Evening star., 1940-01-15
Naval Appropriations

Novol Appropriations
II would be unfortunate indeed if
confused, statistics and misconcep-
tions regarding the naval building
program were to imperil the admin
1stratlon's carefully considered plan
Tor strengthening national defenses
in these critical times. That some
confusion has arisen is apparent
from conflicting statements issuing
from the Capitol within the past few
days. Such congressional students
OF naval problems as Senator David
I. Walsh of Massachusetts, chairman
of the Senate Naval Affairs Commit
tee, and Representative Carl Vinson,
chairman of the House Naval Affairs
Committee, have expressed widely
differing views as to the present
status of the naval construction pro-
gram. Senator Walsh, commenting
on the proposal to authorize a
twenty-five per cent expansion of
the fleet, has questioned the wisdom
OF asking for another Navy on pa
per" when, according to his informa-'
tion, most of the ships authorized
under the 1888 program are still ION
paper" Mr.. Vinson, author of the
pending naval increase bill, re-
spends with seemingly reliable sta
tistics tending to show that all bat
tleships, carriers and submarines
authorized by the act of 1888 have
been provided for" He said he was
at a loss to understand how any one
conversant with naval matters could
Confuse the situation"
Since confusion obviously does
exist, however, 1t is not surprising
that Senator James F. Byrnes of
South Carolina, who is member
of the Appropriations Committee,
should suggest an immediate inquiry
into the exact situation with respect
to ship authorizations and appro-
priations. Among chief objects of
the investigation are to ascertain
how much of the tonnage author
lied in 1888 remains unappropriated
for and whether there has been
undue delay in building vessels for
which money has been made avail
able by Congress. 1t Is probable that
an effort also will be made to place
responsibility for defects which de-
veloped in some of the newer ships.
The 1898 naval act authorized con-
struction of forty-six combat and
auxiliary vessels and shortly there
after Congress voted funds for a
start toward the goal. According to
Mr.. Vinson, appropriations have
been voted SO far under this act for
one aircraft carrier, two battleships,
four cruisers, eight destroyers and
eight submarines. The pending ma
val supply bill would provide money
for two more battleships, another
aircraft carrier, two cruisers, eight
destroyers and six submarines, and
of this group one battleship and four
submarines would be charged against
the replacement program of 1884,
rather than the expansion act
passed four years later. Thus, as
Chairman Vinson reads the data,
the only ships of the 1898 program
for which appropriations have not
been made or requested-the ships
remaining ION paper"-are two
cruisers and seven destroyers.
1t takes time to design a warship
and more time to build one There
is no standardized plan that can be
followed in this highly specialized
and complicated industry. The his
tory of naval science has shown that
mistakes and delays are inevitable,
especially if there be too much
haste and too little long-range re-
search and planning. That is why
1t would be unwise and dangerous in
the extreme to fail to make adequate
provision right now, both as to au-
thorizations and appropriations, for
possible emergencies of the future.
A fair inquiry by Congress undoubt-
edly will show that appropriations
should be made for whatever ships
remain on the paper" list of 1888
and that huge additional sums must
be spent before the United States
can feel reasonably secure in world
shaken by totalitarian bombs and