The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-03-30
wANTEp-AN AMERICAN POLICY.

Mr.. Cleveland, in his inaugural ad-
dress, declared himself opposed to b0un-
ties and subsidies which he said,
burden the labor and thrift of portion
of our citizens to aid ill-advised or Ian
gushing enterprises in which they have
no concern" If that is to be the key
note of the policy of this administration
we predict that before it ends it will be
regarded as the most un-A American and
anti-American administration of recent
years.
No public man of broad views would
commit himself unqualifcdly against all
bounties and subsidies. Mr.. Cleveland
assumed that they are never justifable.
that they are always Gin aid of ill-ad-
vised or languishing enterprises" and
that they "burden the labor and thrift
of n portion OF our citizens" TO establish
interests in which they have no concern.
This Is a very narrow view of the case,
and very illogical. 1t bees the question
by assuming that all bounties and subsi-
dies are vicious. The argument is: mo
bounty or subsidy is justiiiable. there
fore they should all be condemned" Or.
to put it differently, "all bounties and
subsidies burden the labor and thrift of
a portion of our citizens to aid ill-advised
or languishing enterprises In which they
have no concern; therefore they should
not be tolerated"
Bounties and subsidies are recognized
hu civ To-
mate means of developing national in
dustries and promoting national inter-
ests. in the development or promotion
of which all classes of citizens are con-
cerned. In Great Britain, France, Ger
many and other countries they are rec
ognized as necessary and useful part
of government machinery, freely re-
sorted to by the government and fully
approved by the people. They have
proved very efficient and valuable in
many ways, notably in developing the
beet sugar industry IN France and Ger
many, and in building up the merchant
marine and foreign trade of those coun-
tries and of Great Britain.
The only bounty in force in this coun-
try at present ia the sugar bounty, and
the only subsidy is one intended to aid
in the establishment of certain lines of
ocean steamers. We doubt if there
is an intelligent citizen of the United
States who will not admit that the per-
manent establishment of the beet sugar
industry, making us independent of for
eign countries for that staple commodi-
ty. is q desideratum of sufficient impOr-
lance to fully justify the payment of a
bounty for few years. especially as
consumers are now getting sugar cheaper
than ever before by reason of the re-
moval of the duty. As for our marine
interests, Mr.. Cleveland must be very
poorly informed if he does not know
that our only possible hope of compet-
lies in policy of judiciOus subsidies or
subventiOns to ocean steamers. Great
Britain, Germany, France, Spain and
Italy all pay subsidies to steamships
and some of them to sailing ships as
we'll. and have for many years. Why
snOuiQ the Un1Ceu states fetuee To ADOPT
| policy which has proved so successful
and profitable in other couDtries9
1t is very narrow and shOrt-sigl.ted
view of American interests which would
declare indiscriminatc war against boun-
ties and subsidies as essentially wrong
| and never justifiable. On the contrary.
the true American policy is to de-
velop American interests by every le-
| Ultimate means. and especially to try
the methods which have been used sue
cessfully by other countries. MIR. Cleve-
lands first administration did absolute
| ly nothing for the development of Amer
lean trade, either domestic or foreign,
| or the promotion of American industries.
and it left our marine in decidedly
worse condition than it found it
There is nothing in the present outlook
to justify hope that his second admin
istration will be any improvement on
his first. Mr.. Cleveland does not seen
to have any conception of an American
| policy.