Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1901-10-23

the same extent a national necessity.
If we had a record of the fact that
our contemporary had ever approved
the manner in which the jetties re-
ferred to were built, we would proba-
bly, be able to make it appear a little
inconsistent; but, frankly, we have no
such record. We remember Of its hav-
ing asked for appropriations ind con-
graduated the city and state on get
ting appropriations; but we are una
BILE to say that 1t has ever expressed
| itself as believing in the principle Of
taxing San Francisco for the benefit
Of Charleston. Inasmuch, as we our
selves approve the proposition under
the circumstances, we shall not at
tempt to probe the matter too deep
ly. We have always believed that the
development Of the port Of Charleston
could go a long ways toward the de-
velopment Of all the commercial inter-
ests Of the whole Southeastern corner
of the United States, and as "a plain
case Of business" this end unquestion-
ably justifies liberal expenditure of
government funds. At the same time,
however, we beg to advise our esteemed
friend that in our opinion the work has
only just commenced. Charleston has
deep water all right enough. and we are
glad to see that foreign ships are tak6
ing advantage of 1t; but the country as
a whole will never begin to realize to
the fullest extent on its investment inc
this case until there Is an American
line Of steamships between Charleston,
and South American, and other for
eign ports. And just as 1t would have
probably been a long time before
Charleston could have gotten deep wa
ter without a subsidy, so also will 1t
probably be a long time before this
American steamship line will be estab-
lished without a. subsidy.
Still laboring under the delusion that
the fool foreigners are paying us
literally for the privilege Of hauling
our freights, The News and Courier ar
gues:
If the freight carrying service, for
instance, which foreigners perform for
us for 5000, 900 a year, would cost
us 5000, 100000 If performed by ourselves
we are clearly slUO,000,000 the gamer
by employing them. We have $780,
900 900 to use in the development Of the
country in many ways, which If we did
our own hauling across the sea, would
have to go to pay for the extra cost of
that business alone. Our freight car
| riers, the ship owners, would get that
large sum, Of course: but how would
| the country, or any interest, or indus
| try, not connected with them be ben
ef1tted" by the extra and needless and
wasteful expenditure?
THE ENQUIRER has not been foolish
enough to say that 1t would cost us
5000, 100000 year to do what the for
eigners are doing for 5000, 900, 900. On the
| contrary 1t Is disposed to contend that
If American ship owners are assisted
at the rate Of 50, 900, 900 for a few years,
1t will not be great while before they
will be able to do the work for which
we are now paying $2OO,OOO,OOO for a
considerably less sum. But even If the
work did cost us $500, 600, 900 instead Of
5000, 100000, and the whole sum were
kept in America instead Of being sent
abroad we are unableto see where that
500, ,OOO. 900 referred to would be lost to
the development Of the industries Of
this country. It appears to us rather
that the gross annual income Of the
foreigners would suffer to the extent
of at least 5000, ,OOO, ,OO0t less such sums as
we would have Of necessity to spend In
foreign ports.
One more point and we are done.
In it's efforts to show that the proposed
subsidy is mere gratuity, having no
deeper object that the enrichment Of
private individuals. The News and
Courier said:
We do not see how the ship owners
can properly be left out Of the ques-
tion He is a very important factor In
the question. He is the man to whom
1t Is proposed to give every year $9.000,-
900, collected from"his fellow citizens
by taxation, as a free gift for no con-
sideration-to make his alleged unprof-
table business profitable. If 1t were
proposed to give that sum annually to
the cotton farmer or cotton manufac-
turer of York county, on the same
| terms, there would be a loud and en-
phatic protest throughout the country.
If we recollect properly, there was a
time when the legislature Of South.
Carolina donated heavy subsidies to
the cotton factories Of this state by
granting immunity from taxation for
a number Of years. Quite a number Of
factories were established as the re-
suit Of this liberality on the part Of the
state and we heard Of no serious COM
plant. The cotton farmer Is very we'll
established and does not need the sub
sidy referred to; but that the subsidy Is
good idea under certain circumstan-
ces Is evidenced by the fact that the
Russian government is using the means
to develop cotton production in Asia
and the German government is using 1t
on the west coast Of Africa. Without
the subsidy cotton growing could never
be established in either territory against
us; but with it the time may come
when we will find formidable competi-
tors in both countries. AS soon as
their cotton growers can stand alone,
the Germans and Russians will with
draw their subsidies, and this Is the
plan that we should pursue with refer
ence to our American ship owners.
MERE-MENTION.
Miss Ellen M. Stone is still in the
hands of the Bulgarian brigands.....
All of the mills that were closed on ac-
count Of the great steel strike, have re-