Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-12-13
A RAY OF WHITE LIGHT
Thrown Upon the ship Subsidy Bill
by Mr.. Hay, of Georgia.


objects of the pending measure, would
not follow the enactment of the bill IN
to law. The one definite thing that
was known about the operation OF the
proposed legislation was that it would
take from the treasury of the United
States 100000 year for period OF
thirty years and donate that vast
sum to the ship owners carrying the
foreign trade of this country. In other
words, "one mans business is to be
heavily taxeu in order to advance and
to make more profitable the private
business of another citizen"
Mr. Clay entered upon an analysis
of the pending measure. He pointed
out that an additional amount was
paid owners of vessels of greater speed
regardless of freight capacity. He
said. that the subsidy to be given
vessels up to II knots which are real
ly our great freight carriers, is only
one and half cents per gross ton,
while the subsidy given to a fast
steamer, which carries chiefly passeng-
ers and fine manufactured goods is
three and eight-tenths cents per ton
for a twenty-one knot ship" Thus 1t
would appear, he contended, that the
12-knot vessel, which really carried
the products Of the country would re-
ceive only a little more than one
third of the subsidy paid to the fast
passenger steamers. He elaborated
what he deemed to be the injustice
and inequality" of the measure in this
respect, presenting a comparison of
cargoes carried by the ST. Paul, swift
steamer of the American line, and OF
the Manhattan, one of the great
freighters of the Atlantic TranspOrta-
ton Company. The comparison show
ed that the Manhattan, a 14-knot ship,
carried immense quantities OF agrl-
cultural products OF any kind; yet,
contended Mr.. Clay, the Manhattan
will receive little more than one-thlrd
of the subsidy given the st. Paul.
How those who favor this measure,
he declared, which donates to the st.
Paul more than 100000 can maintain
that the farmers and producers OF this
country are the principal benenclar-
les Of this bill passes my comprehen-
sion. | am not surprised that at the
hearings before the committee not a
single farmer or producer appeared 10
advocate the passage OF the Dill; and
I am not surprised that the Sh1p-oWn-
ers alone monopolized the time or the
committee in pointing out great Dene- |
fits that would accrue to the country
from the passage of the bill. An anal
vsis of the bill will demonstrate that
thew alone are the beneficiarles OF this
legislation"
Mr.. Clay contended that the greater
part of the exports OF the United
States were carried in steamers of less
than eleven knots speed and that II
was not, therefore, within the bounds
of reason or justice that the fast yes
sells which carried only a small per
centage of the exports, should receive
the great bulk of the subsidy. Mr..
Clay ridiculed the proposition lad
down in the majority report OF the
commerce committee on the bill that
the enactment of the measure into
law would be of greater benet1t to the
agriculture interests of the country
than If would be to the ship building
and ship owning States.
Mr. CLAY maintained that the bill as
formulated nv the committee would not
tend to increase the merchant marine
Of tho United States. Of" said he,
"senators will examine the testimony
clusion will be reached that the snip
owners have a thorough organization
to carry through this legislation. They
are not seeking opportunities TO bulld
ships, but they are trying TO secure leg
islation that will enable them to go IN
the public treasury and draw $9,OOO,O0O
annually to divide among themselves.
If it be the sole purpose OF the frlends
of this measure to encourage the build
ing of ships and TO enlarge our mer-
chant marine, why is it necessary to
pay the bulk OF this subsidy to the
owners of ships already in existence
without requiring them TO build and put
in use other ships of a similar charac-
ter2 If those who favor this legisla-
ton are acting in good faith, why did
they not provide that the subsidy shall
be paid to those who will build ships
hereafter?"
Mr.. Clay maintained that that pro-
vision of the bill which en3-s Amer
lean owners of foreign vessels to place
those We? as under American register
on condil.Jn that they construct in
American shipyards vessels of like ton
mage and speed would not increase the
merchant marine. He said that mas
much as these owners of foreign YES
sells brought under the American flag
would receive only fifty per cent Of the
subsidy provided in the bill for Amer
lean vessels, they could not afford to
come into competition with those ships
which are now under American regis
ter. He vigorously attacked the
amendments which had been made to
the bill since the present session of
Congress began and presented a long
technical argument in support of his
assertion that they had been made in
the interests of a favored class OF ship
builders. He held that as only ships
constructed within the time specified
by the bill could enjoy the subsidy it
would be impossible for capitalists to
build new ships after the lapse of the
specified period to compete with the
subsidized vessels.
"An American marine built I'D in
this way declared Mr.. Clay, will not
remain long at maximum point. but
Will decrease and go to decay as soon
as the bounty ceases. If money must
be taken from the treasury to give life
and growth to our shipping interests
it will be essential TO continue the
bounty system; otherwise retrogres-
sion, failure and ruin will follow
After discussing the facilities of the
United States for ship building. Mr.