, 1900-05-31

paign issue of it. Just the reverse is
the case. They are about evenly
divided for and against it. This is
SHOWN by the two minority reports
mat have been filed by the Demo-
cratic members OF the House Mer-
chant Marine and Fisheries Commit
zee. The first report filed was signed
oy Messrs. William Aston Chanler, Of
New York; John H. Small, of North
carolina. and Joseph e. Ransdell, of
Louisiana Their report advocates
government add and opposes free ships.
Their suggested amendments to the
Dill are not of a character to seriously
minimize its effectiveness.
The other four Democratic members
of the House Merchant Marine and
Fisheries Committee who signed the
other report, are Messrs. John F. Fitz-
gerald. Of Massachusetts,; Marion De-
Vries, of California;: Thomas Speight.
of Mississippi. and VIM. D. Daily. of
New Jersey. Their report opposes
subsidies and in effect advocates free
ships. Their report, said to have been
written by an attorney of the foreign
steamship lines. is largely an attack
upon the only American steamship
line engaged in the transatlantic
trade.
The odium attaching to the Demo
Gratis who are fighting the battle OF
the foreign shipping lobby in Con-
gress, and who advocate h purchase
of ships built abroad. instead Of their
construction in the United States, pre-
sents them in n very sorry figure.
They will be infinitely more busy in
defending their own attitude on this
question than they can be in assail-
ing that of the Republicans and a
large contingent of their W party
associates. The Democratic leaders
had made desperate efforts to prevent
a public disclosure of their differences.
but the courage of nearly one-half of
the minority made further conceal
ment of their condition impossible.
The Democratic members of the COM
mittee who advocate government aid
by independently filing their report in
advance of the submission of the other
minority report, forced the signers of
the latter to lamely limp last into the
public eye. Their hopeless division
shows how utterly impossible 1t will
be for them to make a successful cam
paign issue of the shipping question.
II Democrats attack a government
aided shipping. Democrats who have
the best of the argument may be
quoted in answer. Republican anu
milton with which to refute Demo
cratic attacks of this character need
not be used-it is furnished by the
more honest and courageous OF the
Democrats themselves.
This is a situation which seems al
most providential for the united Re
publicans. They seem to be assured
of the votes of a large contingent
possibly one-half-of the Democrats in
the House in favor of the Ship Sub
sidy Bill, If it is brought up for pass
age now. Such an opportunity has not
been presented in a generation. and
may never again occur so favorable.
The same situation exists in the
Senate. The Democrats there are I'M
able to prepare, much less to pre-
sent, a minority report In opposition
to the Ship Subsidy Bill. 1t is we'll
and publicly known that a number of
Democrats will speak and vote for the
bill. What the Democratic leaders de-
sire to avoid, at all hazards, is the
effect 1t will have pom their party
followers that will surely result from
the discussion in the SENATE OF the
Ship Subsidy Bill at this session. to
disclose a substantial contingent Of
their party associates in advo-
cacy and voting sor that bill.
II Republicans can be coerced. in
undated or cajoled into p%ostponing
the consideration of the Ship Subsidy
Bill al the present session, the Demo-
Gratis may be able to conceal their own
weakness in divided opposition to the
Ship Subsidy Bill in the Senate. A
little incident has clearly demon
strated this. and shown the despera-
ton of the Democratic leaders.
The Chairman of the Democratic
National Committee, in his rage at
the filing of the Chanler-Small-Rans-
dell report, sent for these gentlemen
and began to angrily upbraid them as
traitors to their party. so the report
goes, and he told them that by their
ill-timed exhibition of independence
and honesty they had sacrificed a
splendid issue upon which the Demo
Gratis could have attacked the Repub-
licans in the coming campaign. The
Democratic Chairman, so 1t is said.
was rendered almost speechless when
he was very emphatically told by
Messrs. Chanler, Small and Ransdell
that he had no authority to denounce
their action, that the Democratic
party had not declared itself on this
subject in its last national platform,
and hat in any event they were de-
cidedly opposed to the dragging of the
shipping question into partisan poll
tics. They told him that the shipping
question was q business proposition, a
commercial question. n Of great and
pressing national Importance; that
they so considered it. and that they
wera ptita raa1y m dafept THAR nlSi-