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

SHEATHING OF SHIPS. THIS IMPORTANT QUESTION REGARDING NEW VESSELS OF WAR IS NOW UP TO CONGRESS—NO DIVISION OF EXPERT OPINION AS TO WHAT SHOULD BE DONE REGARDING ARMOR—OCOALING STATIONS, Wasuineton Burgav, Marink Revirw, 1345 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUK, Wasuineron, D. C., Freruary 14, 1900. Until congress passes upon the question of sheathing for ships of the navy no further progress can be made toward the designing of the new battleships and armored cruisers authorized, more than a year ago. The sheathing subject is now before the two naval committees, Secre- tary Long has recommended that the report of the majority of the naval - beard of construction, which is against sheathing, be followed. Whatever action is taken by congress will probably be provided in the annual naval appropriation bill, which usually does not pass both houses until well along near the close of the session. Rear Admiral Hichborn says that it will be a useless expenditure of money and a waste of time to begin the plans of battleships which may be entirely changed by the course which congress may pursue. Hichborn is the sole advocate of the plan adopted last year for the sheathing of the ships. The board of naval construction in its report against sheathing said that the argument in favor of sheathing is that the bottom of a ship will not foul to so great an extent as when not sheathed and that therefore the vessels should be better able to maintain their speed on moderate coal consumption and save expenses in docking and painting. But against . these advantages they place as disadvantages heavily increased first cost; very difficult form of construction, in which our ship builders have little or no experience; difficult and expensive repairs; danger of injury to hull plates from bad sheathing; additional weight of sheathing which might be given up to coal or armor; increased volume to drive through the water; great difficulty in attaching sheathing to the armor plates, and the lack of East India teak, the best wood for sheathing, in this country. ‘Rear Admiral Hichborn’s answer to all this is of a very vigorous kind and not least of the points to which he takes exception is the assertion that our ship builders have little or no experience in sheathing. He directs attention to the fact that we have already in the United States navy six sheathed vessels and that six others are under construction, and then adds: “To imply that we cannot do in the United States what has been done for twenty years abroad notwithstanding the knowledge that has come to us of foreign practices is, in my opinion, a reflection upon the ability of our own ship builders and mechanics, than whom there are none more capable the world over.” seme time in the department. A letter to Chief Hichborn on this subject from Capt. J. B. Estés of | “IT notice in the press _ Charlotte, N. J., is quite interesting. ‘He says: pt that the board of construction does not see the advantage of sheathing ships’ bottoms. Thirty years ago I recommended to the company operat- ing the Royal Mail line of steamers (iron) that they sheathe the bottoms of their vessels just above the bilge. They did not heed my advice, but in ten years after I made the suggestion they had sunk in the rapids of the St. Lawrence river fifteen of their steamers. The expense of raising these vessels averaged about $80,000. At last two of the directors called on me and asked what could be done. I at once replied, sheathe with 4- inch rock elm. One was of the opinion that the vessels would draw more water. On the contrary they drew on an average 2 inches less. Since they adopted the sheathing not one boat has ‘been sunk, My argu- ment is that with the iron for a backer and the wood for a fender you heve the best bottom that floats. Pardon me for taking up your time, but I feel so much interested in our beautiful navy that [ can not vefrain from offering what I know about the sheathing of steamers,” EXPERTS NOT DIVIDED ON THE ARMOR QUESTION, Rear Admiral O’Neil, chief of the ordnance bureau, has received no intimation as yet from either naval committee relating to the probable time when the armor question may come up for consideration. Testimony on the cost of armor making, the construction of a government factory | and practically all facts pertaining to the armor question haye been so exhaustively presented to each committee that the naval experts contend that no new light can be thrown on the subject and that so far as the firms are concerned they stand as they did one year ago and will not budge an inch. Until congress is willing to authorize the purchase of . piates the construction of war ships will stagnate. Admiral O’Neil says that good Harvey armor can be purchased for about $412 a ton, but that the new armor treated by the Krupp process cannot be had for less than $547 a ton. He strongly advocates the latter armor for the navy and says that with this grade ships can be afforded better protection and have armor placed over all area of the ships, owing to the plates being lighter than those treated with the Harvey process. The battleships of the Indiana ciass have side armor of 18 inches around the belt, but it is not proposed to protect any of the new vessels with armor heavier than 15 inches, which, it is believed, will give the same, — if not more effectiveness, owing to its superior tensile strength and resist- ing powers. Admiral O’Neil contends that the American navy, which has assumed a position among the nations of the earth for-superior armor and ordnance, cannot afford to accept an inferior plate for the finest ships it is to build, even though the price is considerably in excess of that paid _for armor protecting the sides of the Indiana type of vessels.-; There isino (division. among the-experts on the armor question-but a unanimous senti- ment that congress should authorize the purchase of the best armor/in the market. NEW COALING STATIONS. Rear Admiral Bradford, chief of the bureau of equipment, has made preliminary arrangements for the establishment of coaling stations at the following named places on the Atlantic coast and the ‘Gulf of Mexico: _Frenchman’s Bay, Me., Portland, Me., Portsmouth, N. H., Boston, New London, in the vicinity of Newport, New York, League Island, -Pa., But as the matter is now in the © hands of the naval committees and as the secretary has approved the | recommendation of the majority not much will probably be heard of it for - MARINE REVIEW. oo... Chesapeake Bay, Port Royal, 'S. C., Key West and Dry Tortugas, Fla., and New Orleans, La. It is also contemplated to establish coaling sta- tions at Mission Rock, Cal., Pearl Harbor, and Honolulu in Hawaii, and at Copras Island in the harbor of San Luis de Apra, Guam. NOVEL LECTURE ON SHIP BUILDING. Naval Constructor Wm. H. Varney, who is lookiiig after the ¢con- struction of vessels at the works of the Harlan & Hollingsworth Co.. Wilmington, Del., at the’ Columbian Iron Works of Baltimore, and at the Maryland Steel Co.’s works, managed to make up for a large gathering oi Baltimore people at the headquarters of the Y. M. €. A. a Very inter- esting lecture on ship building. Mr. Varney first made ‘a’ domparison between the bible dimensions of Noah’s ark, 21.6 inches’ for a cubit, and the new North German ship Deutschland. This was’ fotlowed ‘by views! first of the primitive mode of crossing the river, a savage on a log; then the canoe, and from that the development of the Nile boat or galley of 2500 years B. C.; then the Greek man-of-war 700 years B. C.; then from the Carthagenian, 5383 years B. C., to the Chinese vessel of A. D. 1100; then the model of the Santa Maria of 1492, as sent to the Chicago expo- sition, as well as the Viking, the piratical ship of the middle ages, and the British ship-of-the-line, A. D. 1610. The modern system of building ships was compared with the ancient system. The ancient system, as shown, was to set up the stem and stern post and a few frames and bend- ing battens, filling in with timbers as is done by some builders of small buais at the present time. Compared with this was the modern system of construction, showing mould loft and describing it with a few sketches of the manner of laying down vessels in the mould loft and transferring to the schrive board. Body plans on the schrive board were also shown and then the bending floor for iron vessels with the workmen bending a hot angle bar. Following this was. the frame bent complete, and then the keel blocks, as well as the manner of erecting the ship from the keel blocks, including the various parts of framing up to the launching, the different methods of launching, etc. The Deutschland of 1847 was compared with the new Deutschland and the American liner City of Paris with a side-wheel steamer of the type of 1848; the man-of-war Jamestown, as built at Norfolk in 1844 with the Baltimore of today and. the Constitution of 1812 fame (built at Boston in 1797) with the. Oregon of 1898 Drawn on the screen also were other men-of-war, namely, the Indiana, Atlanta, Minneapolis, New .York, Dolphin, torpedo boat Mc- Kee, submarine boat Holland on the surface and submerged, and the Katahdin in the naval review in New York harbor in 1898. Other illustrations were results of the hurricane of March 16, 1889, at Samoa harbor, in which the Trenton and Vandalia were wrecked and the Ger- man vessels of that wreck thrown over upon their sides. ‘Illustrations of the yachts Defender and Valkarie were also included im the collection on account of their showing full spread of sail under way. NEW SHELBY STEEL TUBE CO. The Shelby Steel Tube Co., with general offices in Cleveland and capital stock -of- $7,376,400, formed in 1897 by the consolidation of the seamless tube companies of the Central West, has been reorganized in the past week as a New Jersey corporation under the same namé. The author- ized capital stock is $15,000,000—$6,000,000 preferred and $9,000,000 com- mon stock. The directors include R. L. Coleman, president of the American Bicycle Co. and A. A. Pope and H. A. Lozier, who are directors of that company. The other directors are: liams, Shelby, O.; E. W. Bliss, Brooklyn, N. Y.; L. S. Hoyt, New Castle, Pa.; John L. McKinney, Titusville, Pa.; F. J. Carolan, San Francisco, Cal.; Frank O. Lowden, Chicago; James B. Dill, East Orange, N. J. It is expected that the officers of the old company will take charge of the new company. They are: President, W. E. Miller; treasurer, W. S. Miller; secretary, H. H. Cockley; N. A. Gilbert will be general counsel. Companies and plants included in the new corporation are the fol- lowing: New Castle Tube Co.; McCool Tube Co.; Auburn Nut & Bolt Works; Hercules Seamless Tube Co.; Pope Tube Co., absorbed in 1899. ‘The tubing end of the business of the United States Projectile Co., Ell- wood Weldless Tube Co., Greenville Tube Co., American Weldless Tub- ing Co. of Toledo, Brewer Seamless Tubing Co. of Toledo, United States Standard Drawn Steel Co. of Cuyahoga Falls, O., Shelby Steel Tube Co. of Ohio and the Albany Mfg. Co. of Albany, Ind., absorbed in 1899; also the tubing end of the business of the Mansfield Machine Works. INSTRUCTION IN MARINE ENGINEERING. Among other new projects recently decided upon by the trustees of Columbia University is one for the establishment of courses in marine engineering and naval architecture. The decision was reached as the re- sult of a general realization of the fact that a new era in American ship building has dawned, but it is said that it was primarily upon the sugges- tion of Rear Admiral Melville that the trustees decided to place naval architecture in the curriculum of the School of Mechanical Engineering. Prof. Cathcart, formerly of the United States navy, will be the head of the new department.. The course will be optional to scientific students and. will include boiler design, marine auxiliaries, appliances, materials and propelling machinery, as well as.architectural desigm and mold-loft practice. Designs for special vessels and machinery will be required as a graduation thesis from candidates for degrees. Speaking of theiexten- ce sion of the,department’s work, President, Low of Columbia said recently: ““T share the opinion of the faculty that<it is highly important for the “university to.preempt the field of marine engineering without delay.” Chairman Kimball of the Norfolk & Western directorate is authority for the statement that the passage of the shipping bill means the, estab- lishment by his line of a bi-weekly steamship service between Norfolk and South American ports and he also believes that it means the estab- lishment of an additional ship building plant at Norfolk. The board of trade of Norfolk has adopted resolutions urgently recommending the passage of the bill. W. E. Miller, Cleveland; B. J. Wil- »