
ton made by the Mccain board was
| at Bohemia, the eastern end of Pensa-
cola bay and the conclusions arrived
at by the board while entirely appli-
cable to that portion Of the bay sur
| veyed, do not hold for a navy yard
| site at the western end Of the bay.
| This site is entirely suitable for heavy
| buildings, excavated docks, or basins;
| and although the cost may be found
| somewhat greater than at other navy
yards, 1t is not believed that the cost
| of dock or pier construction will be
found excessive or prohibitive."
An Old Argument.
So the main argument against Pen
sacola in the Times Democrat article
is fallacious, being based upon a report
which was made twenty-four years
ago, and which did not concern the
present Pensacola navy yard location,
but point more than ten miles dis
tant therefron, near the mouth of a
river and Of very different character.
Also, the article bases the contention
that craving dock can be successful
" built at New Orleans upon a report
submitted at the same time, 1885, by
private contractor, and attempts to
prove by this that the navy depart
ment doesn't know it's own business
when 1t says that is not feasible now
| to build a craving dock at New Or
leans.
A resolution of the senate In 1903
ordered an inquiry into craving dock
location on the Gulf Of Mexico, and
Secretary of the Navy Moody report
ed: THE harbor of Pensacola bay Is
the best upon the Gulf Of Mexico Gin
deed, upon the entire southern COAST
in which the establish a dry dock of
the largest class. The entrance to the
harbor Is now of sufficient depth, the
situation is favorable, and the expanse
Of water is fine and ample for the as
sembly Of a squadron or feet. Re
plying specifically to the inquiries in
the resolution Of the senate of the 10Th
ultino, the bureau would state that it
is desirable to construct a craving
dock large enough for the largest bat
tleships Of the navy upon the Gulf
of Mexico, and that the navy yard
upon the bay Of Pensacola is the point
where it should be located" These are
the salient paragraphs in the report.
Even Rear Admiral Edwards him
self. who did make a minority recon-
mendation in favor Of certain naval |
activity at New Orleans, said also in
the same report: Due, however |
among other reasons to the fact that
the excessively varying stages of the |
river at New Orleans prevent the eco
nonical building of craving docks and
launching ways, the adjustment Of |
great naval SLaIlOn at InaC port is |
probably prohibited
The majority report Of the board |
signed by the three other officers. says:
Although on account of the impossi- |
bflity Of providing, except at prohibi- |
tive cost, Notifications nearer than
about thirty miles to the entrance to |
the passes of the Mississippi river |
su submarines or other naval vessel may |
be required as an auxiliary to the main |
fleet protection of the Mississippi val |
ley, a naval station at New Orleans !
on which these vessels could base is |
not necessarily required. In the opin- |
ion of the board New Orleans is not |
suitable for a naval base Of the mag |
nitude desired. and a navy yard to !
repair submarines or other vessesl sta
toned at the mouth of the Mississippi |
river could, on account of the distance
from the mouth of the river to the |
city of New Orleans, and the very
strong current ordinarily met with in
the river, be well located at some other
point not too far distant from New
Orleans"
The Minority Report.
Rear Admiral Edwards, in his mi
nority report on Pensacola, which was
favorable. just as was the majority II
report but couched in different Ian
guage, says: TN the event Of the de-
partment's decision to recommend TO
congress the construction of a large
craving dock at Pensacola Cand such
action is unqualihedly and unhesitat-
ingly recommended. providing founda-
ton conditions are favorable), the i'm
mediate reopening Of the station
should be directed, and a gradual but
progressive and thoughtful develop
ment are regards the erection Of build
ings and installation Of appliances
should be outlined. 4 commissioned
officer should be ordered as command
ant, and there should be associated
with him the necessary assistants 10
reopen the station in an efficient and II