The Fight For Two Ships.

New York Times 100 years ago today, July 28, 1912:
    An attempt will be made to-morrow to hold another caucus of Democratic members of the House of Representatives and agree to a compromise on one battleship. Two is the number required. No intelligent objection to the construction of two new warships this year has been advanced by anybody. Congressmen disappointed in their expectations of appropriations for their districts propose to punish the whole country by hampering the upbuilding of the Navy. They are the same politicians, by the way, as The Army and Navy Journal suggested last week, who are proposing to "twist the lion's tail" because Great Britain has politely protested against a manifest misinterpretation of the canal treaty. They think it the height of patriotism to go about with chips on their shoulders, but the means of National defense they consider less important than public building contracts in their own constituencies.
    Congressman Sulzer has taken a manly and truly patriotic stand in refusing to be bound in this matter of great National importance by the dictates of any party caucus. The Increase of the Navy is not a political matter. Democrats and Republicans alike throughout the country are anxious to have our Navy kept in its proper relative position. If no battleships are built this year we are bound to fall behind. If only one is built we shall still fail to keep our place, unless three are to be built next year.
    Mr. Sulzer has found efficient support among his Democratic colleagues. If he stands out bravely he may win the fight. He can truthfully warn his fellow-members, if they persist in viewing the upbuilding of the Navy in a sordid, partisan way, that many votes for the Democratic candidates will be lost in November through adherence to the mistaken policy of crippling the Navy.