The Congressional Globe: Containing the Debates and Proceedings of the Third Session Forty-Second Congress; An Appendix, Embracing the Laws Passed at That Session Page: 714
[959] p. ; 25 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
714
THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE.
January 20,
limit npon- this expenditure. I think it is
unbusiness-like that you should pass bills of
this kind, having no estimates of the amount
of money you are voting out of the Treasury.
I have already indicated to the majority of
the Senate my disposition to treat the matter
in an entirely unpartisan way, and to consider
the measure solely upon its own merits, and
not as to whether there is to be mingled in this
scheme for the benefit of our Navy official
abuse in any way. I have abstained from
speaking on that point at (he present time,
because 1 desire to perfect the bill as well as
my poor powers will permit, in order to make
it an efficient measure for the restoration and
reestablish ment of the Navy.
I therefore move to amend, if it be in order,
the amendment of the committee by inserting
after the word "power," in line thirty-seven,
the words "not to exceed nine hundred tons
each," and strikingoutthe words which follow,
which will then be superfluous, " and of such
class or classes as in his judgment will best
subserve the demands of the service." That
substitutes the judgment of the Senate in
regard to this matter for the unrestricted dis-
cretion of the Secretary of the Navy, and at
the same time, as I have indicated iu what I
have read from his report and that of his sub-
ordinate officials, it fulfills the idea which his
report apparently intended to convey, and that
is, that the vessels should be of medium size
and adapted for active service.
Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. I suggest to the
Senator whether it will not substantially accom-
plish all that he desires to say that the ton-
nage shall not exceed a lower sum, say six
hundred tons V I do not understand that it is
the intention of the Navy Department to build
any considerable portion of these vessels more
than six hundred tons. I therefore suggest
that this limitation should apply to a lower
grade.
Mr. BAYARD. We fix nine hundred tons
as he maximum. Of course, it may be re-
duced to any number below that that they
Mr. MORRILL, of Maine, But would not
the Senator be willing to leave discretion, if
it should be thought advisable, to build two
of a larger tonnage that nine hundred tons?
Would he think there was peril in that, inas-
much as we reserve to ourselves all the appro-
priating power? Nothing is appropriated
here. He contemplates building a larger
class of vessels than seems to be contemplated
now.
Mr. BAYARD. The Senator does not un-
derstand the Secretary of the Navy to want
anything but small, active cruisers, medium-
sized vessels
Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. No, sir.
Mr. BAYARD. If that be the case, the
limit I have put is far beyond what the experi-
ence of our Navy has shown is most useful. I
believe there is not a smarter vessel of the
Navy than the Iroquois, and she is but six
hundred and ninety-five tons.
Mr. HOWE. Mr. President, in listeningto
this debate so far I have come to feel that I
do not know how to vote intelligently either
upon the original bill or upon the amendment
reported by the Committee on Naval Affairs.
I do not quite agree with one suggestion sub-
mitted by the honorable Senator from Maine,
that we employ a Secretary of the Navy for
the express purpose of providing navies. I
supposed that that was really the legitimate
business of Congress. Of course we need the
i assistance and the aid of the Secretary of the
Navy to advise Congress in this behalf, but
the Constitution commits to the Legislature
the prerogative of providing navies.
I suppose there is not a Senator on this floor
who has more confidence in the judgment or
in the prudence of the present Secretary of
the Navy than I have, and I have that measure
of confidence ill him and in his familiarity wjth
the present wants of the Navy which leads me
to. believe that he could, if he were asked to
do so, tell us specifically how many vessels he
wants and what class of vessels he wants ; and
if the Committee on Naval Affairs would ask
him for advice npon these points—I do not
know that they have not asked him—I suppose
they would be prepared to tell the Senate just
what the needs of the Navy are in that respect.
And my friend from Missouri [Mr. ScHtmz]
suggests that he might also be able to tell just
how much money he would want. I doubt if
he could do that, nor would I care to know
specifically upon that point just at the present
time. If I was persuaded that we need ten
vessels carrying six or sixteen guns each, I
would have no hesitation in voting authority
to the Secretary of the Navy to proceed to
procure such vessels, and I would not myself
make it a condition that he should build them
for a certain sum. I would be willing to pay
what it was necessary to pay to procure those
vessels.
Now, the Senator from Delaware has just
submitted an amendment which tends, I
think, to correct the pending amendment in
thi3 regard. The difficulty with that is that I
do not know whether nine hundred tons is too
large or-too small to suit the purposes of the
Navy. I suppose the Secretary knows just
what class of vessels, indeed he tells us just
what vessels he has got, and the size of the
vessels that he has now in commission; he
does not tell us, or at least I have not seen the
information—I do not know but that it is to
be found in some of the papers before the
body—I have not seen any information which
tells me which one of the vessels now in com-
mission he proposes to lay up when be gets his
new vessels, and therefore I do not know what
vessels he wants to supply the place of. I
think if his attention was called to this point
he could give us information which the bill
does not give us.
I really should feel safer in voting on this
question if we had that information. The bill
authorizes the Secretary of the Navy to build
ten vessels carrying not less than six guns
each I believe. Some of our vessels, I think,
carry forty-five guns. So that the bill as it
stands enables him to build any kind of vessel
carrying not less than six guns, and it may go
as high as forty-five, and I do not know but
that there are vessels carrying more guns,
though I believe that is the highest number of
any vessel in our Navy.
There is another open question suggested by
this bill, which seems to me of very much
more importance than this that I have just
referred to. The bill authorizes him to build
these vessels either of wood or of iron. I have
read just enough upon this great controversy
between the friends of wood and of iron ves-
sels to lead me to believe not that either
wood or iron is the best, for I am not per-
suaded which is the best to-day, but I am per-
suaded that one is very much better than the
?r •er'J a, one of the highest interests of the
United States to-day is to have that matter
definitely ascertained and settled. I would
be willing myself to vote out of the Treasury
a very reasonable and a very generous sum of
money if it could be applied to the determina-
tion of that question.
I have read of a time when the navies and
the merchant marine of the world were built
of wood to the exclusion of iron, and when
the ship-yards of the United States furnished
the cheapest vessels that were found afloat:
and if wood will furnish better vessels than
iron, I believe the United States could to-day
build vessels cheaper than any other country,
and I have a suspicion that, after all, wood is
the best material to build vessels of. We have
that material in great abundance. Our great
rival of the seas has it not. She had iron.
We could build wooden vessels cheaper than
she could. We could not build iron vessels
a3 cheap. She did for some reason, either
because she had the one material and had not
the other, or because the one material was
better than the other, suddenly turn her back
on wooden vessels and commence to build
and prosecuted the building of iron vessels ;
and her underwriters and all her authorities,
I believe, became very loud in praise of iron
vessels, and I think there was for a time a
growing opinion here that iron vessels were
the vessels for all our purposes.
I have been a little afraid that we were
beiBg served somewhat after the manner of
the foxes, who when one had lost its tail in a
trap undertook to persuade all the rest of the
fraternity that really it was better to go with-
out tails. I have been afraid that there was
an effort to persuade us on the part of Great
Britain that because she could not build
wooden vessels in competition with us we had
better abandon the building of wooden vessels.
But it seems to me manifest that if we can
demonstrate that wooden vessels are the real
ones, then the path to our old-fashioned su-
premacy in ship-building is very plain, very
clear, and very broad; and I would in that
point of view have very much preferred that
the Committee on Naval Affairs had recom-
mended and instructed the Secretary of the
Navy either to build the whole or a definite
portion of these vessels of wood. I only
throw out this suggestion. I was in hopes to
hear the Senator from Maine, [Mr. Morrill,]
as also the Senator from Delaware, [Mr.
Bayard,3 both of whom I believe have given
a great deal more attention to this subject
than I have, submit their opinions on that one
point. We seem to be agreed that the time
has come when the Navy should build some
more vessels. If at the time of providing for
the wants of the Navy we can take a step
toward settling this much disputed question,
it seems to me very desirable that we should
do so.
Mr. RAMSEY. Mr. President, I desire to
move now, as this bill cannot be disposed of
to-night, that the Senate proceed to the con-
sideration of executive business.
Mr. CRAGIN. Will the Senator allow me
to say one word about this iron question ?
Mr. RAMSEY. I give way.
Mr. CRAGIN. Mr. President, the Navy
has not to-day a single armored vessel afloat,
not a single one that is capable of navigating
the ocean ; and it is not proposed by this bill
it is not proposed by the Navy Department,
to build a single armored vessel, if this bill
passes, as I understand. It is suggested that
two or three or perhaps more of these vessels
may be built of iron, that is, iron frames, and
iron in the sense that the Monocacy and
one or two other iron vessels in the Navy are
now built. But the idea of building them of
wood and then plating that wood with iron,
does not enter into the consideration of this
bill, as I understand. We have had an ex-
periment of that kind. We have fifty-one
monitors now rotting at League Island and at
other stations, made of wood and armored.
What we want with these vessels is forcruisine
purposes, and I have no doubt that they will
be built of wood mostly. Possibly one or two
may be built of iron, as an experiment, of the
armored class spoken of by my friend from
wirE'p e,/af an exPer'mcnt.
Why, Mr. President, the Nipsic, the Yantic,
raentr^'Th' spefks of> "6 no experi-
ments. They are wooden vessels, and the
time in tlT^yy? Deeded at the Pre86Q
theIHemifP.MSEY" Areni?w my raotion> that
the Senate proceed to the consideration of
executive business.
Mr. SHERMAN. If my friend will allow
me, I should like to have two sections printed
Naval 'hill I°h f an araen(lment to the
' b llr } hilv<; s\own them to the chair-
man, and I desire to have them printed and
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe: Containing the Debates and Proceedings of the Third Session Forty-Second Congress; An Appendix, Embracing the Laws Passed at That Session, book, 1873; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc30903/m1/46/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.