The diamond drill. (Crystal Falls, Iron County, Mich.) 1887-1996, 1898-11-19
. POOR PROTECTION.
Alone Will Not Revive
Our Shipping.
Absolute Need OF n Potent shipping
Poiicy-Measures Essential for Its
constitution Considered
and Explained.

the British marine. No close observer
will ascribe this great work to subsidy
only, or TO pretended free trade"
alone. Nor does IL follow, IL subsidy
has been good for Great Britain, ii
would be all-sufficient for the United
States.
We should learn and appreciate the
fact that subsidy has been but one of
the several clements of the British sys-
tenn of ship protection, and IL can be
but one factor in any other method.
When the British introduced subsidy
they still had their early prohibitive
system in force as TO the colonies. and
in all trades except the few in which
reciprocity treaties governed, and In
these they generally had got the ad-
vantage. When they set aside the old
system and began under the present
1s50-they had effected steam connec
tons with the principal parts OF the
world, and had for ten years enjoyed
a monopoly CT transatlantic steam nav
igation.
A Powerful Factor.
This start of Other nations was n
powerful factor Of itself. In the teeth
of this preparation and against such
superiority of position we aimed only
a single Subsidy gun at our enemy.
Moreover, we did this, not for general
protection to our marine, then needing
IL very much, but specially for the IA
tional defense, as already shown. Our
fire did little execution, because no
other measures 10 constitute n system
accompanied subsidy. Not alone could
this be applied only here and there on
postal routes, but IL was easily attacked
and battered down at Washington. The
British had only to increase their out
lay n little, TO bring advertising pat
ronage TO bear, 10 secure the indiffer-
ence or the hostility of our press TO
subsidies-British writer's originating
the argument-to scare congressman
into acts of economy" and thus 20
compass the defeat of ship protection
on the single subsidy line. In this way
we have seen British steam lines aided
and the British treasury spared and
our own lines broken down by our own
people, melted thereto by foreigners,
both before and after the civil war.
The strife OF Subsidy.
II has been asserted OF discriminate
ing duties hat foreign nations would
''retaliate." Perhaps some would, IL
j%ustifiable or convenient. Would not
some resent subsidies, also, IL efficient?
Great Britain began n strife OF expendi-
ture the moment we introduced our
subsidy policy.
III we tabulate British and American
subsidies some striking facts appear:
1. That Great Britain increased her
subsidy nearly double when we put on
competing lines. Upon the appearance
of a clique in congress opposed To sub
sidizlng American steamers the British
ceased TO enlarge appropriations and
even ventured 10 decrease them.
2. That after the repeal. in 1883, of
our subsidy act Of 1s45. which was
given effect by contracts in 1547, AS
and so, Great Britain lightened up con-
siderably on her payments. being able
TO do SO without damage TO her lines,
since much of the support TO ours,
withdrawn by congress TO their ruin.
was turned over TO the British for out
ward mail carriage. Ry the beginning
OF the civil war we were paying 80 per
cent. of the cost Of our ocean nal serv-
ice to foreign shipping. From is4s to
1888 we paid nothing OF the kind.
british Subsidies Again Enlarged.
3. That after the war, when o N
gress had again undertaken 10 support
an American ocean mail service, Great
Britain for the second time enlarged
her subsidy until n clique In congress
appeared TO oppose any ship protective
measure, when she ventured n second
time TO reduce her appropriations; and
on the second repeal of the law for aid
ing steam navigation she further re-
duced them-1s74 TO 1878. AS 10 was
after 1883, SO after rs n large part OF
the support withdrawn from our own
lines, crippling or running them, was
forthwith turned over 10 the aid OF for
eign lines. Our treasury has contrib
utcd, apparently 20 the appreciation OF
our government, over S12,000,000 for
the support Of foreign steam lines, and
but little more than twice as much for
our own.
BiR Tribute to Foreign Mail Carriers.
Under n stingy policy from 1868 20
TT the proportion ~ cost OF our ocean
mails, paid 10 foreign ships, was 2s per
cent. Later our lines, being poorly
paid, gave mp the unequal contest, and
for the period of 1878 20 81 the tribute
OF our treasury to foreign lines for
mails averaged 81 per cent. For the
period OF 1858 10 '9i-34 years-the pro-
portion of money misapplied TO foreign
steam lines was nearly 81 per cent. of
all our sea postal payments. OF late
the percentage Is less The highest
British subsidy payment was made In
1s70-S6, 107, 76l-nnd the highest Amer
lean, I o all lines. in 1851, o36, us
or less than one-third.
Our Experience Not Encouraging.
For 30 years past the British have
expended eight dollars where we have
paid out one upon the maintenance OF
postal connections with the trans