Valdez daily prospector., 1915-10-04
MONDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1915
Communicated.

Communicated.
 Valdez, Oct. 2, 1915.
 litor Valdez Prospector.
 Dear Sir: One would almost sup
 sse you wrote Long Range Legis-
 tion," by the length of the article
 which you presume to think the
 hole matter settled to the satisfac-
 on of all concerned; but there is at
 ase one still unconvinced, and not
 woman either.
 Concerning MT. Furuseth, I have ,othing to add to what you have said, Ihich appears to prove my contention nat he is the father of the bill and
 imply prevailed upon MT. LaFollette use his influence in having it pass d. I agree that MT. LaFollette is esponsible for its passage, but for he provisions contained therein MT. s'uruseth is responsible, and if it was ampered with after leaving his hands t would naturally be in the way of modification. In justice to MT. La Toilette I wish to recall that state fnent in my first article in which I aid: And that was probably the ,xtent of his interest in the matter" IS l now realize that such a state nent could easily be misunderstood. s I fail to see why in this case any inc lines need be drawn between our < 'coastwise shipping" and shipping on the Thigh seas," and think most of the public who came here by water will agree with me that the seas along the Alaskan coast are just as high as any other seas. However, admitting that American ships entering foreign ports, may be subject to regulations which differ from ours, that would not handicap our shipping unless said laws are more onerous than our own and if that is so then it must be evil dent to all that so far as laws are concerned the American ship ought to have an advantage, for no discrim- mating laws could be made, say by England, which we could not dupli cate to England's disadvantage, on account of her having more ships that enter our ports than we have that enter hers.
 As to the P. & O. line to the Ori- ent, you are reminded that many of those crews, though they may not speak much English, are nevertheless British subjects, and entitled to all the rights of other British seamen. Again there is nothing to prove that officers do not have working knowl- edge of the lingo used by the men, notwithstanding the fact that head man is employed, as you state. Also many English passenger ships carry naval reserves as part of their regu- lar crew, though I don't say such is generally the case.
 What you say of the Scandinavian is equally true of the Down Easter" and when l admit, in justice to my Scandinavian friends, that the Scan dinavian seaman is probably equal to the Down Easter" I am saying all ought to say; to permit anyone to say more without entering pro- test would cause some of those old Down Easter shippers to wiggle in their graves.
 Another thought, which may throw some light on our lack of interest in a merchant marine is the fact that we are or ought to be, selling na- tion and the purchaser has the right to order his goods shipped in for eign bottom if he is interested in the matter for he pays the freight and not the shipper, as some would have us to understand.
 think that concludes my case as to the death of the American mer- chant marine; as to whether or not there is necessity for a merchant marine at present or in the future, is another question which will glad ly sidestep at this time. Your at- tention is called to an article in the Seattle Sunday Times of the 18th inst, which may throw some light on the subject under consideration.
 D. E. NORRIS.