The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-05-22


We have received several communications
protesting, with lively emphasis, against
any change in our navigation laws which
would admit foreign built ships to the pro-
lection of the American flag. One writer
asserts that we already possess more vessels
than can find employment, and that hun.
dreds lie idle at our docks. This is perfectly
true, but it does not sustain the argument
sought to be founded upon it, that the pro-
posed change in the navigation laws would
merely increase this burden Of unemployed
property. The writer overlooks an impor-
two classes-that engaged in the coasting
trade and that employed in foreign COM
merce. Foreign ships are totally excluded
from our coasting trade, whereas the
vessels of all other nations are perfectly free
to carry freights between this country and
foreign ports. The American vessels which
lie idle at the wharves belong principally to
the class enrolled for the coasting trade.
Their want Of employment is due to the
stagnation of our domestic commerce which
has existed since the panic of 1873. The
advocates of free trade in ships have never
contemplated the admission of foreign built
vessels to the coasting trade of the United
States. They are willing that American
shipbuilders should continue to enjoy the
monopoly they have always possessed of
this great branch of our commerce, which,
in prosperous times, gives employment to
nearly as much tonnage as our whole foreign
trade But American shipbnilders are not
benefited by the law which forbids
American merchants to buy cheap ships for
the foreign trade, because the foreign trade,
unlike the coasting trade, can be conducted
in foreign bottoms. The great and profita-
BILE lines of steamships which ply between
this port and England, France and Ger
many, and monopolize the best part Of the
carrying trade, have reason to rejoice in our
narrow and restrictive navigation laws,
which exclude Americans from participation
in this lucrative business. What difference
does it make to American shipbuilders
whether these great steamships are owned
by Americans or foreigners? The profits
of construction do not come to them
now any more than they would If Ameri-
can merchants were free to buy such
ships in the cheapest markets. The
profits of navigating ships are much greater
than the profits of building them. Why
should this country lose the profits of both
branches of business? The loss OF one is
quite sufficient. The opponents of free
trade in ships reason rs If American ship
builders would be deprived Of employment
by a change in the navigation laws. This is
absurd. Are they now building the great
steamships which are the vehicles of our
foreign trader Certainly they are not; and
what difference can it make to them whether
these foreign built ships yield the large
profits Of navigation to American or to for
eign owners? Our commerce goes in for
eign built ships in spite of the navi-
CATION laws relaxation Of those
laws would bring q rich harvest to
American shipowners and increase the
wealth OF the country without injury to
American shipbuilders. They do not build
the ocean steamships now, and might not
build them then but they would be no
worse off than they are at present, and the
country would save some part OF the eighty
or a hundred million dollars it now phys to
foreign shipowners for freights. This diff
ference OF eighty millions in the balance OF
trade would facilitate specie payments by
forestalling a drain Of gold for freight
charges to the owners of foreign ships
The HERALD does not advocate q radical
change of our navigation laws. 1t is willing
that the coasting trade should continue to
be the monopoly that it has always been.