The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1904-03-04
AS TO A SHIP SUBSIDY.

Senator Cockrell, Of Missouri. has present
ed to the Senate resolutions adopted by the
Board of Trade of Kansas City defining the
attitude of the board on the shipbuilding
question. The resolutions declare that:
We are in hearty sympathy with the
movement calling for ouragement and
friendly legislation on the part Of Congress
10 enlarge and extend the American mer-
chant marine; 10 remove, as far as possible,
any impediment discrimination TO the
American merchant marine now existing
and 10 put IL upon an equality before the
law with any merchant marine sailing I'M
der the flag OF the most favored nation;
provided. however, that this Board OF Trade
IS unalteraby opposed TO any enactment
by Congress that shall involve the payment
OF any subsidy, IL being the firm conviction
that the magnitude Of the commerce to be
carried, the unlimited supply Of material
within our own borders for the construction
of vessels, and the unequaied ability of our
people in the construction OF the same, to-
gether with their recognized superior sea-
manship, place the people of this Nation
upon a footing on which they are able to
aid.
The resolution seems to have been judi
ciously framed TO favor the upbuilding of
our merchant marine by every means ex-
cept the payment of a money subsidy. This
is safe middle ground. and probably repre-
sents the views of business men in the in
terror of the country not directly connected
with ocean commerce, and especially Of
those in the West.
Among the classes named there is a prev
alent feeling that our merchant marine has
reached deplorably low stage of develop
ment and that Ii deserves to be encouraged
bv favorable LEGISLATION Of everv lind ax-
cept granting a money subsidy. That has
never been done in favor of any business
interest, and there is a feeling that the
practice should not be begun. Congress
granted land subsidies to the Union and
Central Pacific railways, but that was diff
also granted subsidies to United States
steamships to carry the ocean mails, and
the government still pays for that service.
This, however. is different from a subsidy
to build up a private business.
The decadence of our ocean carrying trade
plate with pride. President Harrison said
in one of his annual messages: There is
nothing more justly humiliating to the ma
tional pride and nothing more hurtful to
the national prosperity than the inferiority
of our merchant marine compared with that
of other nations whose general resources.
wealth and seacoast lines do not suggest
any reason for their supremacy on the sea.
1t was not always so, and our people are
agreed, think, that it shall not continue
to be so.'
But, while everybody agrees that the
United States ought to regain its former
supremacy in the ocean-carrying trade.
opinions differ as to how it should be done.
whether by a money subsidy to promote
shipbuiding or by removing existing i'm
pediments and determinations against the
American merchant marine and leaving IT
to develop in obedience to natural laws
without a money subsidy. The latter would
seem to be the better plan and more in &C
cordance with American ideas. The Repub-
lican national platform of 1896 declared:
We favor restoring the early American
policy of discriminating duties for the up
building of our merchant marine and the
protection Of our shipping In the foreign
carrying trade so that American ships-the
product of American labor employed in
American shipyardS, sailing under the stars
and stripes and manned, Differed and
owned by Americans-may regain the car
rying Of our foreign commerce.
The Republican platform of 1900 declared
that "our present dependence upon foreign
shipping for nine-tenths of our foreign car
rying is a great loss TO the industry of this
country" and favored legislation (which
will enable to recover our former place
among the trade-carrying fleets of the
world" 1t was claimed by some that these
resolutions favored a direct ship subsidy
but clearly they did not The early Ameri-
can policy Of discriminating duties in favor
of the American marine had no element OF
subsidy in it, II was under that policy thai
our merchant marine and ocean-carryins
trade attained their greatest development
and there is reason to believe that a return
| TO 1t would have similar results now. A
all events. that policy should be given 6
| thorough trial before resorting to direct
subsidies.
FOLLOWING THE BUTCHER.