The Courier Journal

There Are Ships Enough.

The advocates of ship subsidies and their hired men never all sleep at once. With them it is a question of getting untold millions out of the United States treasury without rendering any service whatever except what they are rendering now, which consists in hoisting the flag of the country over ships which they employ for private gain whenever they can realize a satisfactory profit. For this reason they ask the Government to give them millions out of the treasury without requiring them to furnish any more ships. The prospect of being able to loot the treasury without any danger of punishment justifies a good deal of vigilance. Hence, they are always on the lookout for chances to assert that American trade is suffering for want of adequate transportation facilities. They always assume that these would be provided if millions enough were paid in subsidies, but when their attorneys prepare a bill they always so frame it that the millions paid in subsidies will go, at least as far as possible, to existing lines. These lines are already earning money for their owners, who do not establish lines from purely patriotic motives. They are not constructed after that pattern, as they say in Boston, or, in the freer language of the West, they ain't built that way.

A New York man wrote to the Bureau of Manufacturers suggesting that efforts be made to establish one or more lines of steamships between the ports of the United States and those of Brazil. Presumably the bureau was willing to get arguments in favor of subsidies, and so the letter was forwarded to Mr. Lincoln Hutchinson, a special agent, who was investigating conditions of trade in Brazil. Exactly what is the matter with Mr. Hutchinson is not yet apparent, but he signally failed to do what must have been expected of him. Touching the need of better transportation facilities and the establishment of new lines he wrote:

"My reasons for doubting the efficacy of the proposed stimulus to trade fall under two distinct heads: The opinions of the larger importers here and the experience of other nations which have abundant transportation facilities. I find many of the largest and most experienced importers, men who deal in goods from both the United States and Europe, inclined to laugh at the idea that American exporters are in need of greater facilities. They claim that they never have any difficulty in getting all the goods that are demanded from New York quite as readily as from London, Liverpool or Hamburg.

And as to the experience of those countries that control the bulk of the transportation to Brazil, the statistics show that in the past ten years some of the countries of Europe which have made the greatest effort to stimulate steamship facilities between their ports and those of Brazil have been the least successful in holding their Brazilian trade."

So much for the general aspects of the question. But Mr. Hutchinson gives specifications. He admits that the trade of the United States has lost ground in Brazil in the last ten years. But the same is true of the trade of all the countries of Europe except Italy. The loss of trade by the United States is less than that of any other country which has experienced a loss. England controls the bulk of the transportation facilities and Germany has been making strenuous efforts in favor of direct lines of communication, but both have lost a larger proportion of trade than the United States. France, which subsidizes one of the largest lines which run to these ports, has lost over one-third of her trade. A very small part of the British merchant marine gets any help from the Government, but both Germany and France have expended large sums in that way. France, which has been most prodigal in subsidies, has lost the largest share of trade with Brazil. This is a regular knockout for the subsidy-hunters.

Mr. Hutchinson concludes that the transportation facilities are ample. In this he is undoubtedly quite right. There is no more potent fact than that ocean transportation is overdone rather than the contrary. There is an over-supply of merchant vessels in the world, and they go eagerly to any quarter where paying cargoes can be had. Wherever there is a volume of trade that justifies the running of steamships there is intense rivalry for the business. The idea that the ships give a preference to the trade of their own country is not supported. They are not in business for that purpose, but to earn money. For a long time there have been earnest protests in Great Britain that their lines are giving relatively better rates to Americans to South Africa than they give to British exporters. If this is true, it is simply because such rates are necessary to get the business, but it throws a good deal of light on the contention that trade is captured by having ships of one's own country. Nothing is clearer than the abundance of vessels to do all the business of the world wherever paying cargoes can be had. The theory that trade can be created by paying subsidies to ships to run between ports that furnish no cargoes has been fully exploded. These assertions come regularly from the owners of ships who wish to be pensioned for conducting a private business.