22 ON THE MAXIMUM DIMENSIONS OF SHIPS. 
They constitute a very attractive cargo, because they get on board on their own 
feet and they discharge themselves without the use of any elaborate machinery. 
They even venture fearlessly into the toils of the custom house and the emigration 
service and emerge therefrom in incredibly less time than any inanimate object 
can. (Laughter.) 
If we in the interests of our country shall do, as we ought to do, all that we 
can to regulate and reduce and distribute the immigration traffic to this country, 
it would have a more marked effect upon the maximum dimensions of vessels than 
any consideration advanced before us to-day. 
Now, coming to the subject of the maximum dimensions of battleships, I quote 
from page 17, as follows: “My personal conviction, based upon long-continued 
study of the problem, is that the wiser course in warship building would be found 
in a return to more moderate dimensions and a reduced unit-cost per capital ship.”’ 
And again on page 17: “With equal speed a reduction in the number of heavy 
guns carried in a single ship such as I advocated last year would enable considerable 
reductions to be made in size and cost; and that, for a given total expenditure on 
the first cost of the fleet or squadron, a more formidable and flexible force could, 
in my judgment, be obtained, with greatly reduced risks from either gun fire, 
under-water attacks or magazine explosions.” 
That is a very interesting opinion to me, and it reminds me of a most inter- 
esting incident which occurred at a time when I occupied a position of some 
authority. At that time a distinguished school of advocates broke loose, headed 
by a most distinguished naval historian, advocating this same idea of the advantage 
of a greater number of vessels. The distinguished historian wrote an elaborate 
memorandum for the President of the United States setting forth his conclusions 
as deduced from the experience of Nelson and Howe and the development of the 
frigate as compared with the efficiency of the line-of-battle ship, and I had the 
pleasure of discussing that matter and was able to point out, as has been done by 
others since, that the mobility and handiness of the modern battleship made all 
points of comparison between the experience of Nelson and Howe absolutely value- 
less. Suffice it to say that the result of the discussion which occurred at that time 
convinced President Roosevelt that he wanted the biggest ship, and that decided 
the design of the Connecticut and Louisiana and a considerable class of vessels 
following. : 
I had the pleasure of laying before this Society a very brief paper setting 
forth the facts and figures of the greater fighting capacity which resulted from the 
increase in dimensions of these battleships and armored cruisers. It is not neces- 
sary to recapitulate these figures, but they were similarly and adequately set forth 
in the paper by Professor Welsh before the Institution of Naval Architects this 
spring, in which he showed that an increase in displacement of 34 per cent. and an 
increase in cost of 50 per cent. in a battleship would result in a doubling of the 
effective gun power. I do not base my idea of the advantage of increased size in 
battleships wholly upon any rigid rule as to the amount of the broadside discharge 
or the calibre or number of the guns. 
