Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1907-04-01
ROOSEVELT WRITES POLLARD
President Thanks Nsbraskau for Voting
for Ship subsidy Bill.
SAYS MEASURE is OF GREAT IMPORTANCE
Features I'm other Bills that Were
Objectionable Have Been EIim-
inatsd-weatern COnsress-
men Congratulated.

thanking him for his support of the ship
subsidy bill and congratulating him and
other western congressman for taking
broad and patriotic view of the subject.
The letter follows;
WASHINGTON, d. c., March 10, 1907
My Dear Mr.. Pollard / feel that II is due
not only TO you but to the other western
congressman, the congressman from the In
terror who voted for the ship subsidy bill,
you, but for all of them also, the reasons
why think you have rendered great and
patriotic service
At the outset let me emphasize the fact
that the present proposed ship subsidy bill
mas nothing whatever in common with GER
tain previous measures of the same name.
There were well founded objections to GER
TAIN features of these previous measures
tNn,,i but IN the present measure all these o.
l should heartily favor the present meas
ure IN any event; but the experiences OF
Secretary Root on his trip to South Amer
cihc, seem to me to render It Of the ut
most consequence to pass the proposed
to 1t is that 1t does not go FAR enough.
personally, for instance, would like to see
line to South America from one OF our
1 feel that you men from the west who
stood by the cause of American shipping
IN supporting the ship subsidy bill deserve
the same praise that should be accorded 70
those men of the seacoast regions who
voted for and by their votes succeeded in
establishing, our present system Of national
irrigation In the states from Kansas, Ne
bras ka and the Dakotas westward to Cali
fornia oregon and Washington. At that
time the argument was made to me by
many men representing the country east
of the mississippi that 1t was not fair to
ask their support for measure purely 70
benefit the states OF the Great Plains and
the Rockies. My answer TO them was that
anything that benefited a part of this coun-
try ultimately benefited all of it, and that
we were in honor bound to support any
such measure. even If our particular To-
WE mt a
| ment applies now in reference to this ship
ping bill: 1t Is deeply discreditable 70 us
| as nation that our shipping should be
| driven from the high seas, and 1t has thus
| been driven partly because our steamship
lines are quite unable to compete with
! foreign steamship lines, English, German
! Japanese, French, which are heavily sub
| sidized by their governments, and partly
because the high standard of wages and
| of living which we exact for our seamen
puts our shipmasters and shipowners at
! disadvantage when forced to compete even
with unsubsidiZed ships Of foreign powers.
! This difference in standards. and the sub
sidization Of our foreign competitors, taken
! development of our shipping which is In
! surmountable except by subsidy, and
| this obstacle must be cleared away as we
would clear away bar from the mouth
| Real Blow TO Country.
| I felt that the loss of the ship subsidy
! bill at the last session of congress was
real blow to our country. and that It was
particularly to be regretted because 1t mas
| tended to dampen some Of the enthusiasm
| for closer relations with this country which
Secretary Roots visit aroused -. sqNth
/ ArIseica. g - - fot.SFlist cable from our
! minister to Uruguay shows how the failure
to pass this bill is regretted in some Of the
great eomn1onwealths Of South America
| "MONTEVIDEO, March II. 1907.-Root,
| Washington: Great disappointment felt in
| River Plate countries over failure of ship
ping bill to become law. The desire Is
90 great for a direct communication with
| United States that 1 believe agreement
could be made in advance which would In
S9 Sr RSer Pate eoSDRes 81 Shs
In my message at the opening of the last
session Of congress spoke on this matter
Let me once again call the attention Of
the congress to two subjects concerning
| which l have frequently before communi-
Gated with them. One is the question Of
developing American shipping. 1 trust that
a law embodying in substance the views
| or a major part of the views, expressed in
the report on this subject made before the
house at its last session will be passed. I
am well aware that in former years OBJ
| in reference to the announcement of Amer
lean shipping; but it seems to me that the
able as any can be. 1t will, of course.
| benefit primarily our seaboard states, such
as Maine Louisiana and Washington, but
| what benefits part of our people in the
end benefits all; just as government aid to
irrigation and forestry in the west is really
of benefit. not only to the Rocky mountain
states, but to all our country II Il prove
impracticable to enact a law for the en-
eouragement OF shipping generally, then at
munication with South America, notably
for fast mail lines to the chief South Amer
our business people, for lack of direct
communication In the shape OF lines Of
steamers with south america should in
advantage compared to the bushes people
OF Europe"
Second Message to Congress.
On January % I followed this up with a
special message running as follows:
TO the Senate and House of Representa-
tives: ! call your attention to the great
desirability of enaeting legislation to help
American shipping and American trade
by encouraging the building and running
Of lines Of large and swift steamers. TO
South America and the orient.
''The urgent need of our country's max
ing an effort to do something like its
ocean has been called to our attention in
striking fashion by the experiences OF Sec
retary Root IT, on his regent s south Amer
he has set forth In his address before
the Transmississippi Commercial congress
an address so important that it deserves
the careful study OF all PUBLIC men.
The facts set Set, forth By 1I Mr Root are
attention OF our people. The great conti-
nent to the south Of US, which should be
Is hardly in direct commercial communica-
tion with US at all, It's commercial relations
DeluE almost exclusively with EUROPE be
tween all the principal South American
ports and Europe lines OF swift and COM
modiOus steamers, subsidized by their
home governments, ply regularly. There
Is no such line OF steamers between these
ports and the United States
| In consequence, our shipping In South
American ports is almost negligible guam
tlty; for instance, in the year ending June
so 1905. there entered the port OF Rio
de Janeiro over 1900 steamers and sailing
vessels from Europe, but from the United
States no steamers and only seven sailing
vessels two OF which were In distress.
One prime reason for this state OF things
a the fact that those who now do business
| on the sea do business In a world not of
natural competition, but OF subsidized COM
. / petition State aid to steamship lines Is
| as much a part Of the commercial system
OF today as state employment of consuls
to promote business. Our commercial COM
petltOrs In Europe pay In the aggregate
aome SIS, 100000 a year TO their steamship
lnea-Great Britain paying nearly 81 900 .000.
Japan pays between 100000 and 81 600 900.
| BY the proposed legislation the United
sfstes viii still pay relatively less than
any one Of its competitors pays. Three
/, years ago the Transmississippi congress
formally set forth as aNiomatic the state
ment that every ship Is a missionary OF
trade that steamship lines work for their
own countries Just as railroad lines work
for their terminal points ana that Il is as
absurd for the United States to depend
uDon foreign ships TO distribute It's prod
ucts as Il would be for department store
I 10 depend upon wagons Of q competing