The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-12-22

Problem of Its Restoration Requires
Americas Earnest Attention.

Boston Herald.
Sir Christopher Furness, one of the lead
ing shipbuilders and ship owners of Great
Britain, after spending three months in the
United States inspecting our various indus
tries, particularly those appertaining to
the business of snipbuilding, on the eve
of his departure for Europe made the
statement that he believed the American
people were soon to re-establish their mer-
chant marine. not through the medium of
subsidies, but by their ability to procure
cheap raw materials and to put these into
the form of ships at a lower cost than their
foreign rivals. Sir Christopher stated that
he had visited practically all of the i'm
pOrtant shipbuilding establishments of the
United States, and without exception found
them so crowded with work that they were
not in a condition to take new orders even
if these were rendered TO them. He was
so firmly convinced of the future enlarge
ment of this business that he had agreed
10 become financially interested i'm a new
~shipbuilding establishment which was to be
shortly located at a desirable point in the
United States. AS to the cost of construc-
ton this authority maintained that a great
deal that had been said concerning this
was mighty deceptive.
Il am" said Sir Christopher, "a part
proprietor of five shipbuilding yards in
England. These yards turned out more
shipping last year than all of the United
States yards put together, and L will under
take to say that we have got as many men
i'm our shipyards earning as high wages as
are in the shipyards of the United States,
consequently it is entirely a question OF
the price of steel. and as the United States
can produce steel cheaper than England
il is reasonable to suppose that in the long
run they will be able TO sell il to Ameri-
can shipbuilders cheaper than English ship
builders can obtain their supplies"
While ii may be true that certain SChed-
ules of wages paid make it appear that the
scale is higher in the United States than 1t
is in England and Scotland, this shrewd
English manufacturer pointed out that
comparisons of this kind were wholly de-
ceptive; that English and Scotch labor was
not as efficient as American labor, while the
hours of work were shorter in Great Britain
than in this country. 1t can, of course. be
said, as Sir Christopher assumed, that his
upon the u-selessness of a ship
ping subsidy were due 10 the fact that En-
glish ships which he owned would have to
run in competition with American sub
sidiZed tonnage; but at the present time
subsidized French and Italian merchant
tonnage and find little difficulty in doing
this work at a profit TO their owner.
II Sir Christopher Furness established
a large shipyard I'm this country he would
doubtless derive as much profit from the
subsidies, If he believed they were advan-
tageous. as would the other owners of
American shipyards. The basis of his rea-
soning is the solid one that in business
enterprises ii is much the better plan for
those actively engaged TO depend upon
their own eXertions than TO look for a more
or less uncertain aid from government
sources. The difficulty with too many Of
our American shipping ventures has been
that they have been largely political in
their character. 1t seems to have been
considered necessary for our steamship
companies to maintain Hobbies at Wash
ington, and the price of their shares In
the market has been determined much
less by the successful prosecution of the
transportation business than by the prob
ability or improbability of obtaining gov
eminent aid.
We have maintained from the first that
the only material obstacle in the way of a
resuscitation of the American merchant
marine is the higher cost of American con-
structed merchant ships. We agree entirely
with Sir Christopher Furness as to the SUI
periOr efficiency of American labor, and
hence its lower cost when compared with
foreign labor, but we realize that when he
says that in the long run American ship
builders should obtain their steel at lower
prices than English and Scotch builders
he refers to conditions that have not thus
far found a practical naturalization I'm
dOubtedly it costs less to manufacture steel
In the United States than ii does in Eng
land and Scotland. but thus far the manu-
facture in this country has been carried
on under conditions that have enabled the
TO name their own prices when
their purchasers were American Shipbuld-
ers, while they have been willing to sell
similar products to foreign shipbuilders at
prices far below those asked of and given
by their own cOuntrymen.
So long as these conditions exist ii will
be impossible for our American shipbuild-
ers to obtain the great benefits Of cheap
raw material, but ii would certainly be
absurd for the government TO assist a mo-
nOpOly of this kind by compelling the tax
payers out Of their pockets to give a coun-
tervailing bounty TO those who are directly
suffering by this extOrtiOn. The proper way
TO give our shipbuilders the advantages of
cheap raw materials Is not 10 encourage
the monopoly. but to abolish It.