Morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven [Conn.]) 1848-1894, 1884-03-24

surplus cotton, grain, cheese, butter and
other products of unprotected agriculture
transported abroad, and the largest part goes
In English free trade vessels. This fact is
worth all the figures and theories ever writ
ten or put together. have not the figures
BY me to state the amount paid by Americans
last year to foreigners rs freight on exports
OF the products of unprotected American
labor, but know that it was many millions
of dollars, much larger sum, in any event,
than any one protected industry paid into
We treasury.
emp asserts that $500, 900 in an American
shipyard will buy as well-built steamer, as
good freight-carrier. as $500, 600 in Brit
ish yard. Harsh language is never convinc-
ing, SO will simply ask, if this statement be
true, how comes it that the ships are not
built? Taxation is what "M and his party
cry for and claim that by it industry is slim
ulated; therefore, it would seem to follow, the
greater the taxation, the greater the stimula-
ton. Are foreign vessels exempt
from port charges that domestic ves-
sells have to pay? ''M" asserts and
for arguments sake will accept his figures,
that free trade Great Britain finds it expedi-
ent to tax her commerce Just one-nineteenth,
in round numbers, of what protection Ameri-
ca does As result the worlds trade is
done by one nation, while the other looks on.
"M"declares his faith in the productive power
of taxation, and his steamer" illustration Is
oA 0hOOAAAAOAAJ spAOAS OAOs IL tA0 pOS-
sibility of error, I quote from his own
figures. '7--=
American vessel, cost S5O0,oOo, taxed $780,
British vessel, cost s6oo, 600. taxed $4OO.
Now, respectfully submit to any candid
mind the above figures, and very meekly
confess no words of mine can strengthen
them. One would think if taxes could pro-
duce anything the United States ought from
''M's' figures to have afioat about nineteen
times the tonnage of Great Britain. Is il
possible that I'M, or anybody else, will ssr-
iously say that American shipping died
because Americans Disseminated against their
own vessels? The marines may relish that
story; few others will. American shipping
died, and rests undisturbed in its grave, be-
cause protection could not compete with
free trade You may reduce port charges to
zero If you like, and 1t will be found that
free trade countries will run ships at
profit, while protective countries will either
run them at loss, or not at all.
Great Britain not only builds ships for her
self, but can and will build them for any
other nation that wants them and is permit
ted to buy them. This, too, when her own
vessels do more than half the carrying trade
of the world. The fact in the case is as fol-
lows: Free trade England if you like) builds
ships for the world Protection (Amsrica
with more freight to carry than any country
save Great Britain) has to hire what she is
forbidden to buy and is protected from
building. poor policy that permits charter
and forbids purchase. When we remember
that during the last period of free trade this
country enjoyed, this United States rubbed
Great Britain closely for first place in the
worlds carrying trade, the present state of
affairs looks odd. Our rebellion came, many
American ships were sold or sunk, and when
the war was over the protective policy as to
ships was reafirmed with emphasis. The re-
suit is patent to all. The Stars and Stripes
-, H..
alongside the flag of Gresce- Steep descent.
What sed it? Perfect protection
The would-be raillery of IN" is funny. He
says that under a protective tariff American
steel rails have fallen from $155 so to $37 so
per ton and infers from this that protective
tariff is great thing. OF two things one is
true: either in 1868 we paid, because of the
tariff. four times what we ought to
have paid, our rail makers are
now getting only about one quarter
what they ought to secure. 1t is pretty clear
that if the tariff made users of rails pay four
times as much as they need pay in 1868, it
was "hard lines for the users of the rail-
roads, out of whose pockets the tax came.
That gradually the price has fallen to $37 so
is perhaps good for the railroads, but triae
severe on the makers of rails. Such fright
full fall could only occur under a protective
tariff, and I fail to see how a policy that |
brings about such results is of advantage to |
nation. mt tells US, IN erect, that pro-
tectiye tariff cuts do9n p<iees- Sat- does
and the first cut it makes is off the laborers' |
wages. Free trade offers no bounties and |
needs no pensions. Who can estimate the |
total of bounties the American people, farmers |
have paid to have railroads built? |
Every rail, spiked, bad bounty stamped on !
it, and who pays such bounties? Has ''M''
forgotten that within seven years English |
rails were imported, duties paid on them, |
and then laid at lower rates than protected |
American rail makers would deliver them? |
To be sure, the quantity was rot enormous, |
but it was considerable. Quite enough to |
show the falsity OF the idea that bounti4s are |
beneficial to people, matter how |
enormous the bounties may be- Where one |
nan gets bounty many have to |
give it. Deny this who can. |
Anyone denying it has to show |
how a man can lift himself by his own waist |
band Severe fluctuations are injurious to |
any trade, and they occur more frequently |
when there is only one market to depend |
upon than when the markets of the world
are open.
In conclusion would say of ships, that if
free trade countries can build steamer for
so per cent of what it can be built here, we
cannot run in competition, if the steamers
are to all intents and purposes equally good.
No amount of sophistry will build steamers.
1t requires iron, steel and skilled labor.
American skill, that once built ships which
challenged the admiration of the world, is
for the present a ''lost art, and the policy |
that IN" advocates killed it. T. 7. B.
New Haven, March 81, 1884.