Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1902-03-11
VEST AGAINST SUBSIDY.
Senator From Missouri Attacks the
Shipping Bill.

Washington, March II. - Senator
Vest of Missouri, spoke for nearly two
hours yesterday in opposition to the
shipping bill, comparing it in it's details
with the postal subsidy act of 1891, and
showing that in the pending bill it was
proposed to increase the subsidy be-
cause it was claimed by the majority
that the present postal subsidies were
not sufficient to achieve the results
hoped for from the pending bill The
Missouri senator declared that T3 per
cent of the subsidy which would be re-
ceived by ships on the Atlantic would
go to the International Navigation
Company-th American line The
pending bill, he said, would take money
out of the treasury of the United States
without giving anything OF value in re-
turn for It, The vessels would get the
subsidies whether they carried a single
postal card or not. He declared that
the pending bill was defended on the
ground that. with the subsidy, the
American merchant marine could COM
pete with the subsidized ships of Euro
pean maritime powers. He denied
'emphatically and distinctly" that
-
operation. England, he asserted, had
SO per cent of the ocean carrying trade
of the world. but he denied that En-
gland paid subsidies to her vessels. He
declared that Great Britain paid the
steamship lines for carrying the mails.
the sums paid being dependent upon
the number of pounds of mail carried
Most of England's ocean commerce was
carried by her tramp steamers, and not
penny of subsidy was paid to any of
them. Mr.. Vest sharply criticised the
provision of the pending bill looking to
the Improvement of the deep sea fish
cries. He said he did not complain Of
the senator from Maine (Mr. Frye) be-
cause he proposed to take S175000 a
year from the taxpayers for the benefit
of New England's deep sea fisheries. He
thought that New England ought to be
satisfied with the legislation for her
benefit already on the statute books.
MIR. Vest criticised the majority of the
commerce committee for eliminating
from this bill the provision which re-
CURED a subsidized ship to carry at
least 90 per cent of her cargo capacity
on any voyage upon which she was to
receive subsidy. The majority, he eX-
planned, had held that the provision
was of doubtful consdtutionality" He
had read letter from Hon. George II.
Edmunds, taking the ground that such
q provision was not unconstitutional.
Mr.. Vest maintained that ships should
be built in this country as cheaply as
they could anywhere. and that the con-
tention of the majority to the contrary
was not we'll founded. He made u Wig
orous attack on the navigation laws of
the United States, declaring that they
We're responsible for the decline of the
marine. They embodied, he
asserted, a semi-barbaric system which
even China had thrown aside. They
had weighed down the merchant ma
rine until it amounted practically to
nothing. The remedy was to abrogate
the navigation laws and permit citizens
of the United States to buy their ships
where they could buy them cheapest.
No subsidy would enable them to do
that. He asserted that If the demo-
cratic party should regain power no
ship subsidy would be permitted to re-
main on the statute books Mr. Vest
said If this subsidy is given, 1T will be
but the beginning of the end and will
result in monopoly equal to that of
the Standard Oil Company
Mr.. Tillman spoke in opposition to
the bill. He said that the bin would
foster monopolies and incidentally re-
ferred TO the proposed incorporation of
the United States Ship Building Com
pany which would absorb the large
shiuVnrCls of the cOuptIV