The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-04-23

Sir 70 there anything IN such triumph as this, TO be
nalionl pride Would il not excite far different emo
ton in the minds OF those who look 10 wise and just
legislation as the Chief glory OF the country
Upon what principle is H. them that we thus Justify the
grant OF this bounty this gratuy. TO enable steam
lines 10 carry freight and passengers al the expense OF the
government know that, at one time, II was said that
could without this system II was said that it a sub
stilue for navy Under that plausible and seductive
cry, many, know, carried OF; but believe that
way that we build up steam navy. Why. the very
officers who reported upon these ships when they were
examined have said, IN relation 10 them, that the term
The contract that they should be adapted to war pur
poses was Indefinite, that vessel might be used Tor
many purposes IN war, and yet not be fitted Tor war
steamers. Commodore M c. Perry and Commander X.
b. Cunningham, in their report, say;
conversion OF these vessels TO war purposes
siderable alteration would be required and though they
never be made equal those originally de
bo rendered available oil ency, and with.
out any very great disbursement of money"
Commander Cunningham, in his report. says:
The term adapted purposes, used, believe in
all contracts hereoioe made by the government, with in
divdnas or companies, IL in opinion too vague and
may in truth be said 10 be adapted pur-
poses In certain degree when she 10 capable OF trans
aud from any point TO any other point
on our Atlantic coastbe fully equal TO the severe duty OF
action as the may be-and he incapable fom the
slight construction OF her upper works OF carrying three
In the report Of the Secretary Of the Navy which is
be found in the same document, ii will be that
he distinctly epudiaes the idea that these
fit for the purpose Of war steamers Who would take
any steamer built for the purposes OF war, either
in the British American service, and attempt to main
tain competition with steamships for passengers and
freight Why not Because, in fitting steamers Tor
they necessarily heavy in their construction
that they cannot have the requisite speed TO accomplish
such purposes as the Collins liners and The Cunarders
accomplish.
Again: have heard doubted by officers OF the ma w,
in whose opinions | have great reliance, whether side
wheel steamers can be converted into efficient steam
ers. have heard il doubted whether the side wheel it.
sell does not incapacatc steamer whether does not
prevent the training OF the guns properly whether the
machinery OF such steamers not much exposed as
them be disabled the commencement of an
action whether. in short. any but ship that has its
wheel in the stern be fitted up for purposes But
these are questions with which do not NEEDLE. They
belong to experts and do not claim 10 belong to that
c lass. only speak OF such information as | have de-
rived from conversation with OF the intelligent
officers in service But suppose, for the purpose of
testing this thing that the British were to undertake TO
convert their navyhe vessels which by sailsto
The carrying OF freight and passengers, should
late them by engaging in the same business !? Suppose
that company were 10 come here from New York or
Boston, and say that, If the government would help
them, they would build such packets to move by sails
as could be converted into war ships hereafter and
that, IN the mean lime, we would give them omuch
per annum, They would carry passengers and freight,
would any one think OF agreeing TO any such PROPOSE
ton No, sir. And Yet such vessels OF commerce
could be as easily converted into shps-of war these
steamers could be used for the purposes of
war The real purpose was 10 build up a steam marine
by bountes and The aid OF government and the naval
service was rather the pretext than the object.
Then II comes TO this, that must maintain this line,
cost what il may. in this struggle OF national rivalry be-
il we do not (and that the real ground which
the appeal IS made the British will sustain their steam
ers, and then they will get the business OF transporting
by steam freight, passengers and masthat they will
thus acquire monopoly of the business, and that we
shall not have our share Clearly, them the object
aatah lIah at ht
bonniies Now, ask If that is precisely the argu
ment with which The iron men come TO us and ask tor
il is said for the Collins Ine that the British have raised
up their works BY long system of protection. They
say Give us protection that may become sufficient
ly strong and 10 Withstand The ELECTS OF COMPETE
ton" The Collins line say "Gve us this assistance
Tor while and will become self sustaining enter
prise; we will find that shall be able sustain
selves-hal the business will support itsef The iron
men say, "Give little more protection for a while
and, after some time these duties will longer be
cessary for shall be able sustain ourselves the
lace oil all competition"
There is not argument which can be used for the
support OF these steamers OF the treasury of The Uni
ted States which, TO my mind does not apply with equal
iorce to the imposition oil duties for the protection and
support OF the iron interests There is not argument
against protection TO iron which does apply my
opinion, against protection TO steam. Why what is the
complaints That you protect one class the expense
OF another. Have we not before us a memorial from
merchants and shipowners OF New York, who protest
that they injured by these which support
out VI tte treasury, tnat ne steamers compete Win
them Tor the carriage OF passengers and freight Have
We not memorial signed by most respectable merchants
and shpowner in that city altestng this iacl Is il
iruei Does il not interfere and is il proper that we
should thus give from the treasury bounes TO enter
prse which IS calculated 10 interfere with the legitimate
profits oil self sustaining business, and merio
nous one so worthy the pride OF every American heart
as that OF our great navigating interest," which heretofore
has sustained itself Look al the contrast We have.
IN relation 10 that interest, thrown the gauntlet the
world We have said TO the rest oil the world, Repeal
your discriminating duties upon tonnage and will repeal
ours All that we ask Is fair play and open and II
you can beat Us, we will take the consequences What
has been the result What has it been but triumphant
and glorious TO trying the generous self reliance OF
those who dared TO risk the EXPERIMENT. Now we have
ced thus system and is proposed that shall
plunge still deeper into system which is calculated 10
encourage the steam marine al the expense OF the other
Interests oil the community, not only inurng Them but
producing complaints jeaousies, and dssalisfsclioDs
which, IN my own opinion, well founded
Let US see how nearly these arguments analogous.
How does Il operate between seciionsi ID Is com.
planned OF the protective system, when TO apply
u 10 IRON, AMI wooens, and coitons that IL benefits
section at the expense of another How Is this Why,
you start these lines from New York She has lines sup
ported nj the expense OF the government, and rnnnng
everywhere. u you are to afford government aid and
patronage would moi justice require that YOU should give
themselves Would not justice require that you should
anord u TO some other towns in order TO develop the
sources OF the places from which other lines might start
and open trade in the country II pur-ue this
system, shall not be bound in justice 10 attend 10 other
seciionsl II give this aid TO the Collins line and
New YORK. how refuse il TO Philadelphia, and
Charleston, and Norfolk, and Baltimore, and Mobile,
and New Oreansi With wha, justice thus afford
II to the richest city in the Union and deny TO all the
ohersf desire to see New York grow desire TO see