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

February, 1915 them or altogether reasonable to ask private capital to open them at a venture.’ “These words would be very en- couraging if they did not indicate government ownership and operation, our experience in which does not make us enthusiastic. Government ownership has not proven better than _ private enterprise by any means. Those who have used government ~owned and controlled telephone and railroad systems abroad know how they compare with these systems in the United States. “In this we have the corroborative opinion of M. Yves Guizot, President of Societe d’Economique Politique and former Minister of Public Works in Paris, who has recently published his views on this subject in ‘When and Why Public Ownership Has Failed.’ “IT quote a sentence or two. ‘Indi- viduals are industrious, productive and economical; but administrative and polit- ical groups both national and municipal are wasteful and run the taxpayers into debt. Again, ‘Men in office do this or that as the first consideration accord- ing to what will make the broadest ap- peal to present popular prejudices and sympathies and further expenditures with a certain audacity which please better than those which do not appeal to public imagination.’ “Like American travelers, M. Guizot criticizes such of the railroads in France, Germany, Belgium and Austria as are owned by the governments and shows an advantage to the public in the railroads of these same countries that are operated by private corporations. “Now government operation of ships can only be performed with a disregard of original cost and the regular over- head charges which must in any event be met. Building Costs “The actual cost of building and oper- ating steamers under the United States laws according to published figures is at least forty per cent higher than under the English or German flag, and even more under the flags of some other nations, and if the United States govern- ment builds the vessels for our merchant marine, it is certain that the specifica- tions and inspection will make the cost much higher. This great difference can- not be met by earnings and of course there will be no profit. The taxpayers will pay the bill, making such expendi- tures practically a subsidy in disguise. “There are difficulties in bringing about re-establishment of a merchant marine so long neglected. The civil war practically destroyed what was then left of American lines to foreign countries, as the capacity of our shipyards was re- THE MARINE REVIEW quired for naval purposes. At the same time advantage of the change from wood to iron for hulls was taken by those abroad, particularly by English shipbuilders who made great strides for- ward.. Our own country needed all avail- able capital and still needs more for interior development, so shipbuilding has heen abandoned by capital for the more profitable railroad building and manu- facturing. All manufacturers have been protected and that protection made the cost of all labor and materials used in the building of ships.much greater than the cost abroad. Foreigners Carrying Our Goods “Our agriculturists, so marily of whom are far from sight of the sea, cared nothing for American ships. They have been content to allow foreigners to carry their goods until the foreigners have gotten so far ahead, they will be difficult to overtake in the race. Our standards of living have been raised for everybody, but particularly for those who work for daily or monthly wages. Mechanics of all classes have received great increases in wages. “These changes in fifty years have combined to cause neglect of an Amer- ican merchant marine. “A change in our laws, removing some restrictions and regulations would put the operation of our steamships on the same level as those of foreigners; but the political tendencies of recent years, the evident disposition of legislators to enact class legislation like that of the La Follette seamen’s bill, will surely add to the cost of operating vessels already too expensive to compete with foreign- ers makes such a change improbable. The free ship proposition so boldly advocated has proven an absolute failure. Not one ship came under our flag under that proposition, until as I have pre- viously pointed out the ninety-seven were driven by the European war to come. under its protection. All other suggestions have been from time to time defeated or tabled by Congress and for this no one political party can be held responsible. “Now the fact remains, regardless of those who hold to the contrary, that British supremacy was started and has been upheld by subsidies while the Unit- ed States was busy in other directions and supinely allowed our commerce to be taken over by them and others. The British government has given an example of this by loaning to the Cunard Steam- ' ship ‘Co. at 2 per cent interest per annum sufficient money to build the Lusi- tania and Mauretania, to hold the su- premacy of the passenger trade, and to provide vessels for their naval reserve. Germany in twenty-five years has made an enormous advance in her merchant 43 marine. That she would do less to ac- complish this result than Great Britain is unbelievable. Japan furnishes another distinguished example of what can be done by a government for its merchant marine. “We must have a merchant marine. We need hardly revert to the well known instances of our deficiency. Our admir- able navy, to be compared to the great navies of the world, must have ships to serve as auxiliaries, as tenders and trans- ports, and as schools for mariners. “Imagine if you can the United King- dom’s situation during the past few months were she not provided with ample ships most skillfully handled; and what would be even now the con- dition of our own agriculturists and manufacturers were it not for the ships of other nations, mostly British? “Our agriculturists and manufacturers must have ships to carry their products to foreign markets, ships under the American flag, for it is truly said ‘Trade follows the Flag.’ “Why not follow the examples of other nations? We cannot grant sub- sidies, that word is so objectionable, but we may grant direct aid, based on serv- ice, on increased cost of operation due to the high standards set ,by our own people; the carrying of mails or the need of a naval reserve; by the loan of large sums at low rate of interest; by pref- erential or differential duties; by a combination of these reasons or without any of them but solely for the broader and better reason that our country needs a merchant marine— not any particular section or class,—but the whole country and all classes, North and South, East and West.” * Endowment Fund The nécessity “of ‘creating an. en- dowment fund has long been urged upon the society. A committee was appointed last year to go into the matter thoroughly and the sugges- tions of the committee were as fol- lows: Although it is not advisable at this time to press for immediate addi- tional contributions to an endowment fund, a definite beginning should be made and the following procedure is recommended: (1) That the accumulated funds of the society, at least to the extent of $12,560 now invested in municipal bonds, be immediately set aside as the nucleus of an endowment fund. (2) That all entrance, life and per- manent membership. fees, all gifts, bequests, etc., unless otherwise spe- cifically designated, be set aside and invested as a permanent addition to the endowment fund. (3) That until the endowment RSE ries aaa ar eng