y, 'mr v '"rw"i",ww4jwrjwps
E,-
b
:
L
8
The Evils of Ship Subsidies.
TJio Journal of Political Economy contains a
very interesting article relative to' ship subsidies
iii Europe. This article is from the pon of Prof.
Frank L. McVoy, of the University of Minne
sota. Mr. McVoy says that the experiences of
England, .Germany and France do not give
encouragement to the advocates of the ship sub
sidy in America.
Following arc extracts from Mr. McVoy' s
interesting article:
England stands forth pre-eminently as a ship
building" and ship-operating nation. Ilcr experience
lias been repeatedly referred to us an argument in
favor of the bill before Congress. .Inst how far has
the English government encouraged her merchant
murine?
In 1808 there were 10,400,043 net tons of shipping
flying the English Hug. During tlio sumo year Eng
lish imports and exports amounted to 8:1,715,047,89.'!.
Of this tremendous amount two-thirds were curried
in English bottoms. What, .then, is the secret of the
English merchant marine? The government has
never paid subsidies to ship-builders or to owners for
,the construction of vessels.
ooo
The subsidies now paid to British vessels arc of
two kinds- those grunted to auxiliary cruisers and
for the carriage of mail. Four companies now re
ceive 834a, 000 for the privilege of the use by the gov
ernment of some of their vessels in time of war.
There aro also five mail subsidies; in 1899 the govern
ment paid out 84,070,097; 20 per cent of this was paid
by the colonies. This is not much more expensive
than the United Statos service. The mail subsidies
were originally given for the sake of tlie sparsely in
hubited colonies which needed aid. But when
colonial trade grew other steamship companies came
into competition and far outstripped the subsidized
lines in their financial success.
The demands of tho government, under these con
tracts aro but little less, if at all, compensated for by
tho subs'idios. Exact figures bear out the. statement
, that tho dividends aro less than the subsidies and ulso
that non-subsidized lines aro able to pay larger divi
dends. Great Britain's merchant marine is due to some
thing else than the payinentof moneys to ship-owners
' possibly to natural causes. These may bo enumer
ated briefly as: (I.) free trade, (II.) free ships, (III.)
curly establishment of tho iron and steel industry,
(IV.) iron ships, (V.) early adoption of tho screw and
marine engines, (VI.) repeal of navigation laws.
ooo
Tho rapid growth of Germany's merchant marine
lin the last thirty years needs other explanation than
j shipping subsidies which havo been paid, as in Great
I1 Britain, for -specific service, amounting in 1898 to the
comparatively small sum of 81,330,420. And yet
ttivniany has twonty-sovon regular lines to European
sports aud thirty-four to other, parts of tho world, and
a steam tonuage of 1,025,521. But the German poliey
has been liberal. (1) It has bought and repaired for
eign ships and then taken to building them ( in 1899,
(though first after England in ship-building, it bought
08,000 tons of England). (2) The government has
withdrawn all duties on tho necessary materials aud
allows tho state railroads to haul these materials at a
low rate. (3) It has established technical schools of
high grade. (4) It has distributed information con
corning the weather, coast soundings, etc. (5) The
Boards of Trade have corporated; and (0) the tariff
has been scientifically worked out.
Tho question of subsidies with Germany was one
of colonial markets, not as in the United States
a desire to have gulps because other nations have them.
i ooo
France, on the other hand, has tried subsidies,
and yet a recent writer of authority predicts complete
ruin in its merchant navy. Tho first subsidies were
paid in 1881. Since then, they have been paid with
some variation as to tho amount, The increase in the
merchant mariuo has fluctuated, and a marked do-
i.t
The Commoner.
crease in the last ton years is shown by statistics.,
Tho law was considered a failure, und for two years a
committee of statesmen, ship-owners, builders, mana
gers, and exporters was in session, and its only recom
mendations were a few modifications of the old act.
In 1899 the French govern ment paid 84,005,020 for pos
tal subsidies and a total of 87,032,242, and still she
received in return smaller increase in her shipping
than any of the great nations.
There are a number of good reasons for this failure
timidity of French capital, condition of Frencli
ports, railroad monopoly, excessive cost of merchant
vessels, and the complexity of the government ma
chinery dealing with the merchant marine.
As no amount of subsidizing could help the French
and offset their commercial disadvantages, riO in the
United States subsidies would be unnecessary were
commercial enterprise to turn towards enlarging the
merchant murine for the sake of commercial advan
tages. ooo
We build and operate our vessels more cheaply
than France and Germany, and nearly as cheaply as
England. The reasons for the decline in American
shipping were summed up by the Dingley committee
in 1885 as duo. to (I) the change from wooden to iron
ship; (2) the civil war; (3) the condition of national
finances (1802-'78); (4) higher rates of profit in other
industries; und (5) higher cost of iron ships in the
United Stutes. With the exception of the second and
third causes, the others are simply commercial ones
which await a commercial solution.
As a fact, ;t appears that the Americans do not
care just at present to enter the carrying trade, and
the subsidies would go to a few existing companies
already in the field.
The legislation now proposed appears to be based
on a short-sighted view of a great problem. The
experiences and policies of successful nations should
be our guide, rather than the efforts of an unsuccess
ful nation. When this country is ready for a mer
chant marine in the fullest sense of the term our
carrying trade will grow to what it ought to be.
BORROWED FUN.
f
Mother: "What can I do to induce you to go to
bed?"
Youngster: "You can let mo sit up a little
longer. "Exchange.
"In these days of oleomargarine, butterine and
similar compounds, it is a wise cow that knows her
own butter." The National City Record.
A poultry show, with a Belgian hare annex, will
be held in Los Angeles. A year ago it was a Belgian
Hare show, with a poultry annex. The humble hen
is a stayer, us well as a layer. Los Angeles Herald.
One of the wittiest replies of tho political campaign-is
that given by the unionist candidate for
Lambeth. "Will you vote for a measure sanctioning
marriage with a deceased wife's sister?" asked the
voter. "Yes," said Mr. Horner, "if it is not made
compulsory." Lahore, (India), Tribune.
- "I hear you are going to Australia with your
husband, Kitty," said the mistress. "Aren't you
nervous about the long voyage?"
"Well, ma'am," said Kitty, calmly, "that's his
lookout. I belong to him now, and if anything
happens to me it'll be his loss, not mine." Woman's
Journal.
"Do you approve of lobbying?" inquired theyoun
man who is learning politics.
"No sir," answered Senator Sorghum, "I emphat
ically do not. What a man wants to do is to get
elected to the legislature himself or have a represent
ative there, so that lie can be absolutely sure things
are going right." Washington Star.
Have you had the grip? If so you can appreciate
this: 'Look out for it. It begins with pneumonia in
the lead by a length; abscess of the ear coming strong
on the outside; ache o' bones a good third. At the
three-quarter pole, earache crowds eustachian tube to
the fence, causing a spill. On the home stretch catarrh
of the head wins by two open lengths, with relapse in
good form for the place." Buffalo Times.
Trusts. , ;
The Armour Packing Company, of Kansas City,
has just imported sixty car loads of salt from Portu
gal. It seems like carrying coals to Newcastle to
bring salt from Europe when the United States has
enough salt deposits to supply the world, but the
packers say they have been driven to this action by
the extortionate prices now demanded by the salt
trust. There are ricli saline deposits in New York, in
Michigan, in Kansas, and in other states, to say noth
ing of the faculties for manufacturing salt all along
the seaboard. Salt can be produced hero as cheaply
as anywhere else in the world. The Kansas City
company could get all the salt it needs- from the
Hutchinson works, only 210 miles distant, yet it has
found it preferable to send 5,000 miles' to another
country for it, and pay the steamer and freight rates,
besides a duty of 8 cents on each 100 pounds rather
than pay the price demanded by the trust. ,
The sources of supply in this country are so numer
ous that it seems almost impossible for any combina
tion to control enough of the output to force up prices,
but it has been done, as is shown by the recent arbi
trary advances. How abnormal the trust's demands
are may now be seen in the action of the Kansas City
packers. If they can save money by importing salt
from Europe the illegitimate profits of the monopoly
must be enormous. The .present wholesale price of 80
a ton must be more than double the legitimate price
if importers can pay a duty of 81.00 a ton in addition
to the steamer and railway charges of 5,000 miles of
transportation and still get tkeir salt more cheaply
than by purchasing it at home.
With affairs in this condition it is evident that the
duty on salt simply aids the trust in tho exaction of
an excessive price for its product. This is a matter
for the consideration of congress. It is probable that
if a Kansas City firm can save money by importing
salt it will pay Chicago packers and similar firms in
the east to do likewise, for the freight from the sea
board might bo somewhat less on the shorter haul.
The salt trust is over reaching itself in the attempt to
grow rich too rapidly by monopolizing the sale of one
of the necessaries of life. The importation of foreign
salt wherever possible will be one way of teaching the
trust that it is over reaching itself. Chicago Tribune
(Rep.)
w
Mr. Lentz's reference- to the removal of Attorney
General Monnett by the trusts coincides significantly
with the abandonment of the .suits against trusts
which Mr. Monnett began. This gentleman was the
republican attorney-general of Ohio. As such he pros
ecuted trusts, under the Ohio law, with such unusual
vigor, for a republican office-holder, as to attract the
attention and win the confidence of the whole country.
Not unnaturally, tho trusts suspected ' him of trying
to make a "strike." That is what vigorous official
opposition has so frequently meant to them. So they
offered a bribe. It was big enough $400,000 to sat
isfy the most greedy "striker." But Mr. Monnett
refused it and pushed his prosecutions. Finally tho
trusts realized that he was not a "striker," but an
honest official; and as there is only one way of deal
ing with that kind of rare bird, they promptly
adopted it. They requested the managers of tho
republican state convention not tq renominate Mr,
Monnett. Tho convention readily complied. Another
candidate was named and elected along with the rest
of the ticket. And now we have the sequel. On
motion of the new attorney-general, all the anti-trust
suits before the supreme court of Ohio are dismissed.
Tho Public.
The military bill increasing tho army which
recently passed the house of representatives provides
for a regular standing army costing $113,000,000 a
year. It should be borne in mind that this is no
temporary expansion of tho size and expense of the
standing army, but a permanent one. Congressman
McCall, of Massachusetts, scored a good point in
emphasizing the cost feature of our proposed standing
army. Tho annual cost, $113,000,000, is $13,000,000
more than the British army costs, and only $12,000,000
less than France pays for her huge military machine.
Germany's army costs only $13,000,000 more. Spring
1
y
ft.
y
cu