Canada's First Submarines : Canada's First World War Experience
Menu 

Canada’s First Submarines

Canada’s First Submarines

2 Responses

  1. Spaniard
    Spaniard at | | Reply

    Submarines:

    The first action of the Borden Government in connection. with the War was to purchase two submarines for the defence: of our Pacific Coast.
    COAST WAS UNPROTECTED.

    The coast was entirely without protection because there was no Canadian Navy to protect it. It was known that there was a
    squadron of German cruisers in South American waters that might easily make a dash for Victoria, Vancouver and Prince Rupert
    before British or Japanese warships in the Pacific could head them off. Thus, at the very outbreak of hostilities, actual war demon-·
    strated to the Canadian people the need of a Canadian navy in Canadian waters, to protect Canadian coasts and Canadian
    shipping.

    It was under these circumstances that the Borden Government undertook to make up for the lack of a Canadian Navy by going to
    Seattle where they purchased two submarines which. had been built by the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey fof’ the Chilean
    Government but were rejected by the Naval Commission of the Chilean Government, as being unit for service, lacking buoyancy and considerably out of date as to style and pattern.

    The two submarines were built in New Jersey and shipped to Seattl€ for assembling, and were completed and were being subjected
    to trial tests for some months. The Chilean Govern:ment had sent the Chairman of their Naval Commission, Captain Plaza, to Seattle
    to witness the official trials, and accept, on -behalf of the Chilean Government, the two submarines.

    SUBMARINES REJECTED BY CHILE.
    The following is an extract from a statement which Capt. :Plaza, Chairman of the Chilean Naval Commission, gave to the -Press, and
    which was published in the Seattle Sunday Times of .July 26, 1914.

    “I can only confirm the report you have, that the two submarines built here for my government have not been accepted and that at
    this time they do not meet the full requirements of the contract between the Government of Chile and the Electric Boat Company
    of New Jersey.”

    Commenting on this statement by the Chilean expert, the “Times said:

    “Considering all the angles in the cast Jt is evident that the incident of the rejection of the Iquique and Antafolta.ta (the two
    submarines afterwards purchased by Canada) will cause a mild sen.ation in Coast shipbuilding a. well as in naval circles.
    It is apparent however, that aside from the discovery that the two submarines lack the proper buoyancy to make certain
    their safety and efficiency, they are considerably out of date as to style and pattern. They were designed ),: :several years
    ago, and, it is known they do not compare 3 with the type of submarines now building here and elsewhere for the United
    States Government. In fact, it is understood, were the two submarines satisfactory in point of safety and efficiency, they
    would scarcely measure up in standards of destructiye power, speed and other requirements to the submarines recently
    built or on the ways in various ship yards of the ~ country.”

    The Seattle Times has wide circulation in Victoria and it is -:fair to assume that the facts regarding the submarines were well
    known there.

    This was on July 26th. Immediately this report was made, ‘ Mr. J. V. Patterson, President of the Seattle Construction and
    Dry Dock Company, the shipbuilding firm who had assembled -the boats in Seattle, went to Victoria, so it is stated, and
    interviewed Sir Richard McBride.

    AND WHAT HAPPENED !
    Sir Richard McBride immediately agreed to pay $1,150,000, ior these two rejected boats and wired the Borden Government
    were at Ottawa to confirm his purchase, which they did. I In the House of Commons on_February 11th, Dr. Wm. Fugsley,
    M.P. for St. Johns brought this matter to the attention of the Government and in doing so stated,”

    I am informed ori authority which I believe to be reliable that the original contract price was $387,000 for each submarine.
    That made the original contract for the two submarines $774,000. I am told that after contract was entered into an extra
    torpedo tube and some other extras were previded which brought the contre.ct, price up to $900,000. My information is
    from the Pacific Coast.”

    WHAT DEFENCE DID THE GOVERNMENT MAKE?
    Absolutely none, except to state that Sir Richard McBride had paid $1,150,000, for the boats and that the Borden Govern:
    ment has reimbursed him to this extent.

    WHY WERE THREE DRAFTS DRAWN FOR THIS AMOUNT?
    On examination of the Auditor General before the Public Accounts Committee on March 31st, 1915, (page 401) it is shown
    that three. drafts were drawn for amounts as follows, totalling $1,150,000.
    No. 15862 on the Canadian Bank of Commerce,·
    N.y….. ……………………………… ……………………….$500,000.00
    No. 15883 on the ‘Canadian Bank of Commerce, .
    N.y…………………………………………………………… 399,437.50
    No. 84894 on the Canadian Bank of Commerce,
    Seattle………….. …………….. …………… ……………….. 249,961.00

    The endorsements on these cheques confirm what Dr. Pugsley had stated in the House, namely that $900,000,
    (less commission), went to New York in payment of the submarines and that $250,000 (less commission), went
    to Mr. J. V. Patterson of Seattle N ow we will quote what the Auditor General stated in regard to these endorsements,”
    With regard to the two New York drafts which were drawn in favour of Mr. J. V. Patterson, they were endorsed “Pay to the
    -order of the Electric Boat Company, signed J. V. Patterson, and the Electric Boat Company had .endorsed them ‘.’ A.
    R. Grant, Vice-President.”

    It can therefore be assumed that these two drafts totalling $900,000, less commission were received and cashed by the
    Electric Boat Company of New Jersey.

    S.V.P. extracted from the “War Contract Scandals,” Public Accounts Committee of the House of Commons Ottawa 1915.

    .

    What about the third draft for $250,000, (less commission). This was payable to J. V. Patterson of Seattle and endorsed
    by J. V. Patterson and had the stamp of the Canadian Bank of Commerce, Seattle.

    This should be sufficient proof that $250,000 went elsewhere than to the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey.

    ANOTHER APPARENT LOSS TO THE COUNTRY OF $250,000.

  2. Spaniard
    Spaniard at | | Reply

    Submarines:

    The first action of the Borden Government in connection. with the War was to purchase two submarines for the defence: of our Pacific Coast. COAST WAS UNPROTECTED.

    The coast was entirely without protection because there was no Canadian Navy to protect it. It was known that there was a squadron of German cruisers in South American waters that might easily make a dash for Victoria, Vancouver and Prince Rupert before British or Japanese warships in the Pacific could head them off. Thus, at the very outbreak of hostilities, actual war demon-strated to the Canadian people the need of a Canadian navy in Canadian waters, to protect Canadian coasts and Canadian shipping.

    It was under these circumstances that the Borden Government undertook to make up for the lack of a Canadian Navy by going to Seattle where they purchased two submarines which. had been built by the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey fof’ the Chilean Government but were rejected by the Naval Commission of the Chilean Government, as being unit for service, lacking buoyancy and considerably out of date as to style and pattern.

    The two submarines were built in New Jersey and shipped to Seattle for assembling, and were completed and were being subjected to trial tests for some months. The Chilean Govern:ment had sent the Chairman of their Naval Commission, Captain Plaza, to Seattle to witness the official trials, and accept, on-behalf of the Chilean Government, the two submarines.

    SUBMARINES REJECTED BY CHILE.
    The following is an extract from a statement which Capt. :Plaza, Chairman of the Chilean Naval Commission, gave to the -Press, and which was published in the Seattle Sunday Times of .July 26, 1914.

    “I can only confirm the report you have, that the two submarines built here for my government have not been accepted and that at
    this time they do not meet the full requirements of the contract between the Government of Chile and the Electric Boat Company
    of New Jersey.”

    Commenting on this statement by the Chilean expert, the “Times said:

    “Considering all the angles in the cast Jt is evident that the incident of the rejection of the Iquique and Antafolta.ta (the two submarines afterwards purchased by Canada) will cause a mild sen.ation in Coast shipbuilding a. well as in naval circles. It is apparent however, that aside from the discovery that the two submarines lack the proper buoyancy to make certain their safety and efficiency, they are considerably out of date as to style and pattern. They were designed ), several years ago, and, it is known they do not compare 3 with the type of submarines now building here and elsewhere for the United States Government. In fact, it is understood, were the two submarines satisfactory in point of safety and efficiency, they would scarcely measure up in standards of destructiye power, speed and other requirements to the submarines recently
    built or on the ways in various ship yards of the country.”

    The Seattle Times has wide circulation in Victoria and it is fair to assume that the facts regarding the submarines were well known there.

    This was on July 26th. Immediately this report was made, Mr. J. V. Patterson, President of the Seattle Construction and Dry Dock Company, the shipbuilding firm who had assembled -the boats in Seattle, went to Victoria, so it is stated, and interviewed Sir Richard McBride.

    AND WHAT HAPPENED !
    Sir Richard McBride immediately agreed to pay $1,150,000, ior these two rejected boats and wired the Borden Government were at Ottawa to confirm his purchase, which they did. I In the House of Commons on February 11th, Dr. Wm. Fugsley, M.P. for St. Johns brought this matter to the attention of the Government and in doing so stated,”

    I am informed ori authority which I believe to be reliable that the original contract price was $387,000 for each submarine. That made the original contract for the two submarines $774,000. I am told that after contract was entered into an extra torpedo tube and some other extras were previded which brought the contre.ct, price up to $900,000. My information is from the Pacific Coast.”

    WHAT DEFENCE DID THE GOVERNMENT MAKE?
    Absolutely none, except to state that Sir Richard McBride had paid $1,150,000, for the boats and that the Borden Government has reimbursed him to this extent.

    WHY WERE THREE DRAFTS DRAWN FOR THIS AMOUNT?
    On examination of the Auditor General before the Public Accounts Committee on March 31st, 1915, (page 401) it is shown that three drafts were drawn for amounts as follows, totalling $1,150,000.

    No. 15862 on the Canadian Bank of Commerce,·
    N.y….. ……………………………… ……………………….$500,000.00
    No. 15883 on the ‘Canadian Bank of Commerce, .
    N.y…………………………………………………………… 399,437.50
    No. 84894 on the Canadian Bank of Commerce,
    Seattle………….. …………….. …………… ……………….. 249,961.00

    The endorsements on these cheques confirm what Dr. Pugsley had stated in the House, namely that $900,000, (less commission), went to New York in payment of the submarines and that $250,000 (less commission), went to Mr. J. V. Patterson of Seattle N ow we will quote what the Auditor General stated in regard to these endorsements,” with regard to the two New York drafts which were drawn in favour of Mr. J. V. Patterson, they were endorsed “Pay to the -order of the Electric Boat Company, signed J. V. Patterson, and the Electric Boat Company had endorsed them ‘.’ A. R. Grant, Vice-President.”

    It can therefore be assumed that these two drafts totalling $900,000, less commission were received and cashed by the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey.

    What about the third draft for $250,000, (less commission). This was payable to J. V. Patterson of Seattle and endorsed by J. V. Patterson and had the stamp of the Canadian Bank of Commerce, Seattle.

    This should be sufficient proof that $250,000 went elsewhere than to the Electric Boat Company of New Jersey.

    ANOTHER APPARENT LOSS TO THE COUNTRY OF $250,000.

    S.V.P. extracted from the “War Contract Scandals,” Public Accounts Committee of the House of Commons Ottawa 1915.

    .

Leave a Reply