The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-08-07

lines WlGnDTaAll MS q means U! SetllhlG u ltiBeL
portion of her trade from the Chambers Of
! Commerce of the city Of New York, city Of
Memphis, city of st. Louis, Philadelphia
Board Of Trade, Merchants Exchange of
Pittsburg, Board Of Trade Of Omaha, Cotton
Exchange of Philadelphia, Board Of Trade Of
| New Brunswick, various influential citizens
outside of these bodies from the cities Of Bos-
! ton, New York and Philadelphia, and from
| the Postal Convention Of Old Point Comfort
where 800 delegates from thirty Southern
| cities assembled Notwithstanding this very
abundant proof of the necessity for this Brazil
| mail line OF steamships, a Senator from Della
ware calls 1t an Outrageous proposition and
| Especial Legislation in favor OF one man"
| John Roach.
| Let us consider some of the other obiec-
tions urged against the measure. The Sena-
| tor from Delawares assertions as to Its being
| Outrageous and for the benefit Of one man
| is answered by the petitions referred to above,
| A Senator from Maryland spoke Of the bill
| establishing o mail route from New York via
Norfolk and New Orleans via Galveston to
| Rio Janelro as an attempt to foster O terrible
| monopoly to the injury OF Baltimore, whose
citizens had built up large coffee trade by
means OF sailing vessels, and during fifty
| years had been satisfied with this means Of
communication. Well, we do not complain OF
| Baltimore merchants on this account. II sail
| ing vessels suit them it Is well, but when they
present protest against New York or New
| Orleans having steamers for carrying the
| sells do not suit us, and many other commu-
mites agree with us In the assertion that they
never can compete with England and France,
| who by means OF steamships almost monOp-
olize the trade of South America, and we can
| not therefore regard the protest Of our BaIti-
more friends, and indorse their efforts in
| fighting steamships lines with sailing vessels.
Our experiences would appear to teach us
better.
And again. to show the absolute folly of
plnIr n Dnfraat byc or ar G tho
tor from Maryland even proved that, in this
| fifty years 'sof building up trade with sail
| ing. vessels one trip from Baltimore to Rio
had been made in twenty-six days, and
it was not much saving in time to give malls
to steamships, and this, too, in the face Of the
| fact that the bill under consideration required
| the steamships to be contracted with to be of
| a speed of thirteen miles per hour-which
| would guarantee the trip in about twenty to
| twenty-five days time. We cannot treat this
argument seriously. AS we'll might the fiat
| hoatmen of the Mississippi river protest
against the Postmaster Generals SO arrang
| ing the schedule Of mail lettings as to shut
a steamboat monopoly to the injury of their
| me-honored safe and reliable iatboats Of
| "our daddies."
| Besides the proposition being Outrageous"
and fostering d hateful monopoly" it was
urged by another Senator that it was Gun
constitutional" Poor old constitution! How
many wrongs even are done in thy namel It
IS true that the constitution only provides
that Congress may establish pOstoffiCes and
post routes, but had the worthy trainers gone
farther and provided for steamship. railroad
and telegraph lines though they might have
anticipated these modes of communication
they would have risked having their heads
shaved and spending the balance of their
days in an insane asylum, instead of going
down to honored graves. Therefore, would
rather attempt to refute the argument than
by such results had the constitution per-
feetly clear on this subject to the Senator's
mind
The statutes Of the United States now
authorize the Postmaster General to make
contracts to carry the mails upon the OCEAN
and to appoint mail agents on steamships. but
limits the compensation to "sea postage"
Does the limit make the statutes constitu-
tional, and the extension of the compensation
to certain rate per mile place it outside of
the constitution? 1t was not so regarded
when in = the Collins line of steamships
by an act OF Congress, was allowed S per
York and Liverpool, and it will scarcely be
said that since that time we have improved
in our reverence for that instrument or had
some new light thrown in upon it to enable
rs more clearly to see what it was intended
to mean.
But another stumbling block-it was sub
sidy! | admit that the word sounds badly,
but is it rightly applied to the payment Of
jectional sense.
The term Subsidy" as condemned by State
conventions and by resolutions of the House Of
Representatives, should not be applied to
reasonable compensation paid for steamship
service And ] believe the amount named in
the bill now before Congress- $50 per mile per
annum, or 50 so per mile by the trip, is not
unreasonable. England, while contending for
this very Brazil trade, paid to her steamships
So per mile q trip and France paid by aver
O. Of II Ill.,
trade, reduced the compensation to about
thirty cents yer ounce on letters, and now our
steamers are expected to compete for trade IN
which the English and French steamships are
securely established, with q compensation of
only six cents per letter. Unless the same en-
lightened view is taken OF this subject by our
government, and the same means mployed
in establishing steamship lines in the South
American trade, as did other nations we
must be forever content to see England
France and Germany monopolize it, to the in
jury Of our agricultural and mechanical in
dustrieS
The argument Of Kentucky Senator that
our tariff prevents exchanges Of our products
therefore the Brazil line would fail, "subsidy
Or no subsidy" Is not strong-L might say
was very thin. Nne-tenths of our imports
from Brazil being free coffee, and as we take
from that country over S45,000,O0O in her
products, and only return of ours a little over
we cannot see that our perncious tariff has
anything to do with the balance of trade be-
ing SO much against us.
But to conclude. For these reasons | am
persuaded that we have asked nothing I'M
reasonable from Congress. It is not neces-
sary now to state why we did not succeed in
the three measures have referred to. But it
is very important to consider what we should
40 to help them to success the next session.
This, I think, can be done by conversation
with commercial men at their homes. by
means Of the press and by holding conven-
ton in New Orleans during the coming fall
or winter. And, in my opinion, the general
subjects treated in this article should be con-
sldered by the proposed convention.
Myexperienee in such meetings of CONNER
cial men warn me from attempting too much.
or even allowing the door to be opened for the
discussion Of any purely sectional questions.
Above all, the questions of the tariff should
be avoided.
[ will concisely restate the measures for
which we should work, and am done.
.First-The Improvement Of the navigation
of the Mississippi river and its tributaries, by