The commercial. (Union City, Tenn.) 190?-193?, 1922-11-17
Merchant Marine.

ef Congress. has in view more thai
SnvthinS else the consideration o
the merchant marine bill.
The merchant marine was one o
President Wilson'S ideals of nationa
xre2tnesS. He didn't seem to make
. great deal of distinction between
u aforementioned or privately
owned merchant marine. With him
the imperative and important need
of the Government was sufficient
and efficient merchant carrying ma
rine, leaving the manner of estab
lishment and maintenance to the
wisdom of Congress.
But there is a difference. Congress
seems to have made it a party issue
and it should not be. 1t is c matter
altogether of economy and efficiency
Of accomplishing results. Years
ago Senator CarmaCk made an effec-
tive minority fight against what was
known as the ship subsidy. 1t was
a party fight then and it is to-day a
political salient.
The truth is that the Government
is spending $50,000,000 a year for
the operation and maintenance Of
the merchant marine. Under the bill
which is now proposed for passage
the ships will be sold to private own
ers and provision is also made for
government aid on basis of cargo
and mileage. The ultimate cost of
such aid is estimated at $50, 100000
a year, but little more than half the
present cost under government own
ership.
Now which will we have? A
Democratic policy which costs us
fifty millions year or Republican
policy which costs thirty millions,
capacity and efficiency being the
same
The Commercial has noticed for
some time the tendency toward cen
tralization and that's what is in
vOlved in government ownership,
and with government own
ership comes the possibility
and probability of patronage
and politics AS one of the big pa
pers says, government ownership is
vastly expensive and relatively inef-
fcient.
One of the objections this paper
had to the last Democratic national
platform was too much suggestion of
government aid and promotion. 1t
is, as Henry Wattersen said, a depar
ture from the mooriHgs of true Dem
Ocracy.
l don't know what our Representa-
tives will do, but it is likely that
some of them will fight the merchan:
marine bill as it stands as a test
of party loyalty.yI say that the Gov
eminent should retire from the
transportation business and every
other line of activity that can be per
formed by the people, or by private |
capital with more practical states
manship and efficiency.
Here is what one paper says of |
the importance of the merchant ma,
rine:
THAT all this is true cannot be
fairly questioned. Simply stated, the
issue that is presented to Congress
and the people is this: Shall we have
our merchant marine, or shall we be
dependent upon the chips of other
countries to carry our commerce.
The prosperity of America, for all
future time, must be measured by
the extent and profit of our foreign
trade. The time has gone by when
domestic consumption so nearly alb
sorbed domestic production that for
eign trade had little influence on our
welfare. Our production, in all the
staples that form the basiss of in
ternal and external commerce, now
exceeds our capacity for consump-
ton, and the excess is constantly
growing. Our surplus production
must be sold in other lands if our
farms and our manufacturers are TO
be profitable, and without profit in
industry there can be no prosperity.
Any surplus production above our
capacity of consumption gluts the
nome market, sending prices down
md slowing the wheels of industry,
With a loss to capital and labor gen.
rally, whether on the farm or in the
actory. Export trade, therefore, is
ssentiaI to our welfare, and we must
ave the facilities for the expansion
f that trade to keep pace with the
rowth of our production.
1.-THE chief facility in the maintc-
ance and development of foreign
Ommerce is ocean shipping. Thanks
D the war, which compelled cOnstruc-
ION, we now have a merchant ma
inc somewhat commensurate with |
ur place in world trade If we do
OF keep these ships in service. eth c