The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

20 MARINE REVIEW. MARINE REVIEW Devoted to the Merchant Marine, the Navy, Ship Building, and Kindred Interests. Published every Thursday at No. 418-19 Perry-Payne building, Cleveland, Ohio, by Tue Marine REvizW PuBLIsHING Co. Susscriprion--$3.00 per year in advance; foreign, including postage, $4.50, or 19 shillings. Single copies 10 cents each. Convenient binders sent, post paid, $1.00. Advertising rates on application. Entered at Cleveland Post Office as Second-class Mail Matter. ee Both the chief constructor and the engineer-in-chief of the navy have filed their annual reports with the secretary of the navy. Both are in- teresting and capable documents. Each dwells at length upon points in which they are especially interested. In an indirect and fine Italian way each pays his respects to the other. Hichborn is an advocate ef sheathing of ships and Melville is not. To those who know both of these excellent gentlemen it seems quite clear that Hichborn was thinking of Melville when he wrote: 'Much of the prejudice against it (sheathing) is born of incomplete information as to what is really involved and is of the same nature as that which opposed the introduction of steam navigation and steel ships." Hichborn has also been an advocate of the consolidation of the bureaus of construction, engineering and equipment under one head, and, indeed, had the consolidation been effected when it was recom- mended by the secretary, Hichborn would, in all probability, been placed, at the head of it. Melville has been a vigorous opponent of the plan. of, consolidation since its inception; and it seems quite clear to the layman | that he is thinking of Hichborn when he says: "If a naval constructor i should be found to pose as an expert engineer it would necessarily mean one of two things--either that he has neglected to a most serious extent 2 the pursuit of his own profession, or that his own profession possessed but little requiring absorbing study and great experience, and therefore gave him the needed time for the study and pursuit of engineering. On the other hand, if an engineer should pose as the expert head of the com- bination I am sure a similar statement would be made by the constructors, or at least, I am confident that they would scarcely acquiesce in a sup- position that their work is in any degree less absorbing, or requiring less devotion and experience. Of cotirse if it should be acknowledged that a minor degree of labor is necessary for acquiring the science of naval con- struction, then the one selected would have to be an expert engineer, owing to the less difficulty of adding a small portion of knowledge to the larger." : Both reports, however, are valuable contributions to the literature of the navy department. These two men have vastly enriched the navy of the United States, and it would be difficult to find their betters any- where. Together they evolve formidable fighting machines. They have not only kept pace, but they have practically been in advance of the progress of naval construction and marine engineering. The naval revolution has occurred within their lifetime and they are a part of it; indeed, it is a part, too, of their own evolution. Notwithstanding their prejudices they are giants, both of them. The report of Admiral Hich- born is particularly interesting in that it reviews the development of the navy during his active connection with it, which embraces both the Merrimac and the Oregon. It is, in its way, a history of the United 'States navy. Admiral Melville presents the operations of the personnel law in language so virile that it cannot fail to arrest the attention of the whole country. From what he says it is time to sound the note of alarm. Let the subject be one of a commercial kind and the daily press is certain to deal out arrant nonsense. Was there ever such rubbish written as this which appears in the columns of the Philadelphia North Ameri- can?: 'The armor plate people have had their opportunity and have lost it. There is no longer any excuse for showing them further considera- tion. If they had acted in a spirit of fairness they might be entitled to re- spectful treatment, but their whole policy has been one of threatening arrogance and narrow greed. It is time for Secretary Long to shut the door of his office in theirs faces' Congress has given Secretary Long power and money to build a government plant. He has already lost four months by waiting-on the pleasure of the trust. He now 'proposes to ad- vertise for bids to construct the battleships and cruisers authétized by congress, but no contracts can be awarded until the armor question is settled. His duty is plain. He should refuse to yield to the trust and should use his authority to bring the erection of a government factory." In the first place the 'bids which were submitted by the makers of armor plate were lower than the price which obtains in any other country; and considerably lower than what the same makers are now charging European countries for armor plate. It was simply the unfortunate divis- ion of work which prevented the acceptance of the bids--a condition which could not have been foreseen before they were opened. The making of armor plate is a virtual monopoly from its very nature. It is not an independent business. No business man would put money into a plant for the making of armor plate alone. There is not a sufficient demand for the product. It is not a commodity which can be kept in stock. Every bit of armor plate is a special order. As a-.commercial proposition an armor plate factory can only be successfully operated as an adjunct to an already complete steel making concern. Even then the venture is one of considerable risk, for the initial capital required is im- mense, the machinery of the heaviest and most expensive character, aud there is no guarantee, whatever, but what new processes and new: dis-° coveries will render the plant obsolete before a'ton of armor can _ be turned out. To establish an armor plate factory for the purpose of saving money is absolutely ridiculous. Omitting the initial cost of the plant, which in itself would defeat the object sought, by what alchemy does the government hope to make armor cheaper than concerns that have de- voted years to a study of economy in its manufacture? Should the gov- ernment start tomorrow to erect an armor plate factory it could not turn out a ton of armor in less than four years--and that first ton would cost $4,000,000 to make. There is a government armor plate factory in Russia which is so imminently successful that Russia obtains her armor from England and the United States. Alexander R. Smith has an article in the current issue of Gunton's magazine in which he punctures thoroughly an_article published in the same magazine a few months ago upon the subject of "Sound Shipping Protection," by Capt. William W. Bates. Capt. Bates' article is devoted to a condemnation of the shipping bill in general. Mr.. Smith takes Capt. Bates to task in copious extracts from Capt. Bates' writings and utterances while commissioner of. navigation. Fifteen years ago there was no more earnest advocate of a shipping bill than Capt. Bates himself. His report upon the rise and decline of American shipping is a standard one and occupied two days in its reading in the house of representatives. At that time he strenuously advocated subsidies and bounties. In his report'as commissioner of navigation in 1890 he said: j "The way to begin this work (of reviving American shipping) is by _a bounty system; a system that will act immediately and efficaciously; a. system 'that: will specially increase our exports as differential duties can- 'not do'and never did do. Differential duties will give us the import trade' . but not necessarily the export trade to the same extent.: Bounties will" give us ultimately the control of both trades. For the present all in favor of an American marine must vote for bounties." : Today Capt. Bates thinks that it will require hundreds of millions to revive the American merchant marine. Ten years ago he figured that it would require $8,209,000 per annum. The tonnage bill as originally drafted and advocated by Capt. Bates fixed upon 30 cents per 1,000 miles as the amount of compensation for American ships in the foreign trade. Subsequently this was reduced to 20 cents per 1,000 miles sailed. The bill he is now opposed to fixes upon 10 cents per ton per 1,000 miles sailed except for the first 1,500 miles outward and inward, where the rate is Bcd at 15 cents per ton per 1,000 miles sailed. In 1890 Capt. Bates said: "The tonnage bill had two faults induced by a desire of the com- mittee on marine to be as saving as possible of bounty money. The first was starting the scale of bounties at 20 cents a ton, instead of 25 cents, at least; and the second was in limiting payment of bounty on a single voyage to 7,000 instead of 10,000 miles." And thus has an erstwhile commissioner of navigation practically swallowed himself. Mr. Smith reviews the present bill and predicts that it will be passed at the coming session of congress. Has the government of the United States the power to grant privi- leges that will interfere with navigation? This is a broad question, a new question of widespread interest that may soon be submitted to the high- est courts of the land by the Lake Carriers' Association. It is not probable that the officers of that organization will submit passively to the disadvantages to shipping that have been encountered at Chicago on ac- count of complications growing out of the opening of the drainage canal. The drainage canal authorities, resting upon their claim of a grant from the war department, to take water from Lake Michigan through the Chicago river, may shortly be confronted by a new form of legal pro- cedure along the lines above referred to. A hint of what may be ex- pected on this score is very probably contained in the dispatch of a few days ago from Chicago stating that Capt. J. G. Keith, vice-president of the Lake Carriers' Association, had presented a bill of $1,400 to the sanitary trustees, alleging the sum to be the loss sustained by having the steamer S. S. Curry "hung up" at the Terminal railroad bridge. Presi- dent Boldenweck of the drainage canal trustees refused to pay the amount. The Curry became jammed in the draw of the bridge Sept. 17 and remained imprisoned eighteen hours, causing one of the worst block- ades of the year. Thirty ships were detained, and a fleet of incoming lumber "hookers" caused a jam in the south branch that lasted twenty- four hours after the Curry was pulled out of the draw. Passengers on the Ue Central Railroad had to be carried past the obstruction in uses. It would seem that there should be some limit to the degree of un- truthfulness to which the partisan newspapers descend in the heat. of,a national political campaign such as that now under way. The. Buffalo News a few days ago contained a full column of falsehoods relative fo - the food furnished to men aboard vessels of the firm of M.A, Hanna &. Co. It was charged that the cost of feeding the men was not equal to what is paid for prison or poor-house fare'in Buffalo and that there was no line of vessels on the lakes so poorly provisioned as the Hanna vessels. All this because Senator Hanna happens to be chairman of the Republican © national committee. Politics find no place in these columns, and it is unnecessary to refer to the Buffalo News article as far as vessel men are concerned, but the general public has no positive knowledge of such matters and is unfortunately too often disposed to place some reliance in newspaper statements. The newspaper profession is disgraced by the publication of such a mass of lies regarding a reputable business con- cern. From one end of the lakes to the other there is no business house more highly respected or more liberal in its dealings with employes than M. A, Hanna & Co. Provision bills on its vessels are probably equal to the highest that are paid on the lakes, and there are many ships that pro- vide to captain and deck-hand alike more variety in food than is to be found in the homes of most of the owners. [ October: 25; =