New-York tribune., 1886-05-23
nrvocpATJC NOTIONS or ECONOMY.

EOOu manners
DFvOCRATIC NOTIONS OF ECONOMY.
\, one was surprised that the Democratic
House rejected the amendments TO the Iost
Office Appropriation bill submitted Dy tne
Republican Senate providing for the convey
ance in American vessels OF the foreign mails
to Southern and Oriental ports That insane
crv of Subsidy" which as principle had as
little to do with the measure as the doctrine OF
Calvin, and far less than that OF original sln'
was raised in prolonged Holmanic chorus.
The debate on the measure was not conducted
candidly by the Democrats. From the hrst
they avoided the merits of the question ana
insisted on arguing the subject of bountIcs,
ubicb was in no sense before she House. The
Serate,s proposition was to employ our own
sbins as mail carriers rather than the foreign
ocoan tramps. sailing vessels, fishing smacks
and tugboats which have made the Villas ser
vice ludlcrous in the eyes of the world ana
ruinous to ON merchants and our manutact-
urers. and to pay them fair price for their
work.
But the Democratic reformcrs, wearing the
adverti ement on the backs of their coats that
they are going TO be honest if they die for H.
who brood under the shelterng wing OF tEat
only greatest honest man on earth, Holman,
of Indiana, said that it was clearly subsidy to
en,plOv American ships when we could get
British ones. and that they could imagine no
more hagrant and wicked waste of the peoples
money, which it was their Heaven appointed
duty to protect, than to use it to foster and
encourage our own commerce when the trade
of other Nations needed help. That was the
4 fol-, and al.
crnment The foreign shipping lines, they sad
were run by good and worthy Englishmen who
emploved British labor. But our own lines were
owred by wicked Americans whose utter
depravity was shown by their reckless determl-
nation to man their vessels with American
scamen paid al American rates OF wages. Why
asked these watch dogs of the Treasury, why
should we be expected to pay our money
to these Americans when the British sea-
man needs it? Let us have no subsidies.
Let our foreign carrying trade go to
the dogs Let us spend whatever we have
to spend to build up British commerce at
the expense of our own merchants. This is
being honest. This is reform This is making
a reputation for economy, and this is what we
are here for.
1t is difficult to deal calmly and patiently
with people who take the position we have thus
accurately described. Argument is lost on
then. Figures they refuse 10 comprehend.
All they care to is that the Republicans
propose to spend a sum of money and that if
they defeat it they can pose before the country
as stern economists. Once in a while these peo-
pie, or their apologsts, can be forced into
something like an argument, and consequently
into a corner. The Washington Post his got
itself into that situation now. Why, 1t inquiries,
should we desire to go into the carrying trade
when il is the least profitable of all occupa-
tons No conundIum is more readily an
swercd. The prime purpose of direct cOmmu-
nication with developing countries is to open
AMI maintain market for our own industries.
We have the factories to supply all the goods
these countries need. We are closer to them
than the European ports and can sell on as
favorable terms. And yet, of the $40 ,OOO, 600
of imports purchased in 1881 bv Brazil, this
country supplied only Ss,jOOOO0. Europe
supplies her with eighy-nine steamships, while
We have but three. The Argentine Republic
bought $91,0OO,O 900 of goods in 1851, of
which only $500 900 came from the United
States. We have 10 connecting line and
Europe has twenty-on lines. Uruguay paid out
$4,000, 600 the same year for merchandise,
but only 81, 10000 came from here. Not an
American ship enters her ports. 1t takes her
merchants nine months to get returns from
New-YoIk and only forty-fve days from Lon
don.
These are types of the situation in every
South American and Oriental country. If we
chose ninc-tcnths Of all that trade could be
Ours. Instead of having an immense balance
of trade against us FOR the enrichment of Euro
pean labor, j, cOnld keep our own looms and
engines busy and employ our own skill and
labor. If rapid and frequent communication
was established with these lands, why should
the carrying trade not be profitable Eugland's
rivals are all the European Nations But in
supplantng her we should supplant them all,
and be without a riy al in this grand and limit
less field of enterprise. But what do the IIol-
manic reiormeys and economists care about all
this Their patriotism is satisfied if they can
keep their seats In Congress, job with River
and Han Dor bills, juuket about on Indian COM
missions, and tell their constituents that
though the Democratic Post ONCE bill is |
several million dollars heavier than the last
Republican appropriation, yet they cut out an
item OF $500, 900 to pay American steamships
an honest price for an honest service. With |
that they are satisfied.
-
THE FRENCH MP TDNTS