Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1914-06-26

| Especial Correspondence OF Inc ATs w.
, Washington, June 24-The speech
delivered by Congressman Clyde II
!, Tavenner on the floor of the mouse
with Secretary of the Navy Daniei'
sitting within a few feet of him, an'
which resulted in the conference re
port on the naval bill being rejected
was one of several that Tavenner has
made within the last two weeks In al
effort to take the profit out of war anc
preparation for war by having the gov
ernment manufacture all munitions OF
war
'T offered an amendment providing
for an appropriation of 100000 for
an armor plant" declared TaVenner
afterward, land if could have obtain
ed a vote on the proposition it would
have carried by big majority.
"A government armor plant is abso-
lutely certain. Whenever we can get
a vote on the proposition the armor
ring is doomed And the government
will get it's armor plate 5000 ton
cheaper than it is getting it now. And
the workmen who actually make the
armor plate will receive better wages
and enjoy vastly superior working con-
ditions than now exist in the private
armor plants.
"One of the three concerns in the
armor ring is the Bethlehem Steel
company. In the blast furnaces of this
concern, according to government
report, men were working II hours
day and seven days a week. There are
comparatively few Americans in this
plant. The concern has crowded
Americans out and filed their places
with the cheapest foreign labor that
could be imported.
Another of the armor concerns is
the Midvale company. This is the
concern that graduated Mr.. Taylor, the
inventor of the inhuman Taylor sys-
tenn of scientific shop management. 1t
was from the Midvale and Bethlehem
companies that General Crozier got his
inspiration to install the Taylor sys-
tenn in the government arsenals.'
Asks Armor Plate Factory.
Tavenner's contention On the naval
bill was that it should provide for an
armor plate factory instead of for |
merely an investigation of armor plate; |
1C lAtAC beiu OCCl hl4AS AhNOo-
legations of armor and that the pro-
vision for the investigation was insert
ed merely to escape meeting the ar
NOR plate factory issue.
Here is his argument in full:
Mr.. Speaker, even if 1 am the only
member to do so, 1 intend to vote
against the adoption of this conference
report, because it provides only for an
investigation of the cost of an armor
plant instead of providing for the plant
itself. An armor plant will save to
the people from 100000 to $4,000, 900
annually; an investigation will leave
the government still at the mercy of
the armor ring and save nothing.
Il would favor enthusiastically the
provision in the pending bill providing
or an Investigation of the cost OF
armor and a site for an armor factory!
md adequate and very thorough
have been made in
he past, and this provision for
N unnecessary additional investi- {
cation impresses me as being merely I
IN excuse to avoid making an appro- .
)riation in this congress for an armor ;
liant, as recommended by the secre- /
airy of the navy
Il hold in my hand a 464-page report s
f an investigation made in 1867, {
which shows that armor can be manu- s
actured for $500 per ton, and in this q
stimate profit of 33 1-3 per cent was t
1cluded for the manufacturers. r
Il also hold in my hand another very b
borough report prepared by board I
( naval experts in 1906 in response to
ne provision requiring an investiga-
on of the cost of armor contained in I
ne naval bill of 1905, which, by the Il
'ay, in my opinion, was inserted to {
detrack an appropriation for an ar n
Tor plant in that bill. This report S
'und that armor plate could be man. 1
featured by the government for
2SO.36 per ton.
Nor were these all the investisa- a.
ons. The hearings of the naval af- it
hrs committee on the pending bill, as a
ny member can ascertain for himself II
Y sending for copy of the hearings, g.
,ntain a most exhaustive report as
the cost of armor, compiled by the pl
lreau of ordnance of the navy de- d.
1t