Seattle Throws Its Hat in the Ring for a Federal Gun Works
Washington, Oregon and California are all angling for the new Pacific coast ordnance factory, and Seattle is already lobbying — with Senator Squire arguing that Puget Sound's new dry dock settles the matter.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
WASHINGTON CITY, Aug. 29. — [Special.] — The president has not yet fulfilled an act of congress which directed him to appoint a board of three army and three navy officers to select a site for a new ordnance factory on the Pacific slope. This board will have to be constituted soon if its report is to be ready for congress at the next session. The reason for including navy with army officers on this board is that the factory is to be available for furnishing the batteries of ships as well as forts.
There is quite a rivalry over the question of a site. Both Oregon and Washington want it, and Seattle has already taken active steps looking to a presentation of her claims. California wants the gun factory at Benicia, but both the Columbia river and Puget sound are presenting a stronger claim.
This board will probably be appointed as soon as the president returns, and the rapid development of Puget sound and the construction of the dry dock in those waters is very apt to give the Sound a great preference over other points. In his reports to congress Senator Squire presented an argument in favor of the gun factory on the coast, and the following, from an officer who may be selected as one of the examining board, bears out everything that has been claimed by the Washington senator:
"The armament for a Pacific coast gun factory, whatever site may be selected, rests upon the great number of guns and mortars required for our coast defences and the inability of Watertown unaided to supply these, except after a great many years. Of course assistance will be given by the 100 heavy guns and the 12-inch mortars to be made under private contract, but as the total number of guns necessary to be required on the Pacific coast is estimated at over 500, it will be seen that there is an abundant field for a new factory there. There are also certain military advantages in having two gun factories to count upon, with one of them situated upon the Pacific coast. The cost of labor and of fuel on that coast is a great drawback to the present plan, but may be offset somewhat by a saving in the cost of transporting the finished guns by rail across the continent."
“Both Oregon and Washington want it, and Seattle has already taken active steps looking to a presentation of her claims.”
In 1892 Seattle was a young town auditioning for a piece of the federal defense budget, and the pitch was exactly the one the region still makes: deep water, a new dry dock, and a cheaper rail haul to the interior. Puget Sound got the navy yard and the dry dock at Bremerton, but the gun factory went nowhere — a reminder that winning a federal installation has always been a contest between rival Western ports, not a sure thing.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.