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

An Analysis of its Main Points { Oe ne Ce ee NS AS IS I AS IS IS OS IOS ID TD ND ID Pi forley New Marine Policy What the Nation Thinks of It | | | --a RT eee (Percentages below are explained in detail on page 220) J---PRIVATE OWNERSHIP 'Through his advocacy of private ownership of the American merchant marine, Mr. Hurley has rallied to his support practically every shipowner, ship- builder and student of marine affairs. The voting campaign carried on by THE Marine REvIEw, as described on page 220, shows that practically 100 per cent of the shipowners and shipbuilders of the coun- try favor private ownership. The few defending government operation point generally to the need for using the large government fleet, created with tax- © payers' money, for national purposes such as the operation of the ships in unprofitable trades which ultimately may become of great value to the nation. Against this argument is the fact, as clearly pointed out by Mr. Hurley, that '"'the successful, development of a merchant marine depends not so much on ships, or money, or government aid, as it does on the ex- istence of a large class of alert, resourceful and ener- getic men engaged in the shipping business. clear that the number of such men can be greatly increased only under conditions of private initiative." The position taken by Mr. Hurley on this question has surprised many of the shipping men and _ has delighted all but a few. The unanimous approval Leis given to this position has inclined the shipping world ' to look with greater toleration on the other proposals which Mr. Hurley feels necessary adequately to pro- tect the public interest. In favor of, 97.5 per cent; opposed, 2.5 per cent. I]---Sate or Sures at Wortp Market With the exception of the extremists who advocate government ownership--and these generally are men not connected with ship operation or ship construction, and who are free from the necessity of earning returns on their capital, satisfying stockholders, or _ paying wages--this proposal is actively supported. The original cost of a ship is the largest single factor in determining the ability of her owner to compete successfully, a fact which is becoming more widely appreciated and which John H. Rosseter, director of operations of the shipping board, pointed out in an address published in the April issue of THE Martine Review. A difference of several hundred thousand dollars in the cost of construction imposes a charge against the vessel that handicaps its revenue earning ability every day of its life. An increasing number of American shipowners who hesitate to predict suc- cess for American ships under the normal burden of higher constructing and operating costs, are inclined to grow optimistic as they discuss the possibility of competing successfully with shipowners of other na- tions, provided they can start the race with an equality 'In ship costs. The defense for Mr. Hurley's proposal is readily 218 understood. Ship construction by all of the nations allied in the war against Germany, was a military necessity. The present condition of unrest and dis- turbance in Europe, brought about by food shortage resulting from the inability to keep the world. properly provisioned during the war, is a spur to any lagging memory of the military character of the emergency fleet construction. Mr. Hurley recognizes this fact and desires to recover a fair sum on the high war cost of the ships, to place American shipowners on a parity with those of other nations, and to protect American shipyards who would be crippled if the vessels were disposed of at a value below the market. The Hurley plan may in a general way, return to the government $2,000,000,000 as the selling price of a fleet which cost $3,000,000,000. The recovery of two-thirds of the cost would represent probably the highest rate of salvage on any of the expenses incurred during the war. In favor of, 96.4 per cent; opposed, 3.6 per cent. IJI--PayMEentT Over 10-YEAR PERIoD "Liberal" is the adjective most frequently applied in describing the terms of sale proposed under the Hurley plan. These terms call for a down payment of 25 per cent of the price of the vessel, followed by 10 per cent in the second year, 9 per cent in the third year and 8 per cent in each of the next seven years. This schedule thus provides for the payment of 60 per cent of the purchase price in the first five years and 40 per cent during the last five. Mr. Hur- ley lays great stress on this plan of payment, as he sees in it a method to keep out of the field any pur- chaser who desires to reap a large temporary 'profit. In general, this plan would cal! for the initial pay- ment of about $500,000,000 for the government's ves- sels, a sum which several financiers interested in shipping, have stated can be raised without much difficulty. One or two suggestions have been received by Tue Marine Review favoring a cash payment for the vessels, but the majority of the shipowners favor a policy of paying for the vessels in from 10 to 20 years. In favor of, 85 per cent; opposed, 15 per cent. IV--INsuRANCE Under the Hurley proposal, marine insurance would be restricted entirely to American control. The pur- chaser of a vessel would be required to insure with an American firm his equity in the vessel, the govern- ment carrying in its own fund, as at present, but for purchaser's account, hull and machinery insurance covering that part of the vessel for which payment has not been made. This measure, according to Mr. Hurley, 1S necessary as he does not believe American companies have sufficient financial strength at the