The Appeal. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. ;) 1889-19??, 1913-10-11
WANTS U.S.PLANT
FOR ARM0R Plate
House Bill Calls For Expendi-
turs Of 100000.
AIMED AT ALLEGED TRUST.
Plan to Force Manufacturers to Keep
Prices Down-Government as Com
petitor Would Not Produce All Of Its
Own Plate-Increase In Prices Has
Been Felt.

Neutrality-suspicious. million dollars
to provide for a government armor
plate plant is asked for in a bill intro
duced by Representative Britten of II.
Hnois. The bill was introduced coinci-
dent with the announcement by the
navy department that bids for $4,000,
600 worth of armor for battleship No.
80 had been rejected because they are
Identical. Although Representative
Britten is Republican. his bill fol-
lows generally the ideas of Secretary
Daniels. who has reported that a
trust evidently exists in the armor
plate business and that the govern
ment should have plant of it's own.
not to make all its armor, but to pro-
vide enough to make competition with
the private mills. 49,
In addition. Representative Britten
is about to take up with several sena-
tors the ACCESSIBILITY of changing the
Underwood tariff bill so as to admit
armor plate free Of duty. ..r i.
Representative Britten's bill provides
for the acquisition of site, the cree
ton of suitable buildings and the pro-
curing Of necessary machinery and
supplies for the establishment and
maintenance Of the plan. Active op-
erations on the plant are to be begun
within six months after the passage of
the bill. ..a-n.ss-. 4 W. ...
In discussing his bill Representative
Britten said that he had had in mind
for some months the introducing of a
plan that would break up If possible
the trust now controlling the armor
plate situation in this country. g.
"The opening Of the bids of the navy
department for 100000 worth of ar
NOR for battleship No. 80. appropriated
for last year. in which the bids of the
three armor producing companies in
the United States correspondent exact
ly and giving the same amount per ton
as last year. said Mr. Britten, shows
conclusively the collision existing in
the bidding regardless of the fact that
each bidder attests in an affidavit SUBJ
mitted with his respective bids that
the company is not engaged in any
such agreement and proves conclusive
" that competition for this enormous
amount Of government business is a
farce. ...
"The only way to procure armor
plate at anything like reasonable
price is for the government to enter
into direct competition in it's manu-
facture with the companies already
engaged in this work. l am not in
favor Of entering into the field to
such an extent as to put the other ar
NOR producing companies out of bust
ness, but to manufacture a sufficient
amount Of this commodity so as to
force them into competition and COM
pei them to offer us their armor at
least at fairly reasonable cost.
investigations recently made in this
direction have shown that in a govern
ment plant capable of turning out
10000 tons year. which is about half
Of the armor needed on a two battle
ship program, the cost of the armor
will not exceed 1914 ton. The differ
ence between this and the amount bid
last Tuesday. which was exactly the
same per ton as the bids submitted
last year. 1854; on 10000 tons, at a
saving of $40 per ton over the price
now paid, the government would save
81, 100000 per annum. Deducting the
interest on the money used in building
the plant, the government will, still
save considerably over $1,OOO.OOO a
year. which amount in very short
time will completely cover the cost of
the plant, and at the same time we
will be independent Of this branch of
the steel trust. AS business PROPOSE
ton the plant would net the govern
ment more than II per cent on the en-
tire investment after allowing per cent
on the total expenditure Tor 81 ,2O0OOO).
In 1906 the price of armor plate was
$346 ton. in 1907 the trust jumped 1t
to S42O a ton. and last year it was rails
ed to S454 Il ton. The price goes up
constantly and remains up. and the
evidence is not lacking that the price
at the present time is based more upon
what the companies think they can get
than what it costs.
Some years ago we were confronted
with the same problem in the purchase
Of powder for the use of the army and
the navy. We built powder plant.
entered into direct competition with
the powder companies and today are
saving $26S.SO on each ton of powder.
I'VE manufacture our own powder in
part. we manufacture our own guns,
and there is no reason in the world
why we should not manufacture a.
part of our own armor plate The cost
of the plant is not prohibitive. and the
cost of operation will not be a severe
obstacle.
Il am convinced that the govern
ment should erect a plant large enough
to manufacture a goodly portion of the
armor plate required and give the rest
Of the work to such firms as are will.
ing to bring their prices down to what
will be shown by the government plant
to be Il reasonable figure. This issthe5
intent of my bill. WEE Sc