, 1900-06-21
ANTI-sHIPPINo Sill ARoUMeNT

AN -ShifPIN BILL ARGUMENT
The devious methods pursued by the
opponents of the shipping bill are well
deserving Of study. The great OBJ
Jective is. of course. the bills defeat.
So, one takes the ground that the com
p%ensation provided will not insure the
construction Of great, swift, mail-car-
rying steamships available in time of
emergency as auxiliary cruisers. An
other asserts that the bill is too re-
gardless of slow-going, cargo-carrying
ships, and too favorable to the fast
ocean greyhounds" that carry more
passengers than freight. Obviously II
the argument of one is correct, that of
the other must be wrong. The OBJ
j~ective, however, is not so much sim
cere criticism as the %arousing of pref
udices that will result in the bills de-
feat.
The board of directors Of an asso-
citation of New York merchants, for
Instance, made public a report in OPP
position to the shipping bill on the
ground that it favored cargo-carrying.
slow ships, and did not favor the more
desirable fast ships of large size run
ming in regular lines. They stated
that they had examined the bill with
great care. On the other hand the re-
port of four of the seven Democratic
members of the house merchant ma
rine and fisheries committee-the only
report, by the way. on file against the
bill-takes the ground that 1t does too
much for the great transatlantic lin
ers, and not enough for the cargo car
riers. Similarly, the board of direc-
tors Of a Boston association declared
that they favored subsidies, but not
the bill. because it did too much for
certain fast ships. II provision were
made for the ships that carried the
great cargoes out of the country as
f~aVorably as provision was made for
the liners, they might favor 1t.
That the friends of the bill, however
much so disposed, cannot adjust its
provisions so as to satisfy each of
these critics, goes without saying.
b bill will probably be pressed for
passage as 1t stands. and in that case
1t Is likely that one association will
be opposing it on the very ground
that, IL true, would win the other asso-
cations favor-and it will receive the
Endorsement of neither. Members of
congress are too discerning, however,
to be influenced by such contradictory
and superficial opposition, largely de-
signed, no doubt, to defeat, rather
than to amend, the bill.
In Justice to both New York and
Boston it should be stated that the
leading and far more influential Or
CARNATIONS most heartily favor the
bills passage, and have urged this
course upon congress. A very small
minority Of the public organizations
of business n commercial men in
each of the cities oppose the bill, and,
as In the Boston case, when one looks
for reasons for opposition they are gen.
orally disclosed in the fact that lead
ing officers represent foreign shipping
lines, whose interests are, of course,
antagonized by a bill that provides for
the substitution of American ships in
the place of foreign ships now doing
our foreign carrying.
Foreign influences are nowhere in
lbe Sniteu otateS SO powerful as In
New York, and it is gratifying to state,
therefore, that patriotism, even in that
city. on the question OF an American
merchant marine, instead of a foreign
merchant marine, for the carrying of
American imports and exports, COM
mands the support of an overwhelm-
ing number OF its public spirited bust
ness men.
The contest in the senate and house
next winter, when the shipping bill is
taken up for consideration, will be a
fierce one, beyond a doubt. Foreign
interests will be battling to preserve a
business that yields them 5000, 900, 900
each year in money drawn out of the
pockets Of Americans and taken
abroad, there to build up foreign in
dustries at American expense. Ameri-
cans. on the other hand, believing that
American labor is entitled to the en-
ployment that this $500, 900 900 a year
gives. Will strenuously fight for the
passage of the shipping bill. well as
sured that its enactment means the
beginning of the end of foreign mo-
nopoly Of American foreign carrying.