The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1877-06-09
Our 0liu.
American Shipping.

tdde pitiful TO contemplate. In 1856 wt
carried five-eights of all our own commerce
; and good part Of that of the worlds al
large besides. Now we carry less thar
, one-fourth Of our own commerce and moth
ing for other countries We pay annually
for our own goods more than $50, 900, ,00C
in freights to the owners Of foreign vessels
the total annual value Of all our yessell
built for the foreign trade being one-tenth
that amount. If our shippers could gel
back the control Of American commerce
they co I'D almost afford, out Of the mere
profits on freights, to pension the owner
Of our shipyards aud bribe them to rest idle
The trouble lies entirely in our naviga-
ton laws, which forbid us to buy vessels
abroad and obtain American registry foi
them. Iron 81, ps are cheaper than wooden
ones, iron steamers than wooden steamers
and this class of vessels can be bought on
the Clyde or at Birkenhead for from Is
to 20 per cent. less than the price at which
they can be built in this country. The
consequence is that the American-built
ships ard steamers, even if we could afford
to build them at all, could not compete
with the Clyde-built vessels, and 50 we are
driven out of the carrying trade altogether.
The root Of political economy is expe-
diency. There are no arbitrary rules in
this science. The Navigation Laws were
originally adopted to encourage the devel-
opment Of American ship-building and
American commence pari pasSl. Whether
or not they had that effect originally, it is
certain that they have no such effort now.
There is no American ship-building, and
there is no commerce in American bot
toms. Either the principle of protection
underlying the Navigation Laws was fall
lacious, or it has now lost its effect. As
a remedy, the Navigation Laws should be
revised, amended aud modernized to suit
our present occasions.
What we now need is free trade in
ships, in order that we may put the
American flag at the masthead and Amer
lean seamen in the forecastle Of cheap
foreign-built ships, and, with the plethora
of freights and the cheap insurance secur-
ed to US during the pending great Euro
pean quarrel by our enviable position as
non-combatants, once more enter into
competition with the con mercial States of
Europe for the carrying trade of the
world. The Navigation Laws must be SO
amended as to give US free trade in ships
in order that we can buy oreign-built
vessels, register them in our custom-houses
and feed the world by means of them.
This is a matter upon which all our
Boards of Trade are agreed, and it is only
interested shipbuilders and doetrinaire
protectionists who stick at policy for the
sake Of appearing consistent, that now
oppose this necessary re 'ision Of the obso-
lete statutes-statutes which were adopt
ed, be it remembered, SO far back as 1903.
To this latter class Of opponents belong
the writers of the New York Tribune, un-
willing to have any bread because they
cannot have the whole loaf The class of
thick and thin proCectionists also oppose
it, because their system is shaking and
they need the support of the shipbuilders
in order to keep their "ring" from being
broken. The Tribune argues speciously,
that "when American shipyards are turn
ing out vessels which foreign purchasers
prefer, at the price, to any which they can
buy elsewhere, there seems to be little
reason either to hope or fear that Ameri-
cans, if they were permitted, would make
haste to supply the deficiencies of our
merchant service by buying inferior ships
at higher price" At the price But
what foreigner will buy one of John
Reaches Chester-built ships when he can
get one Of the Lairds at Birkenhead for
20 per cent. less?
The Tribune is perfectly right in saying
that the decadence Of American shipping
did not begin with the appearance of con-
federate cruisers on the ocean. 1t began
further back--in 1886 in fact. The
cause was not the introduction of steam, as
the Tribune vainly imagines, but the use
Of iron for both steamers and sailing
vessels. An iron ship lasts longer than
wooden one, needs fewer repairs and car
ries more freight, hence, even leaving out
fist cost, is cheaper in every way. But
the British have been building iron ships
for twenty years, and they have the yards,
the models, the skilled labor and machine
ry, the capital and the materials, all ena-
bling them to do the work cheaper than
we possibly can. Uutil John Roach can
compete with the Lairds, our merchants
ought to be permitted to buy their iron
ships abroad. When Mr. Roach does
compete with the Clyde and Mersey
builders, our merchants may be trusted to
to buy their ships at home.
Commerce we have already, but we need
our own ships to divert it from indirect
channels into direct ones. Great Britain
now does most Of our carrying trade for
us, and it suits her to force us TO get our
supplies from abroad through London and
Liverpool. Thus We have to pay extra
freight to the British ship owners and
commissions to the British merchats for
every ton of produce which breaks bulk in
Great Britain instead Of coming to us
direct, as it should do, in the natural
course Of trade.
The arguments for prompt and efficient
action In this matter are too numerous to
be recited. They appeal to the common
sense Of every one. The opportunities
afforded by great European war are such
as no nation situated as ours is could af-
ford to let slip without stultifying itself
American ship-builders are not benefited
by the restrictions imposed by the naviea.
ton laws. The commerce is not driven
oil. II is merely transferred to foreign
bottoms The great lines Of steamers a
New York are all owned abroad aud carry
all select freight. American ship-owners
are not able to compete with them in
higher priced American-built ships. and
as the law forbids the registering Of YES
sells foreign-built, our shippers must stand
idle by and see foreigners put all thei,
freights into his pocket. The profits 3
commerce are lager than those Of shin.
building, but ", sacrifice both lines q
profit by our dog-in-the-manger policy
There is no profit on freights, because ",
I has 4I., - II.