Evening star., 1933-08-02
THREE ADM|RALS
FLY YT0HYDE PARK
TO DISCUSS SHIPS
Will Go Into TrammeYs
Charges of Previous KnowI.
edge of Bids.
ADMRS. STANDBY, LAND
AND ROBINSON MAKE TRIP
Construction of 21 Vessels for
Navy Being Gone Over by
Experts and President.
BY the Associated Press.

By the Associated Press.
Three high-ranking naval officers
left Washington today by plane to dis
cuss bids for new ships made last
Wednesday with President Roosevelt at
Hyde Park.
Secretary Of the Navy Swanson said
later that the three also had been as
signed to investigate complaints by
Chairman Trammell of the Senate
Naval Affairs Committee against ship
builders bids for cruisers.
The officers were Admiral w. H.
Stanley, chief of naval operation; Rear
Admiral S. NJ Robinson, chief OF the
Bureau of Engineering, and Rear
Admiral E. S. Land chief of the Bureau
retary said their appointment with the
President to discuss bids for 81 vessels
had been made before the Senator, in a
letter to the Chief Executive, had urged
rejection of cruiser bids.
Ordered Investigation by Trio.
Swanson said he had asked the three,
however, to investigate the Senator S
charges and determine If there was any
suspicion of combination in the bidding.
Other than the Senator's complaint he
said, he had no reason for any suspicion
of the bids. He indicated contracts for
the vessels would be let tomorrow or
Friday and that vessels to be constructed
at Government yards would be allotted
some time this week.
Asked by newspaper men about the
increased japanese naval budget, the
Secretary said the Toxic government
was not exceeding the London naval
treaty limit by the proposed construc-
ton and was entitled to construct the
ships if desired He remarked the
United States had a similar right if it
wished to build up to the treaty limit
Trammell's letter to President Roose-
welt was made public last night.
Trammel1 said he had been informed
the four firms which bid on the cruisers
knew in advance what the offers would
be and that the position Of each Of the
shipbuilders would be protected by the
remaining shipbuilders."
He named the bidders as the Beth
lehem Shipbuilding Corporation, the
New York Shipbuilding Co., the New
port News Shipbuilding g. Dry Dock
Co., and United Dry Docks, Inc.
Asks Thorough Study.
The letter follows:
Dear Mr. President:
II have been quite interested in an
alyzing the bids opened by the Navy
I Department on July 26, 1888, which
were submitted by the shipbuilders on
naval construction. I believe a thor
ough study of the matter should be
made.
1T is my information that:
"On September Is, 1881, Bethlehem
Shipbuilding Corporation, bid for one
1,500-ton destroyer S2,728, 500.
"On July 26, 1888, Bethlehem Ship
building Corporation, bid for an iden-
tical destroyer S2,670,C00, or a decrease
in price Of s58.500.
ION December IA, 1882, Bethlehem
Shipbuilding Corporation bid for one
eight-inch gun ; (heavy) 1o.00o-ton
cruiser $8,196,000
"On July 26, 1913, Bethlehem Ship
building Corporation bid for the same
cruiser $11,720000, or an increase in
price Of s3,524, 900.
There appear to have been but four
bidders on cruisers and eight on de-
stroyers. Gulf Industries, Inc, of Pen
bids on the destroyers.
1T is my information that, in addi-
ton to the facts outlined above, it was
known in advance which of the four
concerns bidding on the cruisers would
be low on each of the several items
and it appears to have been known In
advance that the position of each of
the said shipbuilders would be protected
by bids submitted by the remaining
shipbuilders For instance:
Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corpora
tion,. $11, 100000.
Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry
Dock Co., $13,800,000.
United Dry Docks, Inc, $14,sOO, 900
Protection of Bid.
"The bid of the New York Shipbuild-
ing Corporation on the two light
cruisers was protected by the other
three bidders, as follows:
New York Shipbuilding, $11,657 900
bethlehem Shipbuilding Corpora
tion, 2,780 900.
New York shipbuilding Corporation,
$12,100,000.
Newport News shipbuilding g. Dry
Dock Co.. S13,900,000.
United Dry Docks, Inc, no bid.
II am unable to justify in my OWL
mind the increase in cruiser cost, as
indicated by the 1882 and 1888 bids
particularly when those bids are COM
, pared with the destroyer bids Of 1881
and 1888. I am convinced that the
cruiser bids should be rejected.
Your attention is invited to the fact
that Gulf Industries, Inc, of Pensacola
Fla, in its letter to the Secretary o1
the Navy dated July 20, 1888, stated
that it is prepared to submit bids on
the cruisers which will save the Gov.
ernment millions of dollars, and this
is so whether the bidding is reopene6
by private negotiations or by cal
for new bids.
II bespeak your careful and thought.
full consideration of this request thai
the cruiser bids be rejected"