The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

12 MARINE REVIEW. [October 26, = LEGISLATION IN BEHALF OF OUR MERCHANT MARINE, Questions Submitted by the Marine Review. 1. Shall the United States continue to allow its mer- chant marine in foreign trade to fight a losing battle until it entirely passes out of existence and foreign nations absorb the ocean carrying of our entire import and export trade? 2. Shall the United States decide, as its permanent nonpartisan public policy, that an equitable share of its im- ports and exports must be carried on vessels of the United States, built in our own ship yards and flying our own flag, and that congress will enact whatever national legislation may be needed to stimulate and encourage our citizens to create, maintain and operate the vessels this policy calls for? 8. If it is recommended that congress shall enact re- medial legislation what shall it be, and why? FROM ONE OF THE LEADING GRAIN CONCERNS OF CHICAGO Editor Marine Review:--I have been very much interested for some little time in the articles, correspondence, etc., which have appeared in the Review referring to our merchant marine. While I cannot add any- thing new to arguments that have already been used, I wish to add what I believe to be a fact, that every patriotic American citizen--and our citi- zens are all patriotic--must agree that this nation should see to it that a large percentage of its export and import business shotild be handled in nations at peace with the United States of America, and they did so, and the American merchant marine was obliterated, and we have made no effort since the war to replace it. While it left us without merchant ships, it furnished us with skillful officers and men with which to man our navy which was so much needed, and which we would not have secured readily had it not been for our large and well-manned merchant marine. But, what is worse than all, congress has done absolutely nothing to encourage the rebuilding of our merchant marine. Its loss was, under the circumstances, inevitable, and the subsequent neglect to give aid and security to it has been criminal as well as selfish, and In consequence of such neglect this nation has beeen enriching foreign ship owners in the sum of $200,000,000 per annum, paid them by the people of the United States for carrying our American foreign trade and mails in foreign ships for a period of thirty years last past, a sum which would have enriched this nation in ten years (if paid to Americans) to the extent of $2,000,000,- 000, or nearly double the money now in circulation in the United States of America. Under wise legislation of congress the entire foreign carry- ing trade would have been transferred to American ships, carrying the American flag, and our ships would have been officered by bright, active Americans. This legislation would cause activity in every ship yard on both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, and soon give employment and set at work in the various ship yards and in kindred industries 300,000 bright young Americans. It would open up many avenues of labor which are now unused. Capital would put money into American ships if it were assured that this nation would protect it for only a reasonable period. I feel assured that under a policy of protection the entire foreign carrying trade of this country could be transferred to American ships. It would not only provide the employment already referred to in ship yards, but ° + WHY SECRETARY LONG, OF THE NAVY, FAVORS THE UPBUILDING OF OUR MERCHANT MARINE. Navy DEPARTMENT, JOHN D. Lona, Séc'y, } Washington, Oct. 20, 1899. J DEAR SiR --! have just returned from an absence of two weeks with the President in the west, and find many matters of importance awaiting my attention. Iam therefore not able to write you at any length, but take great pleasure in saying that I am heartily in favor of the upbuilding of the Merchant Marine. First--By reason of the financial return which would follow from carrying our constantly increasing exports; SECOND--From the increased business it would give our ship yards; and THIRD --Because it would furnish a reserve of seamen upon which the Navy could draw in case of war. Very truly yours, To THE EDITOR OF THE MARINE REVIEw, CLEVELAND, OHIO. & ships of American registry; and it is certainly much more to be desired that foreign-built ships be admitted to American registry than to occupy sO unimportant a place in the carrying trade of the world's commerce on the Figh seas. I do not believe there is any doubt but what this nation is now ex- periencing, throughout its entire length and breadth, a period of pros- perity such as we have not before experienced, and during such times it is well for the people to take action, and in a generous manner enable their government to adopt promptly, measures looking toward the ac- complishment of the desired ends. HOMER H. PETERS. * Office of Bartlett, Frazier & Co., Chicago, Oct. 18, 1899. FROM THE PACIFIC COAST. Editor Marine Review:--For a long time prior to the war of the re- bellion the American clipper ships were the pride of seafaring men and landsmen the world over. This period was during the period of wooden ships. They were symmetrical and the fastest ships afloat, and were manned by American seamen, all of whom were bright, active and ad- mitted to be the best sailors then on the high seas. During this period, as shown by the records, 95 per cent of the American foreign trade was conducted and carried in American ships, carrying the American flag and officered and manned by bright American Seamen, and their earnings constituted ttat much of our national wealth; but when actual war overtook the nation, and the enemy's men-of-war or rebel cruisers, made their appearance on the high seas and began destroy- ing our merchant ships, their loyal owners saw that prudence required that they should protect themselves by at once selling their ships to would educate a vast army of competent men who would again support our American navy as they may be required for such service. Under such a policy our manufactures would go out to every people on the face of the earth in American ships, and levy tribute upon them more successfully than could be done with artillery, as we could manu- facture the goods, carry them in American ships, fix the price at home and abroad, and determine the charges for freight. This we are prevented from doing now as we must first negotiate with a foreign ship owner or his agent and allow him to take what may please him because we have no ships. When we have the ships we can do what England has so successfully done for 200 years. It is no wonder that London is the financial center of the world, when all the nations of the earth have been paying tribute to England and dumping it into London. Had this nation adhered to this policy since 1812 (the policy of Washington and Jeffer- son) New York city would have long since been the financial center of the world, not London. The era of iron ship building began after this nation had lost its mer- chant marine, and England could and did build iron ships cheaper than any other nation could. But this nation can now compete with her and build iron ships as cheaply as they can be built in England or any other foreign country, and we can, and after our present rush at home is overt, will sell steel to England with which to build her ships. Nevertheless American ships cannot as yet compete with foreign ships in the carrying trade on the high seas without some protection in the way of differential dues or bounties, because of the difference in seamen's wages, and cost of operation in competition with foreign ships. It was the war of the rebellion that gave England the opportunity