second place, the solvent that they have been using is amyl alcohol, whereas we use a mixture of ethyl aclohol and ether. They have not been using a stablizer, but have been depending on the amyl alcohol to be not only the solvent, but the stablizer, whereas for the past four or five years we have been using diphenylamine for stablizing. In the third place, they have blended their powders, taking all kinds of powder to make up one lot, taking powder that might have been made eight or ten years before and powder that might have been made day before yesterday and putting it into a lot and giving it the date of the blend and permitting it to go out as 1912 powder, when most of it might have been made in 1901. There are other minor differences, but those are the main ones. They show carelessness in the selection of material, the use of certain ingredients that are not the best, and great carelessness in their blending and naming of their lots of powder. These statements are all taken from official French reports, and I believe they are true. Three or four months ago I saw in the newspapers that they had decided to take all of the powder out of the ships. I immediately asked the department to cable to Paris to our naval attaché for confirmation, and the statement was confirmed that they had taken substantially every pound of powder out of the ships and put it ashore. Then they immediately started to replace that powder. To what extent they have done that with new powder I am unable to say, but I know that a representative of the Du Pont Powder Co., as soon as he heard of this, went immediately abroad to see if he could get any business, and up to the time that he left Paris, not more than six weeks ago, they had not yet purchased or made in large quantities any powder of any different kind from that they had made before. The CHAIRMAN. The reason I submitted that question to you was because of the newspaper articles that are going around stating, first, that the powder of our Navy and the powder of the French Navy was identical; and, second, the action of the French in abandoning their powder, indicating that ours was bad, as some have charged, and I wanted to place in the record the material difference between our powder and theirs, so as to meet those criticisms. Mr. ROBERTS. As to the exchange of potassium nitrate for sodium nitrate, referred to in the next paragraph, is that taking place? Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir; it is nearly completed. Mr. ROBERTS. How much of the potassium nitrate is there left at Malden now? Admiral TWINING. I do not know just how much. It is being removed as fast as they can get it out. The contract was let to William R. Grace & Co. about the middle of November, or perhaps the 1st of December. Mr. ROBERTS. Last December? Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. Mr. ROBERTS. I was over at that depot last summer, and the man in charge told me that they had not taken any out recently. Admiral TWINING. The contract was not let until about the 1st of December. Mr. ROBERTS. When do you expect that it will all be out? The CHAIRMAN. Prior to the holiday recess and during the hearings of the Chief of the Bureau of Yards and Docks, you were with us one day. You have an item in the bill providing for a new storage house for this exchange? Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You state that it is now being moved and will be completed by the 1st of March. Will you still need that building? Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. The material that the contractors are delivering now is taken to the Army arsenal, the Picatinny Arsenal near Dover, N. J. They had a storage place for it, and agreed to take it and store it for us until we were ready to take it into one of our own storehouses. We would prefer very much, of course, to have it at Indian Head, in the vicinity of our powder factory. The CHAIRMAN. There has been no change in the conditions since your previous hearing? Admiral TWINING. No, sir. The CHAIRMAN. With reference to that item? The CHAIRMAN. The next item is "For naval gun factory, Washington, District of Columbia: New and improved machinery for existing shops, $125,000." That is the same as the item last year? Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Will you need all of that amount to carry on the current improvements, repairs, etc.? Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. MR. ROBERTS. Will the time come, do you think, when you can cut that item out? Will that foundry ever be equipped with new machinery? The CHAIRMAN. This is the whole of the shops. Admiral TWINING. This is the whole gun factory, all of the shops. I think that ought to be appropriated every year. It represents about 4 per cent of the total value of the machinery plant there, and I think that it is a pretty small appropriation. Mr. ROBERTS. When you speak of new machinery, do you mean the putting in of later models or developments of machinery, or do you mean to replace that which is worn out? Admiral TWINING. It is both, new and improved that is, if some of the old machinery wears out and we want a new lathe, for instance, to replace an old one, of course if we can get something improved we will do it, but from time to time, as you know, it is good economy to discard a perfectly good machine and replace it by something new that will do the work cheaper-so that is the meaning of the wording of that clause. The CHAIRMAN. The next item is under "New batteries for ships of the Navy, for modifying and renewing breech mechanism of 3-inch, 4-inch, 5-inch, and 6-inch guns, $75,000." That is a continuation of the same appropriation for last year, is it not? Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. Mr. ROBERTS. Why do you cut that amount down there? Does this complete the renewals for those guns? Admiral TWINING. That will complete the work we have planned now; yes, sir. You Mr. ROBERTS. I mean on all the guns of those calibers. have a certain number of guns of those different calibers, and you have been for some years modifying and renewing breech mechan isms. Will this $75,000 complete the work on all those guns of those different calibers? Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. "Replacing mark six 6-inch guns with mark eight guns and repairing and modernizing the mark six guns for issue, $150,000." Last year for this purpose we appropriated $100,000. What is the amount? I do not remember that you stated what was the total amount needed for that purpose. Admiral TWINING. I think I stated last year about $620,400. That is the figure I have here, and there has already been appropriated in two years $300,000. I am now asking for $150,000, which will leave $170,400 for the future. The CHAIRMAN. Last year you stated to us in detail the estimated cost of repairing and remodeling these guns and changing them up to date, giving an estimate of cost of each type of gun. Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Has your work and experience during the present year shown any increase or decrease in the cost, as estimated at that time? Admiral TWINING. I find it is not costing quite as much as we estimated. The CHAIRMAN. So that with the amount you can do Admiral TWINING (interposing). We can do a little more work, and that will tend to cut down the final appropriation: yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. "For lining and hooping to the muzzle, 8-inch 40-caliber mark 5 guns, $40,000," instead of $60,000. How much has been already appropriated for that purpose? Admiral TWINING. $120,000. The CHAIRMAN. How much more will be needed after this $40,000? Admiral TWINING. I should like to cut that $40,000 down to $24,000, and that will finish the job. Mr. BATHRICK. Good. Applause from the gallery, gentlemen. Mr. ROBERTS. We will increase your salary. Admiral TWINING. $16,000? The CHAIRMAN. "For liners for eroded guns, $125,000." The same as last year. How much has been appropriated for lining the eroded guns? Admiral TWINING. Last year was the first time that appeared in the estimates. The CHAIRMAN. What is the amount you have in view now? Of course it is a matter that will continue from year to year, as you use guns, but can you give us some idea of about what the annual appropriation will be, or the annual expense? Admiral TWINING. I think that after we get all of our guns in condition the annual expense will not exceed $75,000 for that purpose. That, of course, is incidental to target practice. Mr. ROBERTS. How much more would be necessary to get th eroded guns into condition-this will make $250,000? Admiral TWINING. I think that the same sum will be needed annually for a period of four years, including last year; that would run to $500,000. We would have to do just as much work as our facilities would permit; that is, we will have to buy that many liners for four years. After that it ought to drop to something between $60,000 and $75,000. The CHAIRMAN. "For modifying 5-inch 50-caliber mark 5 guns, $75,000," the same as last year. How much will it take to complete those? Admiral TWINING. That would leave $111,000 to be asked for later, sir, subject to any reduction due to The CHAIRMAN (interposing). To the reduced cost? The CHAIRMAN. "Ammunition for ships of the Navy, for procuring, producing, preserving, and handling ammunition for issue to ships, $3,850,000," the same as last year, and you have added "to be available until expended." Why that new language? Admiral TWINING. That is due to the provision of section 8 of the sundry civil bill of the current year, which provides that all appropriations are to be considered as annual, with certain specific exceptions, unless the language of the appropriation itself specifies otherwise. The CHAIRMAN. That was the purport of the last bill, was it? Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. Up to a year ago we have always considered this as a continuing appropriation. The comptroller ruled otherwise last January, and, of course his ruling, together with the legislation I have just referred to, has put this on an annual basis. It is an appropriation of such a character that it is extremely difficult to estimate on it properly without overestimating it or underestimating it, if it has all got to be obligated within one year. Some of the contracts we make under it are large and we do not feel like making them until we are sure we know exactly what we want. If the appropriation bill is a little late in passing, as it was last year, it reduces the time in which we have to make our contracts, and sometimes a large contract for shell or powder will run over the three years that is allowed in which to make the payments under an annual appropriation. We can only obligate money for one year under an annual appropriation, and we have two additional years in which to pay claims. I had last year to ask for a deficiency on ammunition. The CHAIRMAN. So it is three years before it is turned back finally into the Treasury? Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir; I had last summer to put in a very large deficiency under an old annual appropriation on account of deliveries of shell having been made after the money had been turned into the Treasury. I can not see any harm in making these appropriations continuing, and it would be a great administrative advantage to have it so. Mr. ROBERTS. It would only be fair to the contractors as well if they get the money when they deliver the goods and do not have to wait. Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. If I remember we had a $116,000 deficiency, not actually a deficiency but a reappropriation of money turned into the Treasury, the contractors waiting six or eight months for their money. Mr. ROBERTS. That is quite an item, the interest on that? The CHAIRMAN. It had been appropriated, and then before it could be paid it was turned back into the Treasury and they had to come in and get a reappropriation. Admiral TWINING. Yes, sir. Of course the contractors were partly at fault because they were late in their deliveries, but they had good reason for that. Mr. BATHRICK. Do I understand they claimed interest on that? Mr. ROBERTS. No; the Government never pays interest. They may claim it, but they never get it. The CHAIRMAN. I see there is no item in the bill for modernizing turrets of ships. Have all the turrets been modernized of the completed ships in commission? Admiral TWINING. They will be by the end of this fiscal year. Admiral TWINING. By the appropriations already made; yes, sir. Admiral TWINING. That item will pass out, unless something new comes up requiring changes, and I do not look for it in the near future. The CHAIRMAN. "Torpedoes and appliances: For the purchase and manufacture of torpedoes and appliances, $850,000," instead of $650,000, as last year. What is the present state of our torpedo supply? I would like you to state fully to the committee, with the reservation that such confidential matters as you think should not go in you can, in your revision, modify in the hearings. The stenographer will take it down, but it can be modified, so far as confidential matters are concerned. Admiral TWINING. This estimate is intended to cover the purchase or manufacture of substantially the same number of torpedoes as were provided for by the appropriation of $650,000 for the current year. The sum is necessarily increased, owing to the fact that larger and more expensive torpedoes are to be be acquired. The present state of the torpedo supply is such that I deem it very necessary to acquire at least as many torpedoes next year as we acquired this year. I will furnish for the information of the committee, in a confidential way, a statement of the number of torpedoes on hand and needed. The CHAIRMAN. How many torpedoes were completed during the past fiscal year? Admiral TWINING. We procured 230 from one company and 106 from another. The CHAIRMAN. Those were purchased, were they? And how many were manufactured? Admiral TWINING. Yes; and about 75 at Newport, manufactured. The CHAIRMAN. Are they completely manufactured? Admiral TWINING. At this date they are running their last range trials, and they will be issued soon. It was not all done in this fiscal year; of course, they were begun sometime ago, but they are just about ready for issue to the service now. The CHAIRMAN. Have they been completed? Admiral TWINING. Yes; that is the second lot of torpedoes made at Newport. The CHAIRMAN. How many have you in the course of manufacture there? Admiral TWINING. We have 165-one lot of 75 and one lot of 90. |