The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-11-11
STEAMSHIP SUBSIDIES.
GOODMAN REPLIES TO THE MARI.
NER OF THE GREAT SALT
LAKE.
Most Astounding Ignorance Shown
BY the "Silvery'' Writer of the
Tribune-A Fit Lieutenant For
Sir Joseph Porter, Ia. C. B.

Ignorance as well as misery loves COM
pany. 1t was by no means my intention
to intimate that the Mariner of the
Great Salt Lake was alone in his advo-
cacy of ocean steamship subsidies for
the purpose of encouraging the general
interest of shipbuiIding. If such had been
my idea 1 should not have considered his
! hallucination worthy of attention.
In searching for comparison, he has
at length fallen upon Mr. Henniker Hea-
ton, member of the British parliament
whose statement he commends to my no.
| tice.
"As American ships were not subsi-
died their owners could not compete
with the Cunard and other companies, the
art OF shipbuilding languished, and the
American carrying trade was trans
! posed to foreign bottoms. In 1891 only Is
per cent of the exports from the United
which at one time had engrossed 80 per
| cent. AS a consequence of refusing So Co.,
GOO year in subsidies during thirty
years TO native ship owners, or S15o,OOO,oOO
the United States had TO pay in the
same period not less than $4,000, 100000 for
| freights, while their mercantile marine
dWlndled into insignificance."
IGNORANCE SHOWN.
The ignorance of Mr.. Heaton is more
1 inexcusable inasmuch as his experience
| not resulted from Investigations at the
base of the Rocky Mountains.
| Sir Joseph Porter, X. C. B., was an adj
miral of the Queens navy. and possibly
| Mr.. Heaton may have been one of his
! lieutenants Seemingly, he had never
heard that the United States ever had
wooden shipbuilding had been suppIanted
| by that of iron. or that ships were en-
gagged in any other occupation than that
of carrying mails. His reasoning is that
| rOI ,nr1t CHI nI how nod
| to encourage a now effete style of naval
architecture for the special purpose of
carrying the mails of that day, and that
| this encourag cement would have resulted
in the building of iron ships at this pres
ent. Now, when he speaks of the 'deca-
,dence of our mercantile marine, it should
| be understood on all hands that reference
| is made solely to our foreign carrying
| trade. The building of those old-fash-
Toned side-wheelers and of the iron ships
| that followed them has kept pace in this
! country with the same kinds of shipbuild-
| ing in Great Britain, as is inStanced on
our coast and on the great lakes. 1t
was necessity for us to have ships
/ for the purpose of domestic trade at any
cost, and as foreign flags were strictly
prohibited in this kind of business, our
! ship-owners have been at the mercy of
our domestic ship-builders. 1t is quite
| true that we might have competed in the
general ocean carrying trade had we
been willing to substitute ships, not only
! for carrying mails, which is very small
/
| freight as we'll We could have done as
we are doing now in paying the Ameri-
| can steamship company $4,000 annually
on each steamship for. the benefit of
Mr.. Cramp, who builds them, but neither
the Mariner of the Great Salt Lake or
! Mr.. Heaton can tell US how we could
encourage the building of ordinary mer,
| chant ships unless we confer the same
| bounty on them to make up for Mr.
| Cramps extortions. 1t will perhaps be
good Republican policy to do this wnea zen
the party comes into power again, ana ma
after robbing the treasury for sun
/ larger pension fund, it finds it necessary
to steal some more of the people
money in order to find an excuse for
increasing the tariff.
/ A FEW FACTS.
The only part of the quotation made
by the Tribune from the ECONOMIST
which has any significance, is this:
ton is. that in consequence of our re-
fusal to pay subsidies to our steamer
/ lines as other nations, particularly Great
1 Britain, have to their steamer lines, we
have lost the opportunity to earn 81, go
100000 during the past thirty years. rms
| is an average of S10O,0O0,000 a year, and
/ it is a growing average. At present we
+! pay to foreigners between 500 o00, OO0 and
| $3.50, 000, 900 a year for oversee frelghtS.
| Nor is our disadvantage from the dWlnd-
ling. of our mercantile marine sunlnea
l up by the statement of the money aD-
stracted from the earnings and pronts
/ of Americans and paid to foreigners.
| AS Sir Albert Rollit, M. p, the president
Il of the associated chambers of commerce
4 in Great Britain, said at the Hudders-
field meeting of their foreign trade. that II
/ was likely to remain firm while we re-
tanned the carrying power of the world.
With the exception of the first five lines
given as a reason, the statements OF the