Just One Battleship.

New York Times 100 years ago today, July 30, 1912:
Democrats Will Not Try in the House for More.
Special to The New York Times.
    WASHINGTON, July 29.— One battleship will be the ultimate decision of the Democracy of the House on the naval increase programme for this year. The leaders of the party have concluded that they will make a mistake if the caucus decision against all ships is rigidly adhered to, and they think that enough Democrats are favoring the two battleship proposals advocated by Representative Sulzer to bring about the granting of two through coalition with the Republicans if the opponents of any battleships do not yield for one.
    When the conference report on the naval bill is called up Mr. Sulzer will try to have the House agree to the Senate amendment providing for two
battleships. A canvass of the House indicates that this motion will not carry, and that the Democrats will have enough votes to send the battleship programme back into conference. Then there will be another caucus, in which the Democrats will agree upon one battleship, and this is expected to be the solution of the question. Floor Leader Underwood is in favor of one battleship.
    Perry Belmont, who presented the naval plank to the Baltimore Platform Committee, to-day wired Mr. Sulzer as follows, from Bar Harbor:
    I hope and believe you will succeed in preventing a repudiation or the Democratic platform on the subject of an adequate navy and the policy outlined in the resolution adopted by the Baltimore Convention, a policy rendered imperatively necessary by recent events, and especially on account of the responsibility of our Government in the Panama Canal zone.
    Bernhardt Wall of New York, a Past Department Commander of the United Spanish War Veterans, indicated that a repudiation of the navy plank would be resented at the next encampment of his organization. Mr. Wall wrote to Mr. Sulzer:

    I read this morning that you are willing to bolt the caucus which tabled the resolution calling for two battleships.
    I hope it is so. It is a matter of ordinary patriotism to protect the country. One lesson, such as 1898, is sufficient. Spend a few dollars now and save many hurriedly lavished when trouble comes, and a great deal of trouble and anxiety. The proposed plan of two battleships is conservative enough.
    This is unofficial. I speak as an Individual. But the National encampment at Atlantic City next September is going to express itself in no uncertain language. We can remember the unpreparedness of our country better than others.