Mr. MORIARTY. No; I would try to start from Long Island.
Mr. TAYLER. And there is nothing to interfere with that?

Mr. LESSLER. Except the physical proposition it would be pretty hard for a man to do that work for 15 miles.

Mr. MORIARTY. I might not have to go over 5 or 6. The gasoline engine does that part of it. The foot power is only while he is underneath the water, or in case of an emergency, so he can get home.

SETTING THE GAS ENGINE IN MOTION.

Mr. LESSLER. How does he set the gas engine to work?

Mr. MORIARTY. The same as any other gas engine. It is intended to work just the same as any other engine.

Mr. LESSLER. With his feet or hands?

Mr. TAYLER. He does not have anything to do until he gets within effective range?

DEFENSE OF A COLLIER.

Mr. DE KNIGHT. Here is an illustration. Suppose a collier is pursued by a battle ship. The collier launches a one-man torpedo boat. It lies on the track of the approaching battle ship and discharges the torpedo when the enemy gets within range. Then the collier returns and picks up the boat. Thus the value of one of these boats as a part of the regular torpedo equipment of every vessel of the Navy is at once apparent. All that is necessary is that one of these boats shall be dropped overboard; it goes out and makes an attempt to sink the enemy, and is then picked up again.

Mr. LESSLER. In view of the present status of ordnance it would be pretty dangerous for a collier to get near a battle ship, would it not? Mr. DE KNIGHT. Suppose it is being chased?

Mr. LESSLER. Within 3 or 4 miles that battle ship can get her range and there is no chance when he has to get within 1,000 yards to do his work.

Mr. DE KNIGHT. The battle ship is at a point, say, 15 miles off from the collier, and the man in the boat knows where she is going to pass, just as a train would pass on a track. He knows that the battle ship or cruiser will follow in the wake of the vessel (collier) that is being chased. Now, this boat has been compared with the Holland. Mr. LESSLER. You mean the plans?

IN COMPARISON WITH HOLLAND-LAKE TYPE.

Mr. DE KNIGHT. This boat when built, in comparison with the Holland-Lake type, is like a wasp and a snake, both equally effective in their own way. The wasp is just as dangerous as the snake; its sting is just as effective. It is not claimed that this boat can do all that the Holland-Lake type, which will cost from $150,000 to $200,000, This boat has its limitations, and necessarily it is a much cheaper boat. It is expected to cost about $7,500 after the first boat is built.

THE GOVERNMENT TO BUILD THE FIRST BOAT.

Mr. LESSLER. What do you desire the committee to do?
Mr. LOUDENSLAGER. What is your proposition?

Mr. DE KNIGHT. It is desired simply to have the committee recommend an appropriation of $15,000 for the purpose of authorizing the construction of one of these boats, the Government to own it when completed. After the first boat is built the contractor will build the boats at a price agreeable to the Government.

THE GOVERNMENT TO EXPERIMENT.

Mr. LESSLER. You want the Government to experiment?

Mr. DE KNIGHT. Yes, sir; to build the first boat. These gentlemen have not the means; they are simply inventors. Their other inventions, which have proved a success, are now in use by the Government. Mr. Moriarity is an expert in torpedo work, and every principle included in this boat is a well-known and tried principle. The boat is simply a combination of well-known principles used either in submarine boats or in torpedoes.

Mr. TAYLER. Has this matter been presented to the Navy Department?

Mr. DE KNIGHT. No, sir; nothing further than Mr. Moriarity called at the Navy Department yesterday and presented letters from Representative Bull to Admiral Melville and also to Admiral Bowles.

It had been our intention to bring this matter officially to the attention of the Navy Department. Upon the advice of our patent solicitors we have refrained from doing so, as patents were pending which might have been imperiled by such a procedure. The action of the Naval Committee in taking up the general subject of submarines and inquiring into their usefulness for naval purposes caused us to take prompt action. In case we had made application to the Department for an investigation as to the merits of the boat we might have been debarred from appearing before this committee. As other companies have had an extended hearing we believe the same privilege should have been accorded us. We believe that this committee can consistently grant the modest request that we make, particularly as there is precedent for such action. The committee will understand that any appropria tion authorized by the Congress is to be expended only in the discretion of the Secretary of the Navy. This condition practically permits the Navy Department to make an extended investigation upon their account. The money is not to be expended unless the Secretary believes the best interests of the service will be subserved by so doing. The construction of the boat is also to be carried on under the supervision of experts detailed by the Department.

Mr. RIXEY. Have you stated when you expect to have one of the boats completed?

Mr. DE KNIGHT. No, sir; the proposition is to have the Government build the first boat.

Mr. TAYLER. Is that customary or usual?

THE ORIGINAL MONITOR BUILT AS AN EXPERIMENT.

Mr. DE KNIGHT. In the case of the construction of the original monitor, the success of which is known to all, the Government gave a contract to the inventor and his associates, who agreed to construct a vessel upon the inventor's plans and produce certain results. Of more recent date, in the case of the Gathmann gun, a little over $200,000 was expended for building the first gun, targets, and shells. The experiments took place at Indian Head and at Sandy Hook.

THE FIRST SUBMARINE BOAT BUILT AS AN EXPERIMENT.

I might also say that the Plunger, the first of the submarine boats, which the Government contracted for from the Holland Company, was built in this same manner. In order that there may be no misunderstanding upon this matter, the act authorizing this construction is herewith quoted:

[Naval appropriation act, approved March 8, 1893.]

BUREAU OF ORDNANCE.

Submarine torpedo boat: For building a submarine torpedo boat and conducting experiments therewith, two hundred thousand dollars, to be taken from the balances of appropriations on hand July first, eighteen hundred and ninety-three, to the credit of armor and armament of vessels heretofore authorized.

APPROPRIATIONS FOR GATHMANN GUN AS AN EXPERIMENT.

Mr. TAYLER. The Gathmann gun was a failure.

Mr. DE KNIGHT. Well it was reported to have been a failure; the monitor, however, was not a failure. The Gathmann people are asking for another test. I understand that the War Department has not yet given a decision upon this matter.

Mr. TAYLER. They did prove the service armor-piercing projectile destroyed the target, and that the Gathmann shell did not do anything like what was claimed for it.

Mr. DE KNIGHT. What was claimed for the Gathmann gun was that it would smash in the side of a battle ship, and that the results showed a damage fatal to a battle ship.

Mr. TAYLER. That the detonation against the side of the ship would destroy it by the explosion, whereas the service rifle sent the projectile through the side of the vessel, and it explodes on the other side, whereas the Gathmann projectile was a projectile charged with from 500 to 1,000 pounds of wet gun cotton, which being detonated against the side of a vessel it was claimed would destroy it by the force of the explosion. It has been demonstrated that no such result would follow; that no serious injury will result to the battle ship from the detonation of that enormous amount of gun cotton, while the service rifle sending a direct projectile with only about 60 pounds of the Regular Army explosive would pierce the side of a battle ship, and explode on the other side. That test showed the most effective result ever known in firing at a target. That was possible with the Regular Army guns, projectiles, and explosives. The Government appropriated in that as in a great many other instances in late years for experiments against the advice of the War or Navy Department, and in every single instance where Congress has given them an appropriation against the judgment of the departments the experiment has shown that Congress was wrong, and that the War or Navy Department, as the case may be, was right. Of course that has nothing to do with this, except the Navy ought to express an opinion as to the propriety of making this experiment. And if they did, I have no doubt the committee would recommend it; if they did not, I for one would oppose it, for the results have shown that they were right.

Mr. DE KNIGHT. This is simply the first step; this is an entirely new matter.

Mr. LESSLER. Have the Navy expressed an opinion on this?

Mr. DE KNIGHT. Officially it has never been brought to their

attention.

CAPTAIN WAINWRIGHT'S TESTIMONY.

Mr. DE KNIGHT. Captain Wainwright, in his testimony before this committee, Tuesday, May 20, referred to the Moriarty boat as the Reagan submarine boat. Probably this grew out of the fact that Mr. John T. Reagan, who is here to-day, is the secretary and treasurer of the Newport Manufacturing Company, which owns Mr. Moriarty's patent, and of which Mr. Moriarty is president.

sent me.

Captain Wainwright, in answer to a question by the chairman of this committee, concerning the Moriarty boat, said: "I had a drawing * Yes, sir; it is a one-man boat. **It may be developed, but I do not think you can make an instrument of war out of a oneman boat. It might become useful." However, when Captain Wainwright has had an opportunity to examine fully into this boat, and more in detail, doubtless he will form a still more favorable opinion of it. Mr. LESSLER. How long has it been patented?

Mr. DE KNIGHT. About a year. Some of the patents were issued about a year ago, but delay in action on applications for patents in foreign countries has retarded us in the matter of publicity here.

Mr. RIXEY. The Department seems to be against all submarine boats.

Mr. TAYLER. In the case of the Holland boat the Government took no chances at all until they completed one.

Mr. DE KNIGHT. As previously stated, the building of the first Holland boat by the Government was practically an experiment.

Mr. MORIARTY. I have myself invented several things the Government uses, and all these experiments were paid for by myself. In the construction of this boat I think they ought to give me some substantial

assistance.

Mr. DE KNIGHT. It cost Mr. Moriarty about $10,000 to develop the two inventions which the Government is now using.

Mr. RIXEY. How much is Mr. Moriarty asking now?
Mr. DE KNIGHT. Not more than $15,000.

Mr. MORIARTY. This appropriation is to be expended in the construction of a boat which will be the property of the Government when completed.

Mr. RIXEY. I note this pamphlet says "With the compliments of the Newport Manufacturing Company. Why do they not develop it? Mr. MORIARTY. That is the company of which I am president. As the Government has assisted other inventors of military appliances I believe that we are entitled to the same consideration, particularly in view of the fact of our experience in the manufacture of some of the most important appliances used in torpedo work. At the present time we are engaged in making accessory torpedo appliances for the torpedo station at Newport.

FORMERLY IN THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE.

Mr. LESSLER. Were you in the Government service?

Mr. MORIARTY. I was, for eight years. I am not employed at the station at the present time, but practically every week the officials of the torpedo station give me emergency orders for work which can only be intrusted to mechanics of a high order. By reason of my experience at the torpedo station and of my knowledge of the torpedo

service it is a very common thing for me to receive the preference where such preference can be awarded legally.

Mr. RIXEY. What position did you hold in the Government service? Mr. MORIARTY. I was an instrument maker at the torpedo station. This rating was particularly established for my benefit, so that adequate compensation could be offered which would induce me to remain at the station.

Mr. RIXEY. Do you know of any case where the use of a torpedo has seriously injured a battle ship?

EFFECTIVENESS OF TORPEDOES.

Mr. MORIARTY. Yes, sir; the Housatonic, one of the blockading fleet off Charleston, was destroyed by a torpedo. You have probably read of that attack. I know of no battle ship that has been destroyed. Mr. RIXEY. You know of no practical test in that line?

Mr. MORIARTY. I have had occasion to use them in many experimental ways, both from a dock and a torpedo boat proper.

Mr. RIXEY. But you know of no test against vessels of any kind? Mr. MORIARTY. I do not know of any, personally. The navies of all countries must believe that they could be effectively used, otherwise there would not have been built by the several naval powers over 1,000 torpedo boats and torpedo-boat destroyers. We have had a practical test on the rocks near Newport.

Mr. RIXEY. You only had one test; will you give us the result of that test?

Mr. MORIARTY. I could not give it very thoroughly, because I was not near enough to get positive information upon the subject. The experiment took place at Codington Cove, Newport, R. I., about three or four years ago.

ACCURACY IN FIRING TORPEDOES.

Mr. RIXEY. I would like to know with what accuracy you can fire a torpedo?

Mr. MORIARTY. At Newport, R. I., where the torpedo station is established, we are able to fire with great accuracy.

Mr. RIXEY. At what distance would you have to be?

Mr. MORIARTY. It would depend upon the state of the sea, the strength of the current, and the skill of the operator. There is much in being familiar with this appliance. An expert on torpedoes would be sure to have all the adjustments properly made before launching the torpedo. It is presumed that the torpedo will do its best work when about 1,000 yards from the object.

Mr. TAYLER. Do you know of any case where a torpedo has been fired and its course was such that if it had been exploded it would have blown up a vessel?

Mr. MORIARTY. Yes, sir; and in my opinion a large majority would have hit a war ship. In order to assist the operator in finding the angle to the keel of the ship at which he should discharge his torpedo you make use of an instrument called a torpedo director. With the aid of this speed director a cool man ought to do pretty accurate work.

Mr. TAYLER. Have you seen torpedoes fired at some given object? Mr. MORIARTY. The torpedoes were discharged at an imaginary