The Topeka state journal., 1900-12-15
rHAr sH1P SUBSIDY Bill.

There is a prevailing impression III
the west that the pending ship subsidy
bill is a delusion and a snare. This is
amply demonstrated by the vigorous op-
position OF shipbuilding concerns who
are not given a finger in the pie. The
Maine shipbuilders have organized a
strong lobby to work against any sub
sidy to foreign built ships, even though
owned by Americans
Figures recently compiled at the bu-
reau Of navigation show that the YES
sells built in the United States from
June to November were 495, of 149,9
gross tons.
If this exhibit has any significance it
goes to show that the shipbuilding in
dustry in this country is more than
holding its own without any general
subsidy legislation such as is contem-
plated by the Frye shipping bill.
The one definite thing known about
the bill is that it proposes to take $9,0O0.-
600 a year for a period of thirty years
from the United States treasury and do
nate that vast sum to the ship owners
carrying trade to and from this .coun-
try.
1t is said, too, that the greater por-
tion of this fund will go to fast ocean
liners limited exclusively to mails and
passenger traffic rather than freight
carrying steamers OF. moderate speed
The bin does not even tend to foster
and develop the building of American
ships. as it provides for the payment of
subsidies to the owners of vessels al
ready in existence and makes no pro-
visions for the construction of new yes
sells.
Congressman Cannon, who opposes
the bill. says that "even the promoters
of this bill admit that the ship yards of
the country are working to their fullest
capacity at this time. when there is no
subsidy to encourage or to enrich
them
1t is stated that friends of the sub
sidy bill will make desperate efforts to
push the matter through at this session
in its present form.
The New York World mentions five
points overlooked in the bill which are
pertinent. 1t says:
First-Does the bill compel more
American sailors at better wages?
It does not On the contrary, the ship
owner may pocket the subsidy and hire
foreign seamen at the lowest wages.
Second-Does the bill assure larger
American cargoeS2
1t does not. On the contrary, it makes
it possible for ship owners to sail with
empty vessels and still get the subsidy.
Third-Does the bill secure faster
ships?
1t does not. On the contrary, it makes
fast trips of no consequence.
Fourth-Does the bill arrange for more
mails2
1t does not. On the contrary, it leaves
the foreign mails as now, to be carried
by the fast British and German ships
F'ifth-Does the bill provide for more
ships2
It does not. On the contrary, it makes
it to the interest Of the existing COM
panies to combine, crush competition
and divide the subsidy among as few
ships and ship owners as possible
What then does the bill prOmise2
Large bonuses to be added to the divi-
dends Of steamship companies which are
at present earning good profits without
subsidies.
Has anyone heard of a measure being
urged in congress whereby the farmers
of the west are to be given S9,000,000
yearly for thirty years. or any part of
it? Think how many infant industries
this would establish Twine binding
plants, sugar beet factories, starch from
potatoes factories and barbed wire
plants would dot the Kansas prairies al
most as thickly as shipyards in the
east Let the western congressman be
! careful of their votes on the ship sub
sidy bill lest their records come up in the
/ future to plague them.