The New York herald., 1868-06-18

| Mr. EIDRlDeE asked whether there was anything
on laDortng man or the West, from the crown OF MS
head to the sole or his foot that not taxed Tor
the benefit OF manufacturersY
Mr.. LYNCH remarked that the war, which had
nearly annihiated American commerce. had pro-
tected and stimulated the agricultural and manufac-
turing interests and those interests were to-day in
more thriving condition than they had been before
| the war. But the American built ship which had 10
pay taxes on all its materials was brought into direct
competition with a British ship which had no such
taxes. There was, therefore, no analogy between
Mr.. EIDRIDGE agreed with the gentleman from
| Maine that shipbuilding should be Tree from taxa
ton but he protested against discrimination IN favor
OF ships and against the iab0ring man.
Mr.. LYNCH said he did not agree with the gentle
man from Wisconsin. He tMr. LYNCH was in favor
OF protecting American labor and American in
| d'stry. subsequently Mr. Lynch stated that the
letter read from Bath shipbuilder came pot from
shipbuilder but shipowner. man who had
| branch of his house In Liverpool, and who was
therefore interested In keeping up the present de-
| preston in American commerce.
| Mr.. BROOKS, tdem:l OF N Y, addressed the House
in advocacy OF the bill The three great Of
country were commerce, agriculture and manu-
| factures Although American agriculture and manu-
| features were now In a high degree OF prosperity,
| steamer under the American nag excepting small
and ragged line running occasionally from the port
California to japan and China This line was Created
and protected solely by the generosity OF Congress-
without which II would not 6e Dc able to maintain
land. II mortifying spectacle to see in the
port Of New York the flags OF France, Of England and
OF the Northern countries OF Europe noatng over
ships that carried American trade and commerce and
passengers.
lish were able to build snips so much cheaper than
Americans could
Mr. BROOKS remarked that the gentleman from
Wisconsin was roguish and mischieyous In putting
that question. II for the purpose OF involving
him in tarilr and free trade argument; but he de-
clined to go into that question.
Mr.. HARDING, (rep.) OF ILL.,, inquired how the line
between California and China was able to maintain
| Mr.. BROOKS replied that that line of steamships
| the Pacific Mail Steamship Company had subsidy
OF $500000 a year for ten years for carrying the
malls and that in addition our navigation laws pre-
vent foreign vessels from entering into our coast
Mr.. ELDRIDGE inquired whether 1t would not be
good speculation for Americans who want ships to
| go TO England and buy themf
| Mr. BROOKS replied that the laws Of the country
| would not allow that to be done.
years there would not be sailor or shipbuilder in
| the country.
Mr. e DIR PC that plenty Of sailors
Mr.. BROOKS appealed to the House to reject upon
the absolute necessity Of maintaining M American
against copper or iron, not for tariff or anttartn
but he spoke for the predomnating interest Of the
| cOuntry-the protection Of the nag. Unless some
| thing was done to protect the commerce and ship
ping interests OF the country the Union nag would
| coastwse trade and between California and China.
MI: WAsnBURN, Of Wis., supported the bin He
as understand, as follows:-First, that the great
shipping interest OF the country unlike any other
the Carrying
| Of the country has fallen into the hands OF that
oSo Of ns
inflated currency consequent thereon. with the
high internal taxes high wages and the high price
OF articles entering into ship, IL is Impossible TO
build and sail an American ship in competition
| with foreign ship; and that in point Of fact no
foreign waters, and very few ships are now being
built or can BE built In the cities of New York and
believe both these statements are true am unwil
ing to see Great Britain longer reap the harvest OF
Pstuay our on the 70
will, in my Judgment, strike down no other interest.
a e
| rves no benefit from shipbuidtng, and cannot be
injured # we pass this bill Anxious to see our nag
that this bill Will greatly tend TO that result and
injure other interest OF this country shall vote
Mr. spALDINo, rep.) Of Ohio, said Il adopt the
speech OF the gentleman from Wisconsin, and ior the
Mr.. PIKE, (rep.) Of Me-, advocated the bill and
stated that he had been informed that on recent
voyage to and from Calcutta there had been only two
American ships spoken, and that naval Ofiicer had
| informed him last week that on the great
highway Of commerce between the United
from ANNAPOLIS 70 France and back again
the West India ports American ships were only
doing half the trade they used to do; and The trade
lean ships for one English to three English ships for
one American. II this bill were defeated the last
| blow at American commerce would be struck
| Mr. BRoOMALL, rep.) OF Pa, proposed TO amend
| the amendment Of his colleague (Mr. MorrilD by
adding provision that the present tari duties be
Mr. ALLISON, (rep) OF Iowa. spoke against the bill,
and said that the second section was simply propo
ston TO allow the shipcarpenters OF Maine 70 the
lumber OF New brunswick and Canada and
the iron and copper Of England and the
months OF the year at building ships. 1t was pro-
position to strike down absolutely four or five great
' Struck down By % Vicious system Of ei draWbacks IW
Why did gentlemen ask for free trade IN shipping
when they were not willing to give free trade 70 the
Westp II free trade was good for Maine, why was
| It not good for the whole country
| Mr.. BLAINE explained the difference 10 consist in
the fact that while by protection other interests were
saved from the competition OF foreign labor, the
| American built ships, on the materials OF which
high taxes had 10 be paid, came into competition on
] the ocean with the cheapy built vessels OF other
nations and could not OF course compete with them.
condition OF American shipping was an abnorma
state OF things which was haired In also by EngIishi
Mr. PILE, rep, OF No. said that although the city
which he represented (St. Louis was largely infe-
rested in copper and very largely In iron heiavored
step In the right direction. His objection TO the bill
| was that IL did not 20 far enough American ship
builders would not be able for many years. owing TO
the high price OF labor, TO compete with foreign ship
builders, and he proposed TO offer an amendment
| to allow the register and enrolment OF fine iron
steamships OF foreign construction to be used In the
transportation OF Western produce between the
mouth OF the Mississippi river and the ssaboard
cities, provided the ships be owned exclusively by
American citizens.
Mr.. BUTLER, (rep.) OF Mass, replying to the argu-
ments OF the copper interests remarked that the
people OF Massachusetts had planted about six mil
lions Of dollars around Lake Superior Ia copper
Mines the stock OF which was not worth the paper
II was written on. The fifteen vessels that we're
be built on the Kennebec river should, under pros
porous circumstances, be multiplied by ten; the
difficulty that the vessel which the ST. Johns
river could be built for afty dollars ton cost ninety
dollars ton on the Kennebec or Merrmac. With
that state Of things IL was impossible for American
commerce to exist.
Mr.. ALLISON, o means OF testing the Of the
House, moved to lay the bill on the table,
Mr.. PIKE offered to amend the bill by striking
"copper" out Of the second section.
Mr. ALLISON remarked that he would still move to
lay 1t on the table.
The question was taken and resulted yeas 50 and
nays 45--as follows
Adauua