The Washington herald., 1922-12-18

sidy plan is less expensive than
operating the fleet as at pres
ent or than scuttlinc $500 .00O,-
900 or s10G, ,000, 900 worth of ships
The present operation costs $50, ,OOO,-
nO0 year. The subsidy plan would
cost $50 10000 at first and eventual
ly nothing. At worst the tax would
he 30 cents annually for every in
habitant OF the United States. to
save a national investment Of mora
| than half billion.
OTHER PLANS FAILED.
That the subsidy pla IN is necessary
10 secure merchant marine, be-
cause all other plans ATTEMPTED in
the United States in the last sixty
years have been failures. Up TO the
outbreak of the war We still had
nothing to show for our ambitions
at sea except plans We had our
plans and our principles. Others
had the ships
A second group OF objections to
the subsidy is that il is un.Ameri.
can: it is partisan: it is class legis.
lation. To these objections the
quick answers are:
That the ship subsidy is no more
III tudu HDN OIneT Ell0-
sidy. We have subsidized indus
tries with protective tariffs. rail.
ways with land grants and loans
highway construction with con.
tinuous appropriations and irrisa.
tion projects with ready money
from from the United States Treas.
usy. These subsidies-called by
other names, but subsidies lust the
same-have cost and are costing
vast sums, but they have produced
national profits in the billions. They
are American. The ship subsidy
would be one OF many subsidies that
have existed and exist today in
American enterprises
That the ship subsidy would be
no more partisan than the army
or navy or postal delivery unless
some party foolishly chooses to
make 1t SO. The fleet to be saved
by the subsidy was constructed by
and under a Democratic Admins
tration and was passed over in tho
course of government to the trus.
teeship Of Republican Admins
tration. The whole people, Of all
parties. paid for It.
MADE FALSE ISSUE.
The whole people. regardless Of
party. will suffer the loss, IL it is
abandoned or destroyed. The whole
people, regardless of party. will
profit from it IL it is maintained
and perpetuated. No one party
will be able to claim credit IL the
subsidy succeed and do its ap.
pointed work. for the fleet will
be an evidence Of both Republican
ana Democratic accomplishment
That the ship subsidy is no more
class legislation than any other
kind OF Law that promotes Ameri
can. enterprise In one field Of
American endeavor for the benefit
of the whole nation
The merchant fleet. IL preserved
by a subsidy from destruction, will
he Of no us to shipowners except
Fas II serves the needs OF the whole
nation-the farmers with their
wheat exports. the manufacturers
with their Industrial shipments, the
mine operators with their cargoes
Of metals
SAME AS FARM AID.
The ship subsidy is simply of
the same sort as the Government
aid extended to farmers from the
Federal treasury at present. ex.
tended now and for fifty years
past to the industrialists and re
ceived now by the highway con-
structors as formerly by the rail.
road builders.
third group of objections Is
that the ship subsidy would go to
enrich shipowners who already are
rich: 1t would mean profits for men
who do not need any more profits;
it would enable men with money
to mako more money and that at
the expense Of the rest Of us. The
quick answers to these objection,
are:
That about three-fourths Of the
subsidy would go to shipowner.
only to be handed over as wages
TO men on shipboard Because OF
the higher wages paid to Americans
on shipboard. the daily cost Of on.
Grating an American cargo-csrrier
OF medium size is $500 a day,
against $500 for a French ship, $3.50