The Winslow mail., 1901-02-28
AGAINST THE SHIP SUBSIDY.
Objections to the Plum ring Scheme
Which Cannot Be Success
fully Met.

Some republican newspapers are
fond of saying that democrats oppose
the Hanna ship subsidy scheme mere
ly because it is a republican measures;
that is to say, that the opposition is
partisan, and has nothing to do with
the merits or demerits Of the bill. This
contention is well answered by the re-
port made by the minority members
of the committee on merchant marine
and fisheries (Messrs. John F. Fitz-
gerald, Marion De Vries, Thomas
Spight and William D. DAILY. demo
crats) and submitted to the house on
May II last. The amended title of the
ship subsidy bill is ga bill to promote
the commerce and increase the for
eign trade of the United States and
to provide for the national Defense"
Worthy objects, surely, though some
what at variance with the high pro-
tectionist "home market" theory.
"With the expressed objects of the
bill" says the democratic minority
report, "the minority is in entire ac-
cord, but does not agree with the ma
jority as to the proposed remedies.
The last statistical abstract issued by
the treasury department shows that
the per capita imports varied but lit
tie between 1868 and 1889. They were
1898 in 1868 and 5000 in 1899; they
have decreased in 81 years but 81 cents
per capita. Our exports, however,
show a steady increase. In 1868 they
60 90 nd IN
The figures of 1899 were equaled only
in two years-18S1 and 1893 The ex-
port trade of the United States per
capita has therefore more than dou-
bled during the past 81 years. 1t may
be said that it is not the foreign
trade or commerce, but the transport
tation of that trade or the articles
with which it has to DO, that needs
the special assistance of the govern
ment. But the statistical abstract of
the treasury department shows that
the tonnage of steam vessels has in
creased since 1886 from 1,199,415 tons
to 2476,O11 tons in 1899. The tonnage
is the greatest in the history of the
United States" The democratic obiec-
tions to the measure are summarized
as follows by Mr.. Fitzgerald and his
colleagues:
a. The objects professed in the title
are entirely forgotten in the body of the
bill
80 It is reasonably certain that the
most of the subsidy would go to lines
already established and prosperous.
''3 Under this bill the ordinary freight
steamers, which carry so or 80 per cent.
of our agricultural exports, will get but
fraction of the amount of subsidy
which the passenger steamers would
receive, although the latter carry less
than ten per cent. of our agricultural ex-
ports.
a. Under this bill ship can run prac-
tically in ballast and draw subsidy We
believe that when freight is not pl npt-
ly offered it will pay a certain clas~ of
ships to run empty rather than to Wait
for cargo.
"5. This bill would tax all our citi-
zens to provide extra profits for a ia
vored few in this favored industry.
sc. The professions of this bill are in
sincere and it's principles are unsound.
We believe that the best interests of
this nation do not demand the passage of
this or of any similar bill.
These objections have never been
successfully met, nor is it possible to
defend the bill against them. The
points raised in paragraphs mum oered
2. and are particularly unaTwer-
able. The opposition to the ship sub
sidy scheme is based upon the same
sound and honest principles which
have lain back of the resistance to all
previous schemes to flch from the
many for the benefit of a few.-Albany
Argus.