Evening capital and Maryland gazette., 1912-12-27
FAvORS MERCHANT MARINE.
What Annapolis Correspondent Thinks
ofTrsffic Through Panama Canal.

Writing 10 a Baltimore paper, an
Annapolis correspondent who as
sumes the nom de plume OF De
Arecie. y has the following which The
CAPITAL reprints for the benefit of
the many interested Annapolitans who
will not see il in TIE Baltimore
paper. He says.
whether or not we shsll give
American ships q lower rate than
the ships of other nations through
the Panama Canal now hinges on
the British treaty. If the United
States was not included under the
heading. IL should have been all
other na tions, . rather than "ai ma
tions. (" for YOU may be sure that had
any other nation failed to consider
rs among "all nations" we would
have been very much hurt.
Therefore. if the representatives
Of the United States failed to make q
correct treaty, it is our duty as a
nation to carry out our contract the
same as q business man would do in
case his agent drew up a faulty con-
tract. Let us be good losers and
give Great Britain exactly what the
treaty says. We may lose On oppor-
tunitv 10 subsidixe merchant ma
rine. but the United States basn' t
the same need for one that other ma
tions have.
"In the United States proper we
would have no use for the marine
except as a means for transporting
troops. But there is no place in the
United States where the railroads
cannot afford quicker and better
transportation. Therefore, would It
not be better to arrange for com
plete government control of rail-
WAYS in time of war, rather than q
merchant marine, which very
likely would have to be recalled
from foreign ports?
"Of course the protection of the
United States proper must be the
first consideration, and, therefore,
the money should be used, first, for
building and maintaining a navy Of
sufficient strength TO protect our
seacoast, and, second, for increasing
and concentrating our army and sub
sidizing the railroads so that iE case
an army were landed we would have
the men and the facilities for getting
them where they would check its adj
vance. By getting he transportation
problem we'll in hand we will be able
TO double the protective value OF our
army, while, as it is now, unnecessary
delay would occur in getting our
troops to the front. These things
should be done for the protection OF
this country, rather than subsidiEe 8
merchant marine, which would be
Of little use now in protecting oul
provinces.
They are so situated that the
navy would afford them their great
est protection. They are Of such
natural formation that great armies
could not fight on them; therefore,
the necessity for a merchant ma
rine to transport and supply great
number of troops is not there. And
as the navy must have eoaling steam
ers in peace as we'll as in war, only a
/ limited number would be used in that
service, for the amount of coal used
would not be much increased over the
capacity of the ships already in the
service.
II have only taken in the defensive
side, but that is the important thing,
for nations first duty is to protect
her citizens. And / doubt not but
that it would be better for the worlds
peace if the United States did not
have a merchant marine, which
would make it easy to attack another
nation quickly"