National Republican., 1883-01-12
A Hard Days Work on the Shipping Bill in
the House Of Representatives,
Mr. Cox's Free Material Amendment Ac-
cepted as Substitute
A Few More Very Forciblo Remarks on tho Fitz-John
Porter Case in the Senate.
The Bill Passed by tlic Democrats, Aided
by Don Cameron, IIonr, and soVyelI.
TILE mnuSE.

on the agricultural appropriation bill.
Mr.. Page, chairman of the committee OF
commerce, reported back the resolution
offered by Mr.. Randall, of Pennsylvania, call
ing on the President for statement o.
the aggregate amount expended upon rive,
and harbor improvements since the begin.
ming of the governments; the amounts cx.
pended on each work within each state the
value of the Improvement; whether any
money has been expended ior the Improve
inent of any river or harbOr not within the
United States, together with such other in
formation rs he may deem it proper TO com.
municate. Adopted.
Mr.. Gambler presented the petition of ,57l
consumers of sugar in eastern Massachusetts
asking for n reduction of the duty ON sugar
Referred.
Mr.. Robinson presented similar petition
Of 5,053 citizens of Western Massachusetts,
Referred.
The consideration of
THE SHIPPING BILL
was then resumed, the section under discus.
sion being the drawback section, for which
the committee substitute is pending limiting
the amount of drawback to the amount OF
tonnage collected. TO this substitute Mr.
Candlcr's frec-ship amendment is pending.
Mr. Holman offered an amendment to the
original section, providing That 80 per cent
of the drawback received by any shipowner
shall be paid to the artisans employed in the
construction or repair of q vessel. Ifany sub
sidy were to be granted IL should be divided
equally between capital and labor.
Mr.. Hutchins opposed the pending section
Mr.. Ward, of Pennsylvania, opposed the
idea of free trade in ships. That would be
free trade in its'worst form, and no friend OF
the protection of American industry could
afford to support this idea without abandon
ing his faith or surrendcring his principles.
hr Hammond lpl att IN b, cnpt
that speech in favor of granting q subsidy
TO the Collins line of steamers, attributed by
Mr.. Robson to James X. Polk, was not de-
livcred by him, but by w. II. Polk.
Mr. Robson. Was not he the brother OF Pres-
dent Polk? lsarcastic laughter on the democratic
sldel
Mr.. Hammond replied that he supposed
the gentleman belonged TO the same family.
The bill which w. II. Poll, advocated was for
the construction Of four vessels. which were
built under the bodybuilding power of con-
gress granted by the constitution.
Mr.. Smith advocated the eighteenth section.
it was contended by its opponents that il was
only an entering wedge into the treasury. He
was willing to trust that entering wedge to
the democratic congress, which would come
in next year. If il found that the provision
was subject to abuse or might do harm, tho
law could be repealed. 1t would do no harm
to give it trial.
Mr. Townshend opposed the drawback fea-
ture of the bill. When the democrats had
had control of congress every subsidy scheme
had been defeated, and the lObbics and corri-
dors of the capitol had been cleansed Of sub
sidy seekers and jobbers who had been swarm
ing there. Now, again, congress was con-
fronted by another subsidy scheme. 1t was
not from the Pacific railways or from the Pa
cific Mail steamships, it was John Roach and
his confreres who were asking for an cnor-
nous bounty to be taken from the people
The eighteenth section would put into John
Roach's pocket 100000 every year. 1t was
not III the interest of American labor 1t
was nothing more than subsidy, and the
same arguments were put forward rs were put
forward by the Credit Mobilicr ring and by
the Pacific Mail ring.
Mr.. Reed said that he would not answer the
speech just made, for he could have answered
it any time during the last six years. but
would address himself to an opposition TO Mr..
Candler's frco-ship amendments. The project
of free ships opened no way TO the chcapening
the rates of transportation. British ships
owned by subjects OF Great Britain could
transport our merchandise MS cheaply as a
British ship owned By an American citizen.
Nor was there anything TO be gained, in Il
national point of view, by free ships; but by
building ships in American ship yards we
would put ourselves in the position, as IL
nation, to protect ourselves from attacks from
outside.
Mr.. Herbert said that the only difference
between the two parties on the floor was that
the republicans wanted to do by subsidy
what the democrats decided to accomplish
without subsidy, but by a free-ship pro-
vision.
Mr.. Dingley opposed the freo-ship amend
mcnt, which would have the effect of nulli-
flying the drawback clause.
Mr., Belmont said no one would undertake.
to say whether the provisions contained in
the original bill of the committee and in the
pending amendments would now or speedily
be sufficient to bring back under the Ameri-
can flag its proper share Of the ocean carry
ing trade. That would depend on certain
facts and circumstances respecting the rela-
tiOns of the whole present commerce of the
world to the whole present ocean CARRYING
power of the world. If the ocean CARRYING
trade of the world was at this time oyerdone
then, of course there was at the present
moment not room, in u mere business sense
for more vessels, although they might be
proftably transferred from one flag to tho
other. There were those who said that
between 1850 and 1850 the commerce of all
nations by sea- and land increased 2l0 per
cent; that the carrying power on land by
railways increased during that period
by 39S per cent, and that the
carrying power on the water by ships in
creased by about 300 per cent. At any rate ii
seemed clear that the carrying power, whether
ON land or sea, had grown in a higher ratio
than commerce had grown. There also thosu
who insist that, by reason of the increased
efficiency Of steamers, the investments in
water transportation are even now excessive
as was to be seen by the increase of ballast
entries in the several ports of the world ia
the last fifteen years. However that il might
be, he could not doubt about the present duty
ofcongress regarding the pending measures of
repeal. The government should instantly
remove its heavy hand of restraint and i'm
pediment from individual enterprise in ship
ping. Let the skill and ingenuity of Ameri-
cans be- in this matter, unhindercd by red
tape and government restrictions whenever
the favorable moment presents itself, be it
this year or next year or ten years from now. /
Let the freedom of Americans to build and to
buy vessels wherever they pleased be uncon-
strained by any federal law, and the day
might not be so far oil when, not only our |
commercial, but onr political needs upon the |
the sea would be satisfied. Gentlemen ON the |
other side had repeatedly cOnjurcd up tho |
specter of general war in Europe ] { such an I
event should really occur the tree-ship clause /
would at once become necessity
Mr.. Cannon opposed the eighteenth section. |
He did not believe that il was legitimate, or |
would be found practicable; and so far rs u |
national security was concerned, he did not /
see the necessity for the passage Of the bill. '
He supported the trec-ship amendment.
Mr.. WhitthOno stated that whlo he would .
vote for the free-ship clause he questioned /
whether IL would do anything for the Amei- .
can carrying trade,
Mr. Marsh supported the bill, including the .
eighteenth section. ltwas true Il took money