The Dalles daily chronicle. [volume] (The Dalles, Or.) 1890-1948, 1898-10-18
suBsoRIPrIoN PnIoE.
NEEDS OF OUR SHIPPING.

there has come to the United States
an improved prospect for a great
merchant marine in foreign trade.
They concede that the country which
built the victorious fleets of Sampson
and Dewey need not fear competi-
lsiou in material resources, mechani-
cal appliances, and constructive skill
from any shipbuilders in the world.
Admitting this, they argue that if we
desire to build up our merchant
marine we must adopt the policy of
free ships. This is the English view
of our future in the worlds carrying
trade. 1t is not the American view.
We have demonstrated that we
can build the best warships in the
world. We have shown that we can
make our battle-ships more seaworthy
than those of England, and that we
can give them greater speed without
sacrificing power in battle. We
never have lacked skill in shipbuilG-
ing. We never have fallen below
British standards in the vessels
turned out from our ship yards, but
we have failed to have a great mer-
chant marine because we have been
induced to abandon a policy that
built up the merchant marine of
Great Britain, and, in fact, of every
maritime nation of Europe. We
have sacrificed the interests of our
shipyards to an argument put forward
by AmerIcan-British free traders.
We have protected the shop and the
factory, but have sacrificed our ship
ping interests to an economic fetch.
1t is characteristic of the London
newspapers to plead now for a repeal
of our registry laws and for free ships
though the repeal of the reg
lister laws at this time
would paralyze the very industry
which we aim to stimulate. Instead
of repeating any legislation we should
enact such subsidy laws as will take
our American ships into the Atlantic
and Pacific under conditions as
favorable as those under which Eng
land sends her ships to every CON-
mercial port in the world. With our
splendid achievements in war shut
ting us away from the old era there is
no reason for the old prejudice
against subsidies that has so long
prevented US from securing the full
advantage earned by cur enterprise.
Great Britain IS not at all uncertain
upon this point. She paid for foreign
and colonial packet service during
the year 1697-1S98 some So, 1897, 900,
exclusive of the colonial contracts
covering lines between Vancouver
and Australia and between New Zea-
land and America. The Bombay and
Shanghai service costs annually
81, 100 and the Adelaide service
S71O,655. The carriage of the mails
between the United Kingdom and
New York alone calls for $539,47O.
In England they do not cali these
subsidies. They are subvensions or
payments to encourage the shipping
trade, and they answer the purpose.
Germany, too, has system of
mail subsidies for the development
of her colonial and foreign trade.
The subsidized service includes
European line to Asia and an East
Asiatic line, an Australian line, and
an East African line::at total cost of
$l,247, 800. ThlsIsystem uudoubted
ly will be extended to other centers
of German trade, since merchandise
carried by these ships to China and
Australia has more than doubled In
value.
We stand almost alone among the
commercial and naval rations in the
neglect of our shipping interests.
Now that we are close upon an era of