The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1888-07-20
CURRENT COMMENT.
OUR FOREIGN CARRYING TRADE
TLewiston Journal


Now gentlemen, am not prepared to say that
me decline Of our commerce was due to the tar
if but believe the tariff was the prime. cause
which prevented its restoration, and that in this
alone i did for the State of Maine more injury
than all the good its advocates can show.-Hon.
w. l.. Putnam at Portland.
The context shows that the Democratic
candidate for Governor meant our foreign
carrying trade, and not our foreign "com-
merce" when he spoke of its decline in his
Portland speech. Foreign commerce is
measured by exports and imports, and was
never so large per inhabitant and never in
creased SO rapidly as it has since the war
Our foreign carrying is the business of trans
porting our foreign commerce, and this is
what Mr.. Putnam intended to speak of as
having declined.
There was = very good reason why Mr..
futnam should not charge the decline of our
foreign carrying trade to the change from a
revenue to protective tariff, and that is be-
cause the decline commenced in 1856, when
the revenue tariff was in force, and was as
rapid In the six years before the war, under
the tariff policy, as at any time since the
war. In 1856 seventy-five per cent of our ex.
ports were carried in American vessels in
1861 only 693 per cent, but in 1855 there were
507 vessels built for our foreign trade; in
1859 there were 300; and in 1857 only III. In
the four years of the civil war the decline of
our foreign carrying trade was IS per cent.
But Mr.. Putnam Is prepared to say that our
protective tariff was the prime cause which
prevented the restoration of our foreign
carrying trade"
II is evident that Mr. Putnam wasn't so
well prepared on the question as he would
have been If he had candidly studied it, for
he goes ON to explain that he means to as
sert that the duties imposed on shipbuilding
materials by the present Republican tariff
are so much higher than they were under the
Democratic tariff Of 1886; that they have
prevented the building up of our shipping
in the foreign trade. which, as he implies
would have occurred If the tariff of 1876 had
continued in force.
Now If Mr.. Putnam will take little time
to better prepare" himself before he makes
his next tariff speech, he will find that the
present tariff enacted originally in 1872, i'm
mediately after the Lynch report) is as IA
vorable for shipbuilding for the foreign
trade as was the tariff of 1876, for notwith-
standing the duty ON iron in general is 10 per
cent more under the present tariff than I'M
der that of 1876, yet under the present tariff
all lumber, timber, hemp, MANILA, iron and
steel rods, bars, spikes, nails, bolts copper
and composition metals and wire rope for
the construction, equipment and repair, and
all supplies OF American vessels for the for
eign trade, are admitted free of duty, while
under the tariff of 1916, all these articles
bore duty.
More than that. Notwithstanding it is
now generally conceded that even if the
plates, angles and bars needed for the con-
struction OF iron vessels for the foreign
trade should be added to the articles now
allowed to be imported free of duty, (which
cover everything usea in the construction of
wooden vessels), it would aid very little, yet
in order to get whatever advantage might
come from this, Mr.. Dingley of Maine has
for three Congresses introduced into DEM
ocratic House, bill to add these remaining
articles to the articles to be admitted free Of
duty when used in constructing American
vessels for the foreign trade, but Demo-
cratic committee on ways and means have
refused to report it,
The remedy that Democratic House has
favored for revival of our shipping in the
foreign trade has been the importation. and
administration Of foreign-built vessels. to
american registry free of duty. Is Mr..
futnum prepared TO say" that he approves
OF TINS democratic remedy? We should be
pleased 10 hear from him ON that point.
WINE MI: Putnam is condeming protection
we suggest that in connection with the ship
ping question he considers the fact that our
shipping In the coastw Use trade. which has
been absolutely protected by our NAVIGATION
laws against foreign competition, mas nros-
pered, notwithstanding the great competi-
ton Of railways, until today 1t has three
times the tonnage of that Of Great Britain,
and five times that of any other country
while oar shipping in the foreign trade
| which has been placed at the mercy Of free,