The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1882-12-26

A. Wells aptly termed the Historic lie, .
| that Great Britain built up her shipping
| bysubsidies, is unblushingly repeated; but,
| al me word subsidy" has become odious
| 10 American ears, The committee have
found substitute for it in bounty. "
I DR.. Roach will not be particnlar about the
Ssrrns- al that he desires IL the money to
| enable him to save thjrty-four dollars per
| ton on every steamship that he builds for
| the Pacific Mail Company or for the West
Indian and Brazil trade. This is precisely
what this section of the bill amounts to-
mo more and no less unless is for the
benefit of other shipbuilders who are not
likely to compete with Mr. Roach in his
speeialties.
With all the opportunity this committee
| has had FOR acquiring information its
fmembers display lamentable ignorance
| of history and of facts. One instance has
just been noted. Another is. evident in
| this paragraph
Up to 1854 The English laws relating to
shipping were substantially the same as
ours. At that tine the English PaIlia-
ment began complete revision of her
merchant shipping statutes 80 as to re-
move every obstacle and give every
facility to British shipping, and from year
to year, as the Board of Trade has recon-
mepded, England has been legislating in
theainterest OF her merchant marine Dur
ing this whole period nothing has been
done by the American Congress to meet
England in this direction. Our merchant
shipping laws remain substantially the
same as they were originally framed more
than fourseore years ago. They were all
that were needed so long as the English
laws were dhes same Our error was in
not initiating England. so as to give our
merchant marine the same advantages
in this respect that English shipping
enjoys.
Now the prohibtion TO purchase foreign
built ships was Repealed in 1849, not in
1854, in, which latter year foreign built
ships were permitted the additional priv
ilege of engaging in the coast trade: but
the ail-important change-the one for
which we have SO persistently contended-
was made five years before.
With the last sentence of this quotation all
free ships advocates agree. Why does
not the committee recommend ite Why
does it stultify itself by proposing to
throw off a few light burdens while it
maintains the dead weight of prohibition,
which il acknowledges is an error.
The cofnnfttee, efsconrse, goes to the
Delaware fer its facts, and in so doing un
Intentionally throws considerable light on
a matter that has puzzled as, reconciiing
in degree some of Mr.. Roachess contra
dictory figures
For the purpose of illustrating what
would be the practical working of the
foregoing plan we have obtained from the
Delaware River Ship Building and Engine |
Works a schedule of the materials actually
usedi constructing first class -passen-
ger and freight steamships for the Pacific |
trade OF Q. 131 tons each, having speed |
of thirteen knots. Ii appears that 3. 709, +
$40 pounds of iron, mainly in the form |
ofsplates, angles and bars, were used IN |
the Construction of the hull, engines, boil |
ers, &c, each steamship. The duty on
iron il imported in these forms would aver
age under the presentlta about SEQ for I
each ton of the steamship. The duty on
the other materials used inIthe hull, equip |
ment and furniture would carry the draw
back allowed from the Treasury to about
s34. As the cost of each of the steam
shipsto which we have referred was 1885,
BIT, or $134 per ton. the net cost of the
plan after sleducting the draw
back would be about 800 per ton, which,
rom all the Information obtained from
Epur committee, would be substantially
he cost of a similar steamship built upon
.he Clyde
] This shows us how, with all the disad-
vantages q high cost labor, Mr. Roach
an builda cheap ship. a first class pass
snger and FREIGHT steamship cannot be
built on the CLYDE for one hundred dollars
Ter ton. nor for one hundred and thirty |
CDR dollars per ton. Oneof tive things
clear either that Mr. Roach eanbuild
! frat class steamship : cheaper than she
an be built on9the Clyde, in which case
he does not need the bounty, or else that
he,elass Of ships that has always been
in building, and which this bill
proposes to perpetuate, are not safe and
ecure for life property. Is it not clear
hat we need something more than is offer
d us in the protection of home
market like thisf
HE PuHLTC LANDS OF THE limited