The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1901-01-27
SEED AND SHIP-SUBSIDIES.
Intimate Relation Between an Old
and a Young Measure OF PaternaI-
ism.

and a Young Measure OF PaternaI-
ism.
From the New York Post.
The strong opposition developed against
the ship-subsidy bill. and against the gem
eral idea of subsidies by government in
favor of one set of taxpayers at the cost
OF another, has renewed public criticism
of the abuses which have arisen in con-
nection with the congressional free seed
distribution, and which, it is believed,
have now overshadowed all the beneficial
effects which this distribution once pos-
sessed. Speaking to-day of these two
drains on the public purse, the one of
long standing, the other thus far only a
threat, man versed in agricultural pur-
suits and familiar with the needs of the
farmers calling said:
Mr.. Landreth, the Secretarv of +be
National Sediments Lague, has perform
ed valuable public service in calling at
tention to the inconsistency and abuse of
the congressional free seed distribution
business. The relation of this system to
the proposed ship-subsidy gift 10 shin
owners deserves more than passing no.
tiea.
In the gift of more than a million dol
lars worth of seeds at the expense of the
people of the whole country, a former
Iaudable object in the dissemination of
new ana valuable varieties of fruits. veg
e'ao4es' ana grasses has deteriora ted into
system of personal and political favor
ttism in the distribution of common Goods
OF the most commonplace type. The in
jury to the seed merchants. and those
directly engaged in the seed industry, &c
not Dy any means the most objections hla
feature of this free distribution. but ra III
er the underlying principle, and, in a free
government, the always inimical condf-
uoh or taxing the many for the benetit
OF the comparatively few What wouId
De thought of the proposition of an an
nuaI appropriation by Congress for the
purpose of free distribution to tba 60
Vored congressional constituency of a mil
non collars worth of lumber, or of gro
cerles, or of textile fabrics-wooIlan ava
cotton goods? '--0
nat recognition from press and n,,b-
nc would such a scheme receive? Vet ~
would hardly be more unreasonable ana
uh-American than the present system of
seed distribution. The enormously vaI,,-
able land grants and special privileges 70
some or the railroad companies and the
governments favoritism shown the ma
1loiial ranks stlll have a strong hold on
- as tHe compromising adVan-
tages TO the nation as a whole in onaniro
up new portions of the country in The one
case and the uniform system of c,,r
rehcy IN the other, have been potent fac
tors IN disarming criticism and effective
opposition to the principle of special IA
Vorltlsm TO private interests involved
NO such counterbalancing advanta oas
OBTAIN In the plan of Congressional seed
sratls business. 1t is special legislation
pure and simple. 1t encourages an ever
growing tendency to use the public treas
ury Tor personal and political ends. The
system favors governmental 'paternal-
ism and appeals directly to the unnatri-
otto impulse of seeking special favore
through legislation at public expense An
enlightened pubic sentiment must sooner
islation 20
While unlike the ship-subsidv schema
IN application, the principle involved Is
apparently much the same Both din in
TO the United States Treasury to hen
special persons or interests that. in com
mon with the mass of people in other lines
of occupation or industry. should beln
themselves. AS has been repeatedly
pointed out in the debates in Congress and
by the press, a large part of the mil
hons provided by the proposed ship-s11bsi
dy measure would soon find its wav al
rectly into the treasury of a few great cor
porations. some of which have already re-
ceiVed liberal governmental patronage.
The plan of free seed distribution dos
not call for so large an annual OUTLAY
by the. government as the ship-subsi1v
bill would entail, but If the one measure
Is to stand and the other notwithstand
ing the widespread opposition. be enact
ed, what logic or consistency will there
be IN opposing special benefits through
legislation Il any or all private inter-
ests in every trade aud industry-corpor-