Evening star., 1945-09-02

collaboration for peace. There are two
other lessons of great importance which
should have been learned, too, but
whether they have is still to be demon
strated. The first Is that the United
States must remain strong on land and
sea and in the air-militarily. The
second is that big merchant marine
must be maintained-for national de-
fense and for the protection and exc
pansion of American commerce.
1t is not a question of building an
American merchant fieet-but of keep
ing one. At an expense of from 18 to 20
billions of dollars, this country has built
the greatest merchant marine the
world has ever seen, during the war
now ending. Vice Admiral E. S. Land,
U. S. NJ, retired, chairman of the
United States Maritime Commission,
and war shipping administrator, esti-
mate our completed wartime build
ing program at 56,500,000 deadweight
tons. To this he adds II 100000 dead
weight tons-the American merchant
marine in 1899 before the war started,
losses estimated, he places at $500, 900.
Clearly the American people can have
a big merchant marine in operation and
in reserve If they want one, and pro-
vided they do not allow foreign proga-
gandists and unsound economists in this
country to pull the wool over their eyes,
Obviously it would be impossible to keep
in operation the complete, huge ton
mage. But Admiral Land believes that
there should be kept in service from 49,
600 900 to 10000 900 tons, divided as fol-
lows: 3,500O00 tons for the Great Lakes,
2,500,000 tons for the rivers. $500, 900 tons
for coastal and intercoastal traffic and
100000 in foreign trade. For the rest
of the tonnage, he proposes that there
be a national defense reserve" Tin
santuary) of 81 100000 tons, that TO-
600 900 tons be sold to foreign nations,
that 5000, 900 tons be assigned to military
service and 100000 tons be scrapped for
old age.
Other Ideas Advanced.
These are estimates of what may be
done with this great tonnage. There
are other ideas of what should be done.
One is that ships should not be sold to
foreign maritime nations to be used in
competition with us. But we have a
surplus and other nations will either
build or buy ships elsewhere if they can
not become customers for American
ships nov. Despite all the war losses,
the available world tonnage today is
estimated at approximately 100000
tons more than when the war began in
1889. And this is due to the great build
ing program carried on in the United
States.
Without this building program, the
war could not have been won and might
well have been lost Vital war supplies
of all kinds could neither have been
carried to our own fighting forces in
the Pacific and in Europe and Africa,
nor to our Allies. Admiral Ernest j.
King, commander in chief of the United
States Navy Fleet, has given his testi-
mony about the value of the merchant
feet.
AN inadquate merchant marine was
one of our prewar weaknesses" he said.
after the last war, we dissipated our
store of merchant shipping. We COM
pounded the error by not maintaining
our shipbuilding capacity. Consequent
ly, at the outbreak of this war, we found
It necessary to construct swiftly what
has come to be stupendous tonnage of
cargo ships.
"A Nip-and Tuck Affair"
For many anxious months, it was
nip-and-tuck affair trying to fulfill the
shipping needs and at the same time
attempting to meet the requirements for
offensive and protective operations both
in the Atlantic and the Pacific" ADJ
miral King asked, too, pertinent ques-
tion How long can the United States
afford to continue a cycle of fighting
and building and winning and giving
away-only to fight and build and win
and give again?"
One argument advanced by school
of thought which holds that great
merchant feet is not essential to this
country is that we can depend on the
merchant ships of British, French and
other Western European countries in
case of war. The answer to this is
simply that in two great wars We have
found these foreign ships could not be
relied upon, either to take care of our
commerce before we were drawn into
the wars or to carry essential military
supplies and troops after we were in
the wars. 1t is idle, therefore, to argue
that we can save money by not build
ing and operating OUR own merchant
ships. 1t is far better, and far less
costly, to maintain and operate a big
merchant feet than to wait until we are
In the grip OF war and seek to build up
the necessary fleet. We put $4,000 000,-
900 dollars into our merchant fleet dur
ing the First World War, and more than
six times that amount into the feet
we now have. Construction and operat-
ing subsidies, even over long period
of years, fade into insignifcance COM
pared to such costs.
May Not Have Time Again.
Further, unless this country main
tains an adequate merchant fleet, for
national defense as we'll as for our COM
merce, we may not have time to build
another in the event of third world
war. This country might be the first
attacked. Also other nations shipping
might be destroyed from the air. Or
they might be captured and used against
the United States.
Not only Is it necessary to keep our
merchant ships in large numbers, but it
Is also necessary to maintain shipyards,