New-York tribune., 1922-09-10

| benefits Of the subsidy in this coun-
! try, then other measures must be
4 found.
Two clippings from "The liverpool
journal of Commerce" are quoted here
| to show the misunderstanding of the
! purposes of the United States SUBJ
sidy bill:
Captain j. H, Goodwin, NJ b. f.
/ (president) presided over the quarter
! ly meeting Of the Mercantile Marine
Association, which was held Yesterday
/ in Liverpool.
THE chairman, speaking on the
question of the United States merchant
i shipping bill, said the bill which was
before the Senate practically meant the
Personally he thought it would have
very detrimental effect on British ship
ping and masters and officers pay if
! the bill passed, which he expected it
would in a short time, but whether in
it's present form or not he could not
say. The British government and the
free traders would have to alter their
ideas and tax the United States ships
! in the same proportion as they were
taxing British ships, otherwise it
would not be possible to compete with
the Americans.
"a member remarked that he thought
the British government should come to
the help Of the ship owners.
THE chairman said Great Britain as
4 a whole was almost welded to free
trade, and they had to get not only the
government but the whole of the man
ufacturers to alter their opinions.
another member said he thought
the bill was having very strong opposi-
tion in the states and he did not think
it was going to be passed
Unfriendly Act by United States
1.-The chairman, in reply, said he did
not know whether the bill was going
to be passed, but they could depend
upon it some bill would be passed AS
he had already said, it would have a
very detrimental effect on British ship
ping if they could not get their ships
loaded on the same terms as an Ameri-
can ship could load in this country.
How were they going to compete unless
| they could run their ships very much
cheaper?
"Another member remarked that he
thought it was very unfriendly act on
the part of the United States govern
ment."
later article in the same journal
said
an the House of Commons yester-
lsday, Mr. Gilbert asked the Under
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
whether his intention had been called
TO the existing legislation which gave
His Majesty's government powers
which could be used as a weapon of
defense in the event of the United
States shipping subsidy bill becoming
law, and whether he had any state
nent to make on the subject.
"Mr. Harmsworth- customs con
solidation act of 1853, section 325. en-
overs His Majestiy's government to
impose such duties on foreign tonnage
or goods as may be necessary to
countevai the disadvantages which
British trade or navigation may suf-
/ fer from preferences granted by for.
eign government to their vessels or to
the goods carried in them. | have no
further statement to make at present.
"Mr. Gilbert asked the Under Secre-
tary of State for Foreign Affairs
whether, in view of the fact that the
British navigation laws were repealed
owing to an assurance given by the
United States government in the year
l849, that British ships engaged in for
eign trade should be treated in United
States ports on the same footing a.
United States vessels, he would state
whether the bargain then made had
hitherto been kept.
"Mr. Harm sworth-The answer is in
the Affirmative
Comments by editorial writer's and
others in such publications as Fair
play" the leading marine magazine,
show the same misconception of the
subsidy bill. AS most of these men
must have read the bill, as the basis
for their articles running over many
months, it is difficult to understand
why its features should be miscon-
strued deliberately, unless the purpose
is to create general feeling of an
tagonism which will result in indi-
vidual acts on the part of steamship
companies and port authorities to ham
per American shipping.
American Ships Hampered
Many instances of this nature have
come to the attention of United States
officials One was the action of the
Liverpool conference of ship lines in
refusing to allow American vessels to
participate in the Egyptian cotton
trade until forced to do so by a Ship
ping Board rate war. Another was the
action of q company in the African
trade, which hired old boats and scows
when the first ship of new American
line was due in port. This attempt
was frustrated by vigorous steps on
the part of the American consul. The
list might be multiplied
Such practices do not promote
friendly rivalry in foreign trade, but
fortunately most of the British COM
panies do not indulge in discrimination
of this kind.
Attention was first centered upon the
customs consolidation act in Great
Britain by Sir Owen Philips at a
meeting of the Royal Mail Steam
Packet Company. He made short
reference to it, and did not explain in
what manner it was to be applied or
what measures in the United States it
was intended to offset The Liverpool
Journal of Commerce." commented
upon the statement as follows:
Even now, however. it is not alto
gether clear what Sir Owen had in his
mind when he made the statement re-
ferred to, and perhaps he will on some
future occasion deal with the mater
more fully, as some interest is being
shown not only here, but in the States.
Obviously unfair dues in the United
States ports could be met by increased
charges on this side; thus, if clear
statement were made the position
might be seen by our United States
friends in az different light. Great
Britain in DAYS gone by has been very
slow to retaiiate where her vital in
terests have been assajled, but in the
case of shipping something of the kind
! would be a matter of sheer necessity.
4 Nv "a e0Ilid ro of no,1rcA Enls, o,,r=ot,rac