The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-12-11
LOOPING Trfr rREAsunY.

Tne inoicatlonS gre that the Prest" dent and his packers win find it, Jdifi- cult to make party measure of the ship subsidy scheme and force it through Congress, for Republicans are not all in favor of this form of loot ing the treasury. One of the soundest and strongest of them, The Portland oregonian, has such pointed article on the subject that we freely make 1t our own in our editorial columns. It says;
 All our advocates of ship subsidy are in the position of those who make complaint that our ocean carrying trade is done at too cheap rate, and that Government, therefore, ought to step ury, in addition to the freight money now charged against the goods. This is precisely what all the arguments for ship subsidy come to.
 can make no money in carrying the products of our country to foreign mar kets, because foreign ships carry them at so low rate. Hence, our subsidy advocates are actually contending that freight rates on our products to for eign countries ought to be raised, by out of the Treasury, and turning 1t over to American ship owners.
 We are in q continual fight with our raiiroad managers to ges loWer % as rali by law, all along the line; yet we are told that ship rates are too low, and must be increased by direct payments erable foreigner is doing our ocean service, or much of 1t, for us, too cheap, and we are oppressed thereby.
 It is the shatIowest argument ever made for loot of the public Treasury. The object Is enrichment of new sym dicates, formed for plunder Every ated ahed attentioa 9n tnTns s towsrs sT the sea but since the sea Is the free highway of nations. monopoly in the carriage of our products over 1t can be had only through the subsidy method.
 Ii is protection" gone mad. A prop osition of this nature is, however, mo- tice, acknowledgement or proof that the enrichment of a few among us at the expense of the many. Since foreign ships can and do carry our products at rates admittedly low--too low for our to continue it? Why pay subsidies and build up a new set of millionaire mo- nopoiists and pIutocratic syndicates at home, at the expense of the people on either side .0f the game. who are to be charged on the. one hand higher rates for transportatton of their. products. and then are to be robbed on the other hand by taking money they have paid 1 ntlfe form of taxes into the Treasury and putting il sas freight money into the pockets of ship subsidys exploita- tion2 z-f-5s4- s,9. -ar -e7 f- . Secretary Root, in his speech at Kan sas City, seemed to think that the ar- gument for subsidy was complete, when he remarked that England was paying to steamship lines several million dol- lars year. which makes competition by us costly and difficult. But Great Britain is an island empire; ner chief thought always must be of the sea her political situation and her vast colonial interests require her to pursue a policy not necessary for us; and, after all, the few millions she pays for as- sistance of steamship lines is but a bagatelle in proportion to her vast commercial, shipping and naval inter ests. With her colonies ana dependen- cies she must maintain connections and incidentally she is in position to do much TpfE our ocean tFansportation at lower rNtes than we can ever do 1t for ourselVes.
 Strange to say, we have people who are dissatisfied because England and some other countries are In position to work for us so cheap. Yet the whole agitation for the shiB subsidy bill now before Congress has its origin in the designs of body of franchise grab bers and subsidy -mongers on the Treasury of the United States Ex- haustion of other schemes has concen- trated their efforts upon this one.