Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1889-05-02
snIp suasIDIrs nv FaANon.
Respectfully Referred to the Amcri'
can shipping aud lndustrtal


Respectfully Referred to the anicri-
can shipping aud Industrial
League for Delaware.
The following is from an article by
David A. Wells in one of last year's issues
Of the P0pu ar Science MoathIy.
Tbs recent experience OF France in
attempting to stimulate ship building
and ship-using, through q carefully
devised system of subEldies and bounties,
furnishes another illustration OF the
eject OF governmental interference with
the natural course of industries, second
In Importance only to that afforded by
the experience of sugar.
Tins. to accomplish the purpose above
noted. the French & vernment Fl red in
1881 to give a bounty of Sl2 u ton on
sill ships .uilt in French yards of iron
Rad Steel and subsidy OF SO per 10
tons for every 1000 miles sailed by
French vessels; and as they did not de-
sire to put any inhibition on the citizens
OF France buying vessels in foreign conn
tiles and making them French property,
in case they desired to do so, they pro.
posed to give one halt the latter subsidy
to vessels of foreign construction bought
by citizens of France and transferred to
the French flag.
at the outset, ss was'the case with tho
sugar bounties, the scheme worked ad.
mirably. New and extensive steamship
lines were organized with almost fever
ish haste, aud the construction of many
new and large steamers was promptly
commenced and rapidly pushed forward
in various French ports, and also in the
ship. yards OF G.eat Britain and other
countries. The government paid out
large amount OF money, and it got the
ships. In two years their tonnage iu-
creased from little over 300, 600 to nearly
100, 900 tons for steamers alone; while
the tonnage engaged on long VOYAGES in
creased in single year from $500, 600 to
over 4 700, 900 tons.
II was probably little CALLING to the
French to find ont after two years. ex-
perience that most OF the subsidies paid
by the government we're earned by some
200 iron steamers and sailers, and that
over six.tenths Of these were bnilt and
probably owned in large part in Great
Britain; so that The ahip.yards on the
Clyde got the lions share of the money.
But as all the vessels were transferred to
aud sailed under the French Gag, and
we've regarded as belonging to the French
mercan lie marine, everything seemed TO
| indicate that the new scheme was work.
| ing very we'll, and that the eovsrnment
had really succeeded in building up the
shipping OF France. But the troubls
was that the scheme did not continue 10
work The French soon learned by ex-
perience The truth OF the economic
maxim, that ships are the children aud
not the parents of commerce; and that
while it ives easy to buy ships out OF
money raised by taxation, the mere fact
OF the ownership OF two or three hun
dred more ships did no more to increase
trade than the purchase and own ership Of
two or three hundred more p'ows ncces.
sarily Increased TO farmer the amount
of arabic land TO pillow; or, in other
I words, the French found that they had
gone to large expense to buy new end
costly Bot OF tools, and then had no use
for them.
Ard what was worse, they found fur
thermore, that while they had not in.
creased trade to any material extent, they
had increased the composition for trans
acting what trade they already possessed.
TIE result has been that many French
shipping companies that before The snb
sldy system were a6ie to pay aividanta
0re nov lnGgtr RbDe foEtuEea th3 Nlr
0een derived from the previous artlnclsl
prosperity have Melted away the French
mercantile marine has ceased to grow
and the whole scheme has, proved so dis
astrous failure that the late Paul Bert,
the eminent French legislator and orator,
III speech III the French ASS N bly,
seriously undertook to defend the French
war Of Invasion in Eonquln on the GROUND
that its continuance would afford employ
ment for the new French mercantile
marine, which otherwise, we have RICH
to infer, in his opinion would have re
mained iuie.
: The experience Of the mercantile
marines Of Europe during recent year
. affords tue following curious results: |
shows, first, that she payment OF bOuutie
Z has practically awaited nothing in arrest
e ing the continued decrease in sailing
tonnage; second, that 10 the eight year
e nrior to 1850, French sh piping in II
t most valuable branch steamers, increase
/ faster than the skipping OF any OF ii
o Continental competitors; but after 1856
i the increase Ia tho steam marine c
i q rmany, where no Donates were paid
v vas relatively greater both in numbe
Q snt tonnage Of vessels than IN Franc
h where large bountles were given Rtte
l. 1851, aud was also Rreater as respect
. the aggregate tonnag4 OF all vessels
% sal. and steam. The OBVIOUS expectatia
o o. the French government in fesortin
p to the blUuty system for sh pring WI
2 that ships built aud neyigatsd with Ii
i Gid OF the bounties. vor carry Frenc
e manufactures into foreign countries, m
?. thus open new markets for domest
Il products. But experience, Thus far. hi
d shown that all that has been effected is
l. transfer to some extent, OF the carrial
N OF goods formerly brought in forei(
SO vessels, to French vessels. But, on u
y other hand, the increase OF tonnas
ie under the stimulus OF the houuties,
q yond the requirements Of ttsffic, aud t
d, consequent reduction OF freights has a
re tailed "a loss, and not gain 10 Il
:. French nation; by throwing upon IL t
~ burden Of shipping interest that, b
st for the government aid, would ha
q been Improbable, and which, because
such aid, cannot COMO m Itsef to /
80 demands OF trade h-
an sReport on the Mercantile Marbles
in Foreign Countries" by Worth'aPton
nk Ford. Uai'ed States Department Of $ a
nix Elk. Doc, 1883.
,iV -s-S-S
nd William Roberts, Nj. D. T. Il. O. +, D.,
no the University OF London, Eng, say
vs., Passive congestion OF the kidneys N
in be present, in which the urino conta
not trace OF aibumen, while the syn
ter toms of intense venous coneesti,