Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1914-06-05
CONGRESSMAN TAvENNER Ac.
cusEs OVER CHARGING ON
CONTRACTS.
oovERhmENr MANUFACTURE
URGED As ECONOMY
Congressman Presents Figures 60 Show
United seatse 10 Paying Two Prices
For Plats-Beiisvse e3o,00o.ooo Could
Havs Been 9aSsd - Taxpaysrs-
General News.
Ispecial corr,epondence.l

Washington. June SIN recent
speech In the house. Congressman
Tayennsr, Of illinois. sharply assailed
the armor plate manufacturing inter-
ests Of the country. He asserted that
the 'armor ring had imposed exorbi-
tant prices on the government for ar
NOR plate and that II the government
had had an armor plate factor of Its
own and had made it, own armor. at
least $4,000, 900 would have been saved
to tho people in recent years.
Mr.. Tavennsr charged that there
were . few men In the house who
wanted tho "armor ring" to remain in
business and because Of them 1t was
impossible to get q fair test Of the
house sentiment. In the course OF the
discussions on the naval bill in both
the house and the senate, much has
been said about the desirability Of the
government making its own armor and
it is no longer open to question that 1t
could be done much more cheaply than
the prices for which the armor sup
ply IL purchased. However, there has
been sufficient opposition to govern
ment manufacture at each Of the cap
itol to make 1t practically certain that
no appropriation for an armor plate
factory viii be made this year and
even an In investigation Of the project
may be denied.
Argues For Federal Action.
After referring to the fact that the
government back in 1893 started to pay
on an average s65S per ton for armor
plate. Mr.. Tavenner said:
THE average Of nine estimates made
by various investigating committees of
the senate and navy department and
Of individual officers and expects Of
the navy Is that armor can be manu-
featured in government plant at q
cost Of $247.17 per ton.
yet we arc now paying the arrnor
ring $454 per ton. In all. we have
purchased 1S1.ss5 tons Of armor from
tn earmor ring at an average price Of
s441.42. I believe that 1t is very
conservative statement to say that Of
the $s5.1s3.24s. that we have paid the
arnor ring for this armor, at least $780,
100000 could hava been saved to the
taxpayers had this armor been manu-
featured by the government itself"
When the government was paying
enormous prices for armor back in
1893. Mr.. Tavenner recounted that
Senator Tillman, Of South Carolina.
started in to fight the high price. 1t
was finally reduced from 1858 to S413
per ton. In 1900, provision was put
into the bill that II the secretary Of the
navy was unable to obtain q square
deal from the "armor trust" he was to
build a government armor plate fac
terry. The result was that the armor
plate concern dropped their prices as
low as $345. Then. congress failed to
keep In the naval bill the provision
which was inserted for some years rel
ative to construction Of a government
factory and the prices for armor grad
ually went up. as described by Mr..
Tavenner, until the present price Of
$454 per ton was reached.
Such an amendment in the naval
bill, even II no plant were established.
would save the public s1,000.000 year
at least in the opinion Of Mr.. Tavern
ner. However. he would go further
and have q government forging
plant,
"This BILL" said he. abiding to the
naval appropriation bill. carries an
appropriation Of $14,677.500 for armor
and armament alone. If the govern
r,ent had IT'S own armor and gun
forging plant, believe am we'll with
in the bounds Of conservatism when I
say that 80 per cent Of this sum, or. In
round numbers. 100000, could be
saved to the taxpayers. Is 100000
year on arnnor and armament alone
worth the saving? I, for one, believe
it u.s."