New-York tribune., 1922-11-05


the assertion OF British shipping COM
panies that they welcome the entrance
OF the United States to partnership in
the carrying trade Of the world and
that they do not discriminate against
American vessels.
Ona-third Of the Egyptian cotton
crop is consumed in the United States.
For generation prior to 1920 the crop
was moved to this country in vessels
belonging to the British companies III
the Liverpool Conference. When the
United American Lines, of which w A.
Hartman is chairman. attempted to get
part of the shipments in that year the
effort was blocked completely by the
British companies. After prolonged
negotiations, involving drastic rate
war on the part Of the Shipping Board
American ships get one-half of the
trade.
The Issue still is a matter of CON
troversy. Sir Frederick Lewis, presi-
dent of the Chamber of Shipping of the
United Kingdom and chairman of
numerous steamship lines, declared at
the annual meeting OF the Prince Line
recently that American ships were ad-
mitted to the trade voluntarily by the
British lines as an evidence Of good
will. This statement is contradicted by
Winthrop l.. Marvin, vice-president of
the American Steamship Owners As
sociation, who charges that the action
of the British lines was taken only
when they were compelled to do so.
Asserts Good VIII
In his address at the annual meeting
of the Prince Line, Sir Frederick Lewis
said:
II am reminded that when we last
met we were ON the eve of settling
a controversy with the United States
Shipping Board, connected with the
Egyptian cotton traffic. At that time
refrained from making any detailed
comment upon the situation, as did
not wish to do or say anything which
might possibly be misinterpreted. At
the recent annual general meeting of
Furness, Witty & Co. Ireferred at some
length to the general question Of re-
can shipping, my principal purpose be-
ing to dispel the impressions which
one frequently met with that there
was highly organized system of pro-
paganda on the part of British ship
owners directed against the American
Mercantile Marine. The views I then
expressed have been pretty widely
quoted in the American press, and, on
the whole, have been favorabIy and
fairly commented upon. I have, how
ever, found that / have been charged
with inconsistency between the views
then expressed and the attitude Of
the Prince Line in the Egyptian cotton
controversy.
unfortunately, there are times when
more harm may be done by ignoring
incorrect impressions than by reopen
ing closed incident, and have, there
fore, chosen this opportunity Of allud-
Ing to the matter in the hope that I
may thereby be able TO show that the
feelings of friendship toward the Amer
lean Mercantile Marine, to which L
have on several occasions given public
utterance, are just as sincere in prac-
tice as they are in theory. What were
the facts in the Egyptian cotton con-
troversy? The facts were that the
British liners had for many years car
ried all the cotton that was exported
from Egypt to the United Kingdom and
the United States, but the United States
Consul In Alexandria asserted that the
whole Of the cotton destined for the
United States should be carried In |
American vessels.
Board subsequently rendered for the |
1921-'22 contracts their rate fog the |
United States ports was precisely the !
same as that quoted by the British |
liners, but their rate for United King
dom ports was shi1lings a ton less.
These rates were submitted stimuli |
taneously by each party by tender, and |
all the shippers preferred to
their contract arrangements
with the British liners, as they, no
doubt, recognized that the advantage
than. outweighed the comparatively
small disadvantage in the freight to |
the United Kingdom. At any rate, the |
shippers were perfectly free to exercise
their own Judgment, and, in conse-
guence, the contract with the British |
lines was completed. Nevertheless, |
having secured the contract themselves,
the British lines voluntarily offered a |
to the United States |
Shipping Board, and yet ! have re-
Gently seen II stated in letter from
American Steamship Owners Associa-
tion, that the Prince Line proclaimed
that not one pound Of Egyptian cotton
exported from Alexandria for our New
England mills should be sent in an
American ship, though that ship was
Offering lower freight rate
United States National Fleet
Tt may well be asked what was the
reason for the British lines voluntarily
Offering the United States Shipping
Board a participation In their contract.
The reason was that 1t was recognized
that 1t was a perfectly legitimate and
desire Of the United States
Shipping Board to participate in the
Traffic to the United States, and that
new set Of circumstances had coma into
operation since the pre-war period, viz,
that the United States had become pos
sessed Of q great national mercantile
Heet created for war purposes, for
which she desired to fnd commercial
Unfortunately, the controversy was
by various charges made
by the United States Consul at Alexan-
dria that the British lines had adopted
unfair methods in securing the con-
tract, which charges have never been
and cannot he--substantiated by evi-
dence.
Marvin Tells Facts
Mr. Marvin, in statement 60 s'The
New York Marine Journal said:
~ observe that Sir Frederick Lewis
declared, for one thing, that the .Aneri- |
can contention was that the whole of
the cotton destined for the United
States should be carried in American
sThis IS entirely incorrect. The
A 49, -.