Pine Bluff daily graphic. (Pine Bluff, Ark.) 1893-1942, 1908-03-26
VALUE (?) OF THE
SHIP SUBSIDY BILL
G. W. Galloway Writes to Inquire
\h0m the Necessity OF Such
Measure-Cheap Labor But No
Cheap Goods.

Measure-Cheap Labor But \"
Cheap Goods.
Editor Graphic:
Some ten days since | noticed an
editorial in the Commercial upon
which I ask at your hands an oppor-
tunity to comment. The editor Ia
mented that the American fleet was
being accompanied on it's long voyage
by foreign vessels, flying foreign
flags, while in the employment OF the
American government transporting
supplies for the American fleet. he
seems to understand why the foreign
steamship company got the JOB IN
stead of an American steamship COM
pany. He understands that if an
American company have their SHIPS
built in America of American tariff
protected material the cost is 50
great that they cannot successfully
compete for ocean tonnage with
steamship companies who have their
ships built in free trade countries.
AS a remedy for this unhappy condl-
ton the Commercial would have
Congress enact ship subsidy law do
mating millions to American steam
ship companies, to hire them to do
business in competition with steam
ship companies of free trade coun-
tries. Why should Congress be asked
to pass a ship subsidy law? 1t would
be adding insult to injury to do so.
TO contend that it would be right to
enact a ship subsidy law now is in
substance to contend that two wrongs
will make one right. The enactment
of ship subsidy law would only be
an extension Of the same evil system
Of class legislation which has rem
dered American steamship companies
unable to compete for ocean tonnage
with foreign steamship companies.
Our tariff laws are enacted ostenslbly
to protect American labor. But in
reality to give to American manu-
facturers a monopoly OF the home
market under which special privi-
llege they have robbed the American
consumers annually OF hundreds OF
millions of dollars and at the same
time after they have sold all the man.
ufactured products that the American
consumers can pay for at an eXor-
bitant price, they ship the remainder
to the home of this much dreaded
pauper laborer and undersell the
manufacturers of that country. After
paying freight European manufacture
ers would gladly come to our relief
with cheap goods, but the tariff wall
keeps them out. Our American law
says stay away from here with your
cheap goods and let our pet indus
tries skin the people" You can send
your cheap labor that will be bene-
fetal 70 cur industries but stay away
With your cheap goods.
But now the American steamship
companies have grown to a trust and
are complaining of the eXaction of the
manufacturers. 1t is proposed by our
lawmakers and some editors to go to
their relief with large donation
taxed from the people. If ship sub
sidy law is enacted where will the
money come from to pay it? 1t will
be taken from the public fund of
course. Where did the public fund
come from? 1t was taxed out Of the
people. When that money is turned
over as a gift to the steamship COM
panies the people must be taxed to
replace it. If it be said that it will
not be necessary to tax the people
to replace it it will be plain admis-
sion that the people have already
been taxed beyond the point of ne
cessity. Now there are two remedies,
either one of which would cure the
evil which lost to the American
steamship companies the job of trans
porting supplies for the American
fleet.
If American shipbuilding material
were placed on the free list American
steamship companies could compete
with the world. Or give to American
owned steamships, built in free trade
countries, the protection of the Amer
,nnv ~ oI,