New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-03-08
HR cRAMP on THE SHIPPING BILL.
AZ ARGUMENT FROM BOTH PRINCIPLE AND IN
-EREST

Charles z. Cramp has published a letter ad-
dressed By him 70 the chairman Of the House Com
izfttse on the Merchant Marine IL it he writes in
garr rs follows
L seems 10 ne from the tenor OF questions by
MEMBERS CT The committee ia the pending inquiry
concerning me Shipping BIZ that some extremely
iIAi or-4at y not vital facts are overlooked In
1h6 1rst place, there seems be q disposition 10
regard ne supremacy OF Great Britain in metal
SIP Dlilding as cause, whereas il Is effect
L IS the effect or Two causes
Ftrst-The destruction OF the American ner-
cnan[ marine Just At the beginning OF the of
second-The most persistent and universal aid
ar encouragement from the British Government
II Is not stating the case strongly say that
ne principal or largest shpyards in Great Britain
have been QUILT and equipped ana their working
oTgaIlzaiiors trained al the public cost by pub
ac money Since 1850, about. a little more than
batt mas been he rodIct 81 f5riisb s67T,-s
During the first Ten fifteen years that period
very large proportion OF the naval construction Of
Great Britain was given 10 private shpyards and
for that work prices paid sufficiently large not
only 10 give a handsome profit the ships them
selves bur enable the builders 70 construct new
C-ydocks and otherwise enlarge their plants and
organizations. The most notable example this
klnc IS Laird s. Of birkenhead. VINO were enabled.
ey ne method described, 10 build i've large dry
make meta snip building ne greatest Of all British
industries for q period Of forty years.
Now lei Us look al the side OF the picture
JEST a. me cEne when The metal ship building
supremacy began our supremacy in the era Of the
came and wiped out the commercial feet that
ve had which was composed almost entirely Of
the war ended the business Of owning and oper-
sttng ships in The United States had ceased 10 exist
No effort was made 70 resurrect It
Then. i 10 drive the last nail II the coffin OF
American ship building, the Government adopted
the policy OF doing what naval work il had do
II irs OWL Navy yards; therefore. far as the
eeaboa-d was concerned. there was absolutely no
demand for American built ships except in the
cozsting trade which, IN these years was done al
most exclusively il old wooden hulks that had
yfved the war.
During the period Of ten years or more trnrnedi-
EIey following the close OF the Civil War every
particle Of legislation on snip questions ad-
o. foreign snip owners English Influences always
work n Washington. brought forward in each
successive Congress a free ship pill.
Vow let consider briefly the policy diamet-
really opposed 70 that OF the United States toward
Its shipping interests.
% 20 about twelve years ago. although there
were Two very considerable ship owning companies
II Germany. there was no ship building worth
mentioning. But about 1888 the policy OF Germany
was suddenly changed
From The former policy absolute free ships or
free trade II ships Germany turned the other
IRENE 0f heavily substituting German built vessels
30 subsidy given 70 foreign built vessels run
Emperor promoted the policy with all the
Ugor and ability characteristic Of him. And
concur-enty with that, all the German war vessels
Tor TIE last fifteen years have been built and
required bv law 10 he built in Germany. and as far
az possible OF domestic material
AnC additional and equally important result is
years ago Germany may now be considered the
second ship building nation in the world, and
rapidly encroachlng upon the hitherto undisputed
supremacy q England
On similar lines, though 70 a much less extent,
ne Russian Government has IN the last fifteen or
txetr years and principally IN the last ten years,
made great efforts 70 promote its own ship build
1E
I nay be said that American ship building itself
las grown rapidly since say 1881 OF lSs2 within
twenty years This Is true. but the reason for its