The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-12-05
RUSHING THE sHIP-suBsIDY BILL.

RUSHING THE sHiP-sUBsIDY BILL
1t appears that the Republican sena-
torial committee on order of business has
decided that the ship-subsidy bill shall
take the place of the spooner Philippines
bill, thus placing it at the head OF the
calendar as unfinished business. IL the
Journal correctly interprets this action 1t
must express its regret. 1t seems to indi-
under a sort of w~hip-and-spur policy. 10
jam" it through as quickly as possible,
in the mistaken idea that this will meas
urably f~orestall popular opposition. That
view is never a sound one. II a measure
cannot stand analysis. discussion and pop
ular agitation it is presumably bad. and
rushing it through Congress is calculated
to increase popular opposition instead OF
forestalling or diminishing it.
The Journals opposition to the ship sub
sidy bill is based on grounds Of principle.
of policy, of economy and the absence Of
popular demand or the prospect of general
benefit. 1t does not believe that the pay
ment Of money subsidies for the develop
ment or encouragement of any particular
industry is defensible on grounds of prin-
ciple. 1t cannot be defended on the same
grounds as a protective tariff. because the
main purpose of the latter is 10 raise rev.
enue. and the protection afforded to home
industries confers an equal and impartial
benefit On all classes. A money subsidy
spends revenue instead of raising it, and
its benefits to others than its immediate
recipients are remote and conjectural.
Every dollar Of subsidy must be raised by
taxation. and taking money out of the
pockets of all the people to put it in the
pockets of comparatively a few is wrong
in principle. The substitution of a sub
sidy instead of a protective tariff duty on
sugar. as was done by the tariff act OF
1890. did not work satisfactorily and was
repealed by the law of 1896. which restored
the protective duty. AS that was the only
instance in which Congress ever resorted
TO a money subsidy to encourage or pro-
mote a particular industry. and as that
was abandoned. it may be fairly said that
the passage of a ship subsidy bill would
be a new departure in American legisla-
ton. Most OF the States which passed
laws paying subsidies for beet sugar have
repealed them or are preparing to do so.
On the question of economy the Journal
does not believe that the passage of a bill
which will give to a particular industry
-. - T. -4s~,l,
several million dollars a year for thirty
years. amounting in the aggregate TO
more than $3.50. 600. OO0. can be successfully
defended before the people at a time when
they are asking for a reduction of war
taxes when the ordinary. necessary eX-
penses of the government are steadily in
creasing and when there is an imperative
demand for an increase of the army.
There is a popular demand for economy
in appropriations and expenditures, but
for a ship subsidy 1t is not believed that
a single Republican state convention has
declared for it. Certainly no Western
State has lone so. The Republican ma
tional platform of 1896 contained the fol-
lowing:
of discriminating duties for the upbuilding
of our merchant marine and the protec-
ton of our shipping in the foreign carry
ing trade, so that American ships may re-
gain the carrying of our foreign trade.
This calls for friendly legislation, but
not for a subsidy. The subsidy plan is of
comparatively recent origin and growth.
Its adoption would be indefensible on
grounds of economy as well as of prin-
ciple.
Not only is there no popular demand for
such a measure, but there is no reason to
believe that it would benefit any person
outside of those engaged in building and
running ships, and of these classes it
would benefit only those who least need
1.-THE large builders and ocean liners. and
not small ones. The Chicago Tribune re-
CARDS the pending bill as peculiarly in
i~quitous because it proposes to bestow
special favors on a few particular lines
which already have most liberal mail con-
bers of Congress who vote for the pending
bill will not hear the last of it for many
years. Representatives, especially those
from the middle West" IL says. "who
have been reelected and who wish to re-
main in political life, should be cautious
about committing themselves to a meas
ure which their constituents do not IA.
vor." Such expressions as these should
not be unheeded. Congressman must not
mistake the atmosphere of Washington
for that of the country at large, or the
clamor of a few shipbuilders and owners
and their lobby for the voice of the peo-
pie. Let Republican members go back tc
the platform of 1896, which demanded the
upbuilding of our merchant marine and
carrying trade by other methods than a
money subsidy.
nDtrSInENT NIst<uNU E-VsS INaDI.DUaV