The Union daily times. [volume] (Union, S.C.) 1918-current, 1922-11-02
Charleston Navy
Yard Required For
iiaeicna, Defense
tMaryA:ac .urerc -,cccrdl


tMar,1.ac .urers -,cccrol
Young Teddy Roosevelt, assistant
secretary OF the navy, Low and again
exhibits flashes of the paternal form.
A recent incident is in point. While
Secretary Cenpy was in Japan. and
iTniie Roosevelt was working out
economics in the sdrninis rTstion of the
naTy department, ne determined TO
close up the purely political navy yard
at Charleston, South Carolina. That
az the country will recall, is the yard
which cid Ben Tillman forced upon
the country when he was chairman
Of the senate COMMITTEES on naval af-
fairs during the first Wilson admin
istration. To make u channel to the
yard it was necessary to alter the
landscape materially. At grest ex-
pense u considerable area Of land was
eliminated. This was all to the good
from the Daniels standpoint, sirce the
more money spent in the South, the
better. Young Roosevelt's proposal
to shu: up the Charleston yard soon
encountered negative action on the
| part of he senators from South Car
olina. They induced ten Of their as
&ociates- making an even dozen in all
to sign round robin declaring that
they would oppose with their inhu-
cnce anil their votes the presidents
ship subsidy bill if the Charleston
ment ut the same time should also
close some Northern navy yard. They
| took this threat to Lasker, chairman
of the Shipping Board. Lasker is the
field agent Of the ship subsidy pro-
pocal. He carried the paper to the
White House, and very shortly there
after Roosevelt received formal and
written instructions from his com-
| mandcr-in-chi to cancel the plan
for dismantling the Charleston yard.
Of course, Roosevelt was peeved Es-
pccislly he resented Lasker's part in
the affair. Orders being orders, be
cbeyed-but technically rather than
in spirit. For Immediately he exer-
cised the power of the department and
withdrew ali ships from Charleston,
leaving the yard with nothing to do.
\ few days thereafter Secretary Den
Gy came home. and heing more sub
| servien,, reversed his young assist
ants policy, but not in an offensive
way Adroitly he brought about the
creation of board Of naval officers
to make a new study of navy yard
needs, preserving the existing status"
San Francisco Argonaut.
The foregoing is typical of the
propaganda of lies disseminated in re-
Iation 10 the Charlestol Navy Yard.
Did young Teddy Roosevelt exhibit
'hashe.; of the patemal form? His
father established the yard.
l. it the yard (which old Ben Till
man forced upon the country when he
was chairman Of the senate commit
tee on laval affairs during the first
Wilson administration?
The yard was authorized in 1901,
| Theodore Roosevelt being president
+ the United States, Senator Hale,
# Maine, was chairman of the SEN
ate committee on naval affairs; Mr..
Long, of Massachusetts, was secre-
tary ot the navy and hoth houses of
congress were Republican. 1t was es-
tablished on the recommendation of
the Rogers board, composed of some
of the ablest officers in the navy,
after exhaustive study. 1t would be
strange if the Republican party had
put S2O,0OO,O0O navy yard in Char
lesion, 6. c., for political reasons.
To make a channel to the yard it
was necessary to alter the landscape
materially" The yard is on the west
bank Of Il broad river. There is clear
channel of 80 feet of water to the
open sea and the total sum ever spent
OIL thH river was $175,000.
So much for the facts. They show
that the Argonaut's misinformation
was complete.
For year the British believed inl
Capitalization of navy wards. About
1905 this policy was changed, and one
result was the construction of the
ba2n ut Rosslyn. There, in the north
"f Scotland. the great fleet was main
taincd during the world war and it'll
il lot too much to say that Rosslyn
VAS Il mighty factor in the final vic
;ory Of the Allies. Between Hatteras
nd Panama, the United States has
but one yard-that at Charleston.
There are six north Of Hatteras, al
distance of less than a thousand miles.
Would It be craftsmanship or reck-
lcssncss to abandon that one yard, the
cfficiclcy of which has never been
challenged?
There have been some naval officers
who verbally criticised the Charleston
yard, but very few, if any, have ever
dared 10 put such opinions in writing
and stake their professional reputa-
tions on verdict that the yard is un
81