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

104 hampering restrictions on its growth, regardless of whether the shipping in- dustry was finally subsidized or other- wise aided for foreign trade. Dis- cussion of this question elicited strong condemnation of the seamen’s law as well as declarations that the greatest present hindrance to an American merchant marine is the “unreasoning and unreasonable” attitude of the administration. Assistant Secretary of Commerce E. F. Sweet. outlined a plan to en- able naval auxiliary vessels to be leased to private interests under fairly satisfactory conditions during times of peace, and in times of war to be operated by the government for defensive or other necessary pur- poses. Mr. Sweet declared in favor of the appointment of a non-partisan com- mission of experts to investigate the shipping question. The majority cf the members of this commission, he believed, should be selected from non- official life. Capt. Robert Dollar, president of the Robert Dollar Co., San Fran- cisco, which has traded and operated ships across the Pacific. for many years, told the convention that the reason why. American business men were not now going into shipping under the Stars and Stripes in the foreign trade, as they did during the Napoleonic wars, was the lack of any definite national shipping policy. He opposed government ownership, not only in principle, but on the ground that it would not serve the truce functions which a merchant marine should render to a nation. Public Fails to Grasp Situation “The public does not compre- hend,” said Capt. Dollar, “the three- fold function which shipping dis- charges towards a maritime nation, which is, first, a source of increased national income through the freights collected from world commerce, and the greater facilities for shipment and sale of the national products at large; second, maintenance, under the flag, of communication with distant posses- sions, and third, aid to defense and protection of commerce during war, whether the government is belliger- ent or neutral. Any national ship- ping policy must be designed to serve all these ends, otherwise, the United States will never have a fleet like Great Britain’s. “It is a libel upon the intelligence of our citizens to say that Americans will not engage in foreign shipping. This is refuted by the fact that pre- vious to the war, American citizens owned and operated over two million gross tons under foreign register, be- of the public treasury. ‘the THE MARINE REVIEW ing obliged to do this by the onerous restrictions of the American navigation laws, and economic condi- tions making cost of operation higher under the United States than under the foreign flag.” Opposes Government Ownership Capt. Dollar gave a detailed resume of the present chaotic navigation laws. “The new government ship bill,” he declared, “has aot been in- troduced, and it would be unwise to attempt to discuss unofficial reports that, instead of being confined to government operation, the vessels constructed by the government may be leased. to private companies for operation in certain trades not yet designated. This much, however, it is fair to say: The government pro- poses to embark in a business which normally costs 20 to 30 per cent more to conduct under the American flag than under foreign flags. government can perform the service more cheaply than private enterprises, it must incur deficits, to be met out The vessels cannot be leased to private com- panies, unless private companies can operate them profitably.” F. D. M. Strachan, Brunswick, Ga., declared that any attempt to get the American wage scale for seamen down to a competitive level with other nations is not to be thought of, and that the only method by which the American merchant fleet in for- eign trade can be built up is by the governmental equalization of costs of construction and operation. Mr. Strachan, who has been in the shipping business a number of years, and is building a number of ships which he desires to operate under United States flag in foreign trade, offered a constructive plan which included governmental equal- ization of the cost of a-vessel built in an American ship yard by Amer- ican labor, with the cost of a vessel of the same type in a foreign yard at the same period; a contract on the part of the government with American ship owners to equalize their operating costs over a period of years versus foreign operating costs; and the amendment of Amer- ican navigation laws so that they will be on a parity with the naviga- tion laws of foreign countries with which American-built and owned ships must compete. In return for governmental aid, Mr. Strachan sug- gested, the government should have the right to call on American ship owners for services of an extraordi- nary character, thus assuring at a very low cost the certainty of an addition to its fleet of transports or Unless the ’ purchase bill would provide for the naval auxiliaries in time Welding Ring » representing chamber of commerce of New Y heartily endorsed Capt. Dof views. “I have had 40 years’ ex ence in shipping,” said Mr now properly qualified to become member of a merchant marine boa to tell the people just what to do the shipping connection.” “It is not entirely practicable, y der present conditions,” said J. Fowler, representing W. R. Grace Co., New York, “to change from foreign flag to the American flag, The firm which I represent has indulg in experiment in this direction, changing from British to Americ flags, on certain of its fleet of ocea going vessels. The results of experiment, particularly indicating an increase in the cost of operatio have not been such as to justify further attempt in this dtrection. We would, of course, prefer to have all our ships operate under the Amer flag, but the existing conditions, pa ticularly those statutory enactmen which affect shipping, are not such — as to make this possible.” H. F. Griffith, representing the Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. (Co, Pittsburgh, suggested that if the ship leasing of a government-owned mer- chant marine to private concerns, much of what is now considered ob- — jectionable would be removed. Thinks Prosperity Will Continue George B. Taylor, representing the Society for Developing of American Shipping, New Orleans, said that as- — suming that the maximum possible — rate of construction of ships is main- tained, the preponderance of freight — to be moved over available trans- : portation facilities will be so great as to render shipping exceedingly — profitable for at least two years after — the war. He therefore suggested, that — American shippers, instead of waiting — for some radical change in the situa-_ tion, get busy now and build some ships, and prove that the situation is not nearly so bad as it might - appear. : P. H. W. Ross, president, National Marine League of the United States, | declared that “the shipping question is not merely a squabble between shippers and seamen, but one im which the entire people of the coun- try should be interested and on 3 which they should be heard.” Among other speakers on the merf- chant marine question were M. J Sanders, New Orleans, and John A Penton, president, Penton Publishing Co., Cleveland.