Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1901-02-11
FREE SHIPS.
The Corrective of Ship Subsidy, and
Steel Trusts.
BY Osborne Howes.

That what are termed trust influences
are far reaching in their scope is made
evident by recent experiences in Wash
ington respecting the Congressional status
of the Hanna-Payne ship subsidy bill. 1t
has been difficult for many to account for
the persistency with which this bill has
been pushed forward in the face of a
majority made up of hostile and reluctant
members, and at session of Congress too
short to transact with a proper degree of
consideration even necessary public bust
ness. The statement made by Senator
Frye in the Senate on January 18th, that
he proposed to keep the shipping bill to
the front and did not intend to yield fur
Their to any other bill, not even an appro-
priation bill, unless the Senate by vote
placed appropriation bills ahead, gives
evidence of determination to insist upon
passing this measure, an insistency which
would not be justified by the support, in
dividual, corporate or popular, which the
measure has publicly received.
The ostensible promoters of this measure
are a small number of individuals: their
plan has not received the endorsement of
any considerable number of the large and
influential commercial organizations of
Democratic public men and newspapers,
but by large number of Republicans and
by some of the most influential of the Re-
publican journals. Under such circum-
stances it is not easy to understand how a
project of this kind should take preced-
ence in Congress over the Isthmian canal
bill or the constitution of Cuba. measures
which have the greatest national import
ance.
An explanation is found, however, when
1t is taken into account that in addition
to the handful Of show owners and ship
builders who have appeared before the
Congressional committees this. shipping
subsidy bill has the effective bit unosten-
tatious support of the great Steel manu-
turing combinations, for the reason that
by means of it they hope to forestall the
arousing of hostile public opinion against
them, and at the same time to make a
better domestic market for their product
In paper published in a recent number
of the Scientific American December 5th
1900, Mr.. George w. Dickie, a marine
architect, makes certain statements as the
results of an inspection of the principal
British shipyards. He says:
The tariff on steel plates and shapes
makes it possible for us to find the Brit
ish ship builder working into his ships
American steel from Pittsburg, at a less
cost to him than the English material and
at less cost than is charged the Ameri-
can ship builder for the same material in
Pittsburg. If the American steel manu-
facturer can meet the British steel man
ufacturer on equal terms in the British
ship yard, somehow it seems as if it might
be possible for the American ship builder
to get his steel material as cheap as the
British ship builder gets his"
In the Monthly Summary of Commerce
and Finance of the United States for
August, 1900 prepared by the bureau of
statistics of the Treasury Department, the
statement is made:
The progress of work on ship building
in the United States has largely been re-
tarded because makers of steel materials
required higher price from the American
consumer than they did from the foreign
consumer for substantially similar pro-
duets The natural limit to such a policy
OF maintaining higher level of prices for
these materials at home than abroad is
found in the restriction of domestic con-
structon and in the import duty. If re-
striction of consumption at home does not
operate to prevent the short-sishted pol
Icy OF discrimination against domestic de-
velopment Of manufacturing industries.
the other contingent is more or less sure
10 ARISE namely the demand for reduc-
tlon OF the tariff on unfinished iron and