Evening star., 1927-11-13

20 .
From the figures quoted above, 1t is
evident that we are in an extremely
disadvantageous position to meet for.
eign competition. We have also drift.
ed considerable since 1922 in our naval
strength. The so-called naval ratio
agreed to at the Washington Arms
Conference, which in spirit and prin.
ciple established naval equality with
Great Britain, simply does not exist.
The crux Of the situation Is the obvi.
Gus fact that we are completely out.
ranked by our competitors in the mat.
ter of modern competitive ocean.going
tonnage.
Flag-waving arguments will have
no effect in influencing American ship
pers to use our ships until such
time that we can place at their dis.
posa1 ships offering the same advan.
tages in speed, regularity and FIRE.
quency Of Sailings as are offered by
our competitors. Not until that time
can we be assured of the full support
of American shippers nor Is 1t fair or
reasonable for us to expect them to
accept inferior commercial service un-
der the guise Of patriotism.
There have been many and varied
suggestions offered in the solution of
the shipping problem. The consensus
of opinion apparently favors private
ownership and operation. All sound
thinkers, however, are in accord on
one point, and that is that American
shipping must become a permanent
factor in our foreign trade. -+..
It is, indeed. gratifying to note the
general interest the public Is taking
throughout the entire country in the
shipping question. There are a few.
however, who are still doubtful as to
whether a merchant marine is essen
tial. A document which has received
considerable publicity Is, in part,
quoted, as follows: g..
There has been a great deal said
in various quarters about the vital
necessity of an American merchant
marine, and 1t might be well, when a
committee of Congress again sees
proper to make Investigations in the
matter Of ships, that, along with the
other forms of inquiry suggested in
the foregoing, a broad and scientific
inquiry be made into the question Of
how seriously America really needs
merchant marine and why"
Hostile Influences.
This statement can best be answer
ed by the Socratic method: Should q
country whose wealth IS estimated at
400 billion dollars. with an interna-
tional' trade Of 10 billion dollars an.
nually. with a freight bin for trans
porting this commerce OF 900 million
dollars, whose prosperity IS dependent
on its ability to dispose OF Its surplus
in the world markets, and which IL
largely dependent on It's imports Of
raw material in the operation Of many
Of it's industries, rely on other coun.
tries to carry It's commerce and ex.
pand it's foreign trade?
Occasionally we are told by short
sighted, or perhaps foreign-inspired
economists, LET the nation carry our
products who can carry them cheap
est" We did prior to the World War
and 1t caused our country a needless
expenditure Of 3 billion dollars, IN
addition to the hundreds OF millions
which we paid to our competitors an
nually for that privilege.
It is not an unusual occurrence
whenever the United States formu.
lates plans to rehabilitate fts shipping
that certain influences appear which
are hostile to tho cause. That these
influences are active would appear to
be evident when we read tho astonish.
ing statement in O recent American
publication:
Although the problem has been be.
clouded by extraneous matters, there
have been insidious attempts to classi.
fy the merchant marine Al q naval
auxiliary, which Is to tho last degree
undesirable"
Apparently the individual respon.
sible for this statement does not know
OF the existence Of the merchant ma
r1ne act.
Economic Phase.
In the problem confronting US in
placing American shipping where II
rightfully belongs, we must consider
the economic phase. Some are Of the
opinion that this basic obstacle can be
overcome by increased efficiency and
ingenuity. What are the facts? The
major handicap against US Is due to
the higher shipbuilding costs in the
United States. It is not due to the
| lack OF our efficiency or ingenuity
The personnel and equipment Of our
| shipyards (of the few that are left) are
as efficient as any in the world. The
reason for our higher ship construc
ton costs is due to our higher living
| standards, and no amount OF Increased
| efficiency or ingenuity can Offset this
| handicap to any appreciable extent.
| We have heard statements tha'
many Of our Industries have. beer
able to manufacture their product.
to enable them to compete In foreign
markets. This Is true where indus
| tries can take advantage OF mass pro
! duction methods. but such method.
do not apply in the construction ol
ships. The reason for this is tha
| under normal conditions seldom more
than a half dozen ships are bull
from the same design. Therefore
this expedient cannot be used to lesser
competition with foreign yards, wher,
labor and material are cheaper.
American shipyards are therefor
in direct competition with foreigl
yards.
Other Handicaps.
Among other handicaps, as a re
suit OF our higher living standards
is the higher wage scale and sub
sistence costs on American ships. Th'
difference in construction costs o
ships built In American yards com
pared with those built abroad, togeth
er with the higher wages and sub
sistence paid on American ships com
peting in foreign trade, results u
American shipping being burdene'
with an annual handicap ranginl
from to 8 per cent OF the price pal,
for the vessel built In an American
yard.
Where standards Of living differ Il
the countries engaged in the bushes
Of ocean transportation the cost o
ope alton will vary directly as tn
sta dards Of living In those cour
tries.
Until such time as the living stand