The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1912-01-14
MEANS FOR THE MARINE.

We have note from Col. r.. +.
Holmes expressing his appreciation OF
the editorial page OF The Tribune. but
disagrceing with An editorial with re.
gard to the best means of restoring the
American merchant marine. The edi-
torial referred TO was q consideration
of Representative uuderwood's propo
sltion TO give rebate 10 American
shipping on goods imported in Ameri
can bottoms. We said that the princi
pie upon which this rebate would be
accorded is precisely the same as a
direct ship subsidy. Col. Holmes does
not challenge this. hut thinks that the
rebate proposition would have the bet
ter effect. stating tho matter in the
following words:
As a world Traveller, it has been ex-
iremely humilIating TO me many times
to note the absence Of the American nag
IN foreign ports, and I have often EpeCu-
lated as lo the cause and its remedy, l
have noted, however that those nations
that give large subsidies, have q consid J.
cradle merchant marine and have
| thought at times that that was the rem
edy for our present deplorable condition
In that regard. But is it2 In tho first
place, subsidies arc given mainly or al
most entirely 10 fast ships carrying mails,
buL the slower boats carry The bulk OF
The freight and subsidies would not help
that class to any approciablc degree, but
a reduction OF the duties would help that
class OF shipping without doubt. nor
would the sum so expended amount to
any great sum until We had greater
tonnage on the ocean.
This docs not in any way. contest
| the principle which we stated; and the
case Of bulllier freigbts could be COW
cred by subsidies, or the slower freight
boats would follow the swift subsidized
! ocean shipping II is simply get
| ting at tho matter in different way,
and We believe that the direct subsidy
! is the more economical. the easier 10
| deal with, and far less complicated
than the other; and the shipping ma.
tious of the world appear to have
| reached that conclusion, since they
| give subsidies and not rebates. Col
! Holmes, however, is entitled to respect
IN bis opinion. and his observation as
o world traveller has been large.
With respect 10 tolls ON tho Panama
Canal Col. Holmes cites the case OF
| the Wclland canal and the Sault Ste
| Marie canal, where no distinction in
tolls is made as between American and
Canadian shipping. Aud he continues
How would 1t be. then, IL NC shoulc
make distinction as TO tho use of our
great Panama canal? 1t would seem tc
me That foreign ships, carrying foreign,
goods TO foreign ports other than the
United States,-for very much of the
traffic must bc of this uaturc-shoud
pay some specific tax for the use OF this
canal, and e. would be equally plain that
American goods TO other american ports
should pass free, or nearly so, and II
might be that any goods to American
ports, whether the same he carried In
foreign or American ships, might also
he carried through tho canal free of tolls
especially II by SO doing the goods would
be furnished cheaper to the American
| people.
Undoubtedly the operation Of the
Panama Canal ought to afford a great
opportunity for the upbuilding of
American shipping. President Taft put
the matter very clearly and very deftly
so that the United States should not
he charged in any way with violating
the treaty in cnse it give rebates to
its ships when he suggested that re
bate. Probably that will he the out
come Of the contention; and certainly
with that outcome no foreign nation
would have the least reason TO com