The Washington times., 1902-03-16

ment providing that no contract under
the provisions Of the act shall be binding
/ on the Government of the United States
| until it shall have been submitted to
and approved by Congress. He made
some remarks in explanation and advo-
cacy of the amendment.
Mr.. Aliison's Objections.
| Mr.. Allison then took the floor, and
/ to use his language, stated "a few OBJ
| jections' which he said he had to the
bill. He thought that it ought to have
| beginning and an ending, he said. He
| would therefore offer amendments limit
ing to the LIST of July. 1910. the time
within which the Postmaster General
should make contracts. and providing
that no contract shall extend beyond July
1, 1920.
He said that he would also offer an
amendment providing that no vessel shall
be entitled to full compensation unless
sailing from United States port with
cargo to the amount of her carrying
capacity-the shortage in cargo to cause
proportionate diminution in subsidy.
A further amendment would limit the
aggregate annual expenditure for mail
pay to $4,000, 900 until July /, 1907, and
to IS, ,000, 600 after that date.
With regard TO this Mr.. Allison stated
that he particularly desired TO have a
limit fixed. He was sure that in some
regions of the country the amount would
be said to be as high as $50, 900 900 a
year, to be paid from taxation taken from
the people.
Would Not Propose Limit.
He would not propose limit to the
hsid small cta nd
ing vessels that would come within the
provisions of the bill. If he had his way
about it he would strike that out Of the
bill. He saw no particular reason why
a sailing ship Of 400 or 500 tons from
Charleston to Havana should have a sub
sidy.
He suggested several other amendments
which he proposed to offer to the bill,
and finally said that he had very great
doubts about the entire measure.
Favors Mail Subsidies
Mr.. Spooner criticised the bill in sew
eraI of its provisions. He said that ha
was in favor of the mail subsidies pro-
posed, but he did not like to vote for ff-
teen-year contracts and for the payment
of vast sums Of money out of the Treas
ury unless it was quite apparent that the
purpose sought TO be accomplished would
lie accomplished And he had not been
able to ascertain that from the debate.
On the contrary, the information which
he had been able to obtain from the de
bate caused him TO doubt it. The object
was. not simply to give more pay for car
ryiEg the mails, but to equaiiZe the con
ditions between American ships and ship1
OF other countries.
1t was stated by the friends Of the bill
that the difference in cost of constTuc-
tion and OF operation was IS per cent
Did the pending bill. he asked equalize |
those conditions? If it did not equaIize
them the amounts paid under II would be
"A waste of the public money.
Would Not Overcome Conditions.
He did not believe that the mail rates
provided In the bill would overcome the
adverse conditions; and if the bill diG not
do that, it did too much. He thought tina
there should be notice incorporated in
the bill, TO all the world, that the sub
sidy provided in II was precarious, as
every Senator knew that 1t was and that |
contractors should not build largely |
upon it.
Minority Report.
Another feature OF the shipping bill |
developments yesterday was the pre-
sentation of the report OF the Demo- |
cratic minority members OF the Committee |
on Commerce by Senator Berry.
The report recites that the pending bill |
is in some respects even more objec- |
tionable than that proposed in the last |
Congress. The preceding bill limited the |
annual expenditures to $4,000 00G "a year;
the new bill makes no limit. The stipua- |
tion for the carriage of certain per- |
centage OF cargo in the subsidized YES |
sells is absent from the new bill, which |
also excludes all foreign built vessels.
''The bill proposes. the report con-
tinues. ito tax the whole people of the |
United States to the extent OF several |
millions a year for the benefit OF one sim |
gle industry-the shipbuilding and ship |
ping industry. II is wrong in principle, |
unjust. vicious, pure class legislation, !
and We recommend that it do not pass