The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1901-11-20
McLaurin on Subsidies.

Senator McLaruin, of South Caro-
lina. is progressing finely as Re-
publican. Like most new converts
be is ready to go all the gaits, and
seeks to show greater zeal than
he has just made an argument for
Shipping bounties. Though ne does
not declare specifically in favor OF
the Hanna-Frye subsidy bill he Will
probably support it, which many Re-
publicans of long standing will not
Mr.. McLaurin, however, mas not
sufficiently familiarized himself with
the subsidy argument to recite it with
entire correctness. He begins by say
inc if ships could be built and ope-
rated as cheaply here as abroad a
bounty would still be needed, but
only sufficient to Offset bounties by
other countries to ships built and
managed by their own people. Now,
there is no country except the United
States that denies to ships built IN
other countries the right to hoist the
flag of the country over them. Seve-
raj nations have also paid bounties to
ships built in other countries when
owned by their own people. Great
Britain, the greatest maritime power
in the world, pays for carrying her
mails, but does not discriminate for
or against ship on account of the
place where it was built. Only two
or three per cent. of British merchant
ships get any money from the Govern
ment even for carrying the mails.
But.if American ships cannot be built
as cheaply here as abroad, how does
it happen that American yards build
ships for other countries? If we bad
free trade in ships our builders would
furnish ships as cheaply to our own
people as they do to foreigners. But
it is alleged that if they get cheap
ships they cannot steam them under
the American flag as cheaply as under
a foreign flag. What has the flag to
do with it? It is said, of course, that
wages are higher in America: But
the Hanna-Frye subsidy bill did not
propose to limit the subsidized ships
to American seamen. They were not
to have more than three-fourths for
eieners, except in cases Of necesslt ty.
The wagesssof the three-fourths would,
of course, fix the scale for all. If
foreign-built ships cannot be sailed
under the American flag what is the
object of refusing them a privilege of
which they cannot avail themselves?
Yet it is said that free trade IN ships
would ruin American ship builders.
a confession that ships can be operated
under our flag without a subsidy.
Mr.. McLaurin, however, lays main
stress on tie fact that foreign-built
ships cannot be used in war as naval
auxiliaries. Now the question of using
merchant ships as auxiliary cruisers
is one apart from that of the merchant
marine proper. It is naval ques-
ton. The vessel designed to be used,
upon occasion, as an auxiliary cruiser,
should be constructed with view to
that object. and this involves extra
cost of construction. The privilege of
taking it at will as naval vessel is
valuable one and ought to be paid for
The question whether that is better
for the Government than building
more cruisers of its own is debatable,
but it is a question of finance rather
than of principle. The point that
private property cannot be taken for
public use without compensation is
settled. and is quite apart from that