Mr. RIE, of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I did not intend to occupy the attention of the committee on this subject, but I am impelled to do so from the direction the discussion as taken. and, 1st, I want to so a single word on the question of economy, for am unwilling to admit there is any gentleman upon this floor who is entitled to take precedence of m self in ade sire to reduce the expenses of this government. I wish to call the attention of the committee to this fact in the light of this nestion of economy: that the appropriations as edfor by the Navy Dept last year, if I remember rightl, amounted to $160,000,000. The estimates may e them for the present year only about $123,000,000. The ComAppropriat, If I have correctly scanned the gill, have reduced the estimates about $5,000,000 and the very 1st thing I did myself upon this bill was to offer an amendment by which the Government should save $800,000 more, because I had investigated the matter and found certain sums belonging to unexpended appropriations which might be transferred to other appropriations, saving new appropriations to be raise by taxation this year. Now, sir, the close of the war has rendered it possible for the Government to retrench and reuce on all hands. Among the 1st Depts that commenced retrenchment was the Dept of the Navy. Within ten days of the fall of Fort Fisher orders were sent from the Na Dept to commence the reduction of tenaval force. That was on the 24th of February. On the 20th of May orders were sent to the commanders of squadrons to reduce the naval force by all vessels not profitably and necessarily employed. Again, on the Slst of July, or about the 1st of August, other orders were sent to make the greatest possible retrenchment in the naval force. I say from Fort Fisher up to this hour no member of this House or of this Government has displayed greater anxiety to retrench the expenses of this Government than the Dept of the Navy. Now, sir, it is asked, ” Where is the necessity of increasing these yards at the present time?” Gentlemen have said, “You have got along during 4 years, and why cannotyou get along for 4 years more, or an indefinite pe riod Y” Well, sir, if we were aperfectly mature Government, if we were an clfete nation, if we were a nation going backward, then we might raise the question why we might not eternally stand still with the facilities we now have for carrying on the Government. But I do not understand this to be any such kind of Government or any such kind of nation. We are increasing rapidly in population; we are rapidly covering over our immense territo; and where ever there is a foot of land occupied, whether it be on the Atlantic or in the great West, in the case of a foreirn war which is to be settled on the sea, the welfare, the interest of every man, whether on the coast or in the interior, is alike jeopardized by the inellicieucy of our naval torce. Now, sir, at the commencement of this war we had only about 60 vessels. It was necessary for the Dept to put into active 01p eration not only all the vessels it could run e itself, but to press into the service all the private establishments of the country in manufacturing ships and machinery. But even that was insufficient, and the Dept went forth and bought all the vessels they could find in the mercantile marine that were adapted or that could be adapted to naval purposes; and the Na rose from 60 vesscls to nearly 700 during the war. Now, the retrenchment to which I alluded in the commencement of my remarks commenced on these purchased vessels. They have been sold back again into the merchant service for the most part. But still there is a large number remaining which is a permanentincrease of the Navy. There have been constructed during the ast 4 years between 2 and 300 ) ships, which are legitimate vessels, to be used by the Government or taken care of, and the idea that our navyyards, that could accommodate 60 vessels, store them and keep them in repair there for the future wants of the Gov,ernment when the may again be put into the service are ca able of taking care of between 2 an 300 ships is, on the face of it, an absurdity. Our navy ards have not been enlarged during the perio of the war. Our ship s are now coming home, and they are to be aid up. They must be proor] cared for. There are other vessels on stoc s that must be so far finished as to be protected from decay and I want to say to gentlemen, that it is an absolute necessity that these yards shall be enlarged, or the interest of the naval service must materially suffer, in my opinion, to an extent vastly greater than the outlay that is propossd to be made in this bill to enlarge these ar s. by this recommendation comes from the chief of the Bureau of Yards and Docks, who, I understand from the chairman of the ComAppropriat, has been before that committee which was the properplace for him to go, and has there explained the details of this necessity and it has come to us under the recommendation of the head of the Navy Dept, and I do not find any person connected with the naval service anywhere who has any doubt upon this subject. and, so far as I know, no gentleman who has visited these yards, and has himself made papersonal ins ection of the dees to which they are crowded and the hazar from. fire that exists there, has any doubt whatever about the necessity of either enlarging these yards or providing new ones and gentlemen on e committee will be capable of judging whether they can better increase at the present yards the facilities for carrying on this work, or whether we shall make somewhere else a vast original outlay.