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

22 MARINE REVIEW. [January 17, MR. CLEMENT A. GRISCOM ON OUR MERCHANT MARINE. Mr. Clement ‘A. Griscom, president of the International Navigation Co., has written a special article for the Saturday Evening: Post upon the subject of the ‘‘Merchant Marine.” He makes an earnest plea for the shipping bill. Among many things he says: “The American merchant marine in foreign trade is entitled to gov- ernment aid as a broad matter of public policy, not merely as embracing the private industries of ship building and ship owning. The merchant marine stands in the same relationship to the common defense of the country, for which the constitution instructs congress to provide, as the militia of the states stands to the regular army. National navigation is a necessity to the public defense. There are millions of strong and easily trained arms ready to defend the country on land; on the sea we must have ships and the men to navigate them, and these are not to be had for the asking in a day ora month. The fathers of the republic believed that they had in the merchant marine left to us ample means to supplement the navy in defending the country at sea. As a matter of fact, for our recent war with Spain we not only pressed into the service the few American merchant steamships in existence, but we were compelled to draw on the maritime resources of a not unfriendly power to aid us. Suppose the war with Spain, instead of brilliantly concluding with decisive triumphs in three months, had been prolonged for a year. We should have been ab- solutely without the means for transporting our troops or for coaling the fleets of the navy. During the actual stress of war, no nation, ot course, could have actually sold us ships without violating both the letter and spirit of neutrality. Yet our entire transport fleet, bought by the war department since the close of the war, consists of foreign vessels, and all the colliers of the navy were bought from the British flag. “The United States should adopt the policy which Great Britain, France, Germany and Japan have adopted, of carrying ocean mails to all parts of the world in steamships under its own flag. If I am to be criti- cised for writing in behalf of an interest with which I am particularly identified, then I claim, as an offset, the privilege of having my statements on this phase of the matter accepted as those of one who speaks with information. We are asking in the matter of American ocean mails for substantially the system which Great Britain has followed almost since the beginning of steam navigation, and for which, during sixty years, she has spent in the neighborhood of $240,000,000. The statement frequently put forth that Great Britain pays for her ocean mails nothing but the bare cost of carrying them is absolutely without foundation. I have before me the report of the British postmaster general for 1897. At pages 62 and 63 that report states that the payments for the foreign and colonial mail service amount to £770,943. The estimated receipts for sea postage amount to only £115,068. The estimated British loss on the sea service amounted to £439,000. The balance was made up by contributions from the colonies ranging from the sum of £25, subscribed by the little island of Tortola, up to £75,000, subscribed by the Australian federation. These, then, are the broad facts of the British mail service: expenses £770,948, receipts £115,068. The balance represents generally the sacrifice Great Britain and the colonies feel justified in making to secure the carriage of ocean mails by the largest and fastest British steamships. “Turn now to the method at present in use by the United States. 1 find in the report of the superintendent of foreign mails for 1900, at page 11, the statement that the cost of the ocean mails of the United States, carried to a very large extent by foreign vessels, was $2,014,538, while the receipts were $3,467,189, so that our government makes an annual profit of $1,452,601. As an offset to this profit on the books of the treasury we have the facts that American steamships are almost unknown to the ports of the old world, while British ocean mail steamship lines, maintained at the government’s loss of over $3,000,000 a year, are found in every port. Under the unequal conditions indicated by these bald facts, why should not British mail steamship companies thrive, and how can we look for the creation of new American steamship lines? “The only great industries in which our country has not of late years attained prominence are the building and navigating of steamships for the foreign trade. Our merchant marine engaged in the foreign trade is com- paratively insignificant. At the same time this fact confronts us that there has not, in a generation, been so great an opportunity to establish an American merchant marine as that afforded by present conditions, not only at home, but abroad. The war with Spain indirectly gave a great stimulus to ship building in the United States. The war and navy depart- ments, it will be recalled, bought a considerable number of American steamships engaged. in the coastwise trade, and the owners have been re- placing them by new, larger and faster ships. Besides these facts, every American ship owner knows that, in part at least, the activity of ship building at the present time is due to the belief that legislation will be enacted at an early date to promote the American merchant marine. This belief is based on the knowledge that the present is a most opportune time for such legislation, because, owing to temporary influences, the price of ship building in Great Britain is about 40 per cent. higher than four or five years ago. For my own part, in view of the perfectly well established differences in the cost of building steamships here and in Great Britain, and in operating them under the American and foreign flags after they have been built, and in view of the liberal policy which foreign nations have pursued toward their shipping and our own neglect of our commer- cial marine, I do not see how the promise held forth by existing condi- tions can be made good unless congress is willing to pass a bill based on the subsidy principle. If congress shall pass a law I am equally positive that ship building for the foreign trade in the United States will develop so rapidly that we shall attain all the advantages inseparable from whole- sale construction, which are at the base of Great Britain’s long predom- inance as a maritime nation. From such wholesale ship building, con- ducted in all parts of the United States, a reduction in prices would surely ensue, and the benefit of this reduction would go not only to all the com. mercial, industrial and agricultural interests involved in shipping, but would accrue to the government itself in the form of lower prices fot wat vessels. It is conceded that our very large expenditures for the navy have been one of the most powerful agencies in establishing such ship yards as we now have on the seaboard. Without this naval construction and with- out the coasting law the building of large vessels in this country would never have attained the proportions already reached. The object of the shipping bill, in a word, is to complete the industrial independence of the United States.” MONTHLY SUMMARY OF NAVAL CONSTRUCTION, Excellent progress is noted in the construction of naval vessels in the latest monthly report of the chief constructor, Rear Admiral Hichborn. The sheathed protected cruisers are making considerable advance. The first of them to be launched will be the Cleveland at the Bath Iron Works, Bath, Me., which is now 40 per cent. completed. Following is the report: Degree of completion, BATTLESHIPS. Per cent. Dec. 1. Jan. 1. PLU OIS 2S; ace esata kw Grkctan hie was NeWDpOorts NGWSiesccctacewane eae reee ne 87 87+ PIADAMA ce asanierwcce st Veetaiee Cramp & Sons ....... 99-+- 99-++- Wasconsin: <neeii< coh aac che Union Iron Works ... 98-+- 99-+- WYMAN Oia ave va orsieia Sigiate aatais wi cteieioie ors Cramp & Sons ....... eres 40 MISSOURI A iene scien ences crntens Newport: NO@WS < sccisisavecsse wcoces ee AS 21 ORIG ry Pee Rae owe Union Iron: Works oi se0 eee cak sess 35 36 SHEATHED PROTECTED CRUISERS. DONORS iis ov caw es cca vecnmin evel Ne@afle G2 Tievy sic ccc nwe Pome 34 eeu Des WOIMeS 3) cassis cin cccuicewaxs Fore River Engine Co................. 11 12 Chattanooga ciicsiccs veccwsacrsse HewisNixOn: s372...56c0 cb ceee eaves ene 15 17 Galveston Vs vorcwes cosas cue muse Wins Re: Tries Coss iia veccos ate 4 6 Tacoma ..... Siu iealteaes wee etees Union Tron WOrks estes ccc tse el tae ce 11 13 PlCV.GlANG asics kin chicismeea curate Bath: Uroni Works .6cccivsiiess a cculrceccies 31 40 MONITORS. ATK AWSAS cy vood no sac g cade Se cele es Newport NewS .....ccccceceeccccssveces 45 46-+- INO VAC Se osiined acne ams cae Bath: Tron Works ius ci cus cueeee eeerk 74 76 Mlonidawisii cs wacker ae eens Lewis: Nixoneicas <2 iisucees eared saat stone 54 56 WEY OMNIN Gos. :a'siecaraieicie eins cen oreo alk Union: Tron Works... 66. dsctscinavivivis en's 61 65 TORPEDO BOAT DESTROYERS. Bainbridge Neatle & Wn6vy sis oc vincccsee cecte tees 84 86 @ITY eens Neafies & ievy sue estes swee coerce we 82 84 Chauncey Neafle: © Levys. viviveseacccs eee 82 84 BIO iis Wim, 3Ro Drize: Contacte eee 86 88 Decatur Wai: Re Trise Coriavivess cise waeere 86 88 Hopkins Harlan & Hollingsworth .............. 68 70 Wl Decsucsuieees Harlan & Hollingsworth .............. 68 69 Lawrence Fore River Engine Co.............000- 99 99 MACDONOUSH 3.i 0s cc cccescscwiceces Fore River Engine Co...............+. 97 98 Paul JONES a eciccstlea laced cece ei Union Iron Works ............eeece0e8 79+ 80 ROLY ee cas Gas jis Ao ea aloe Caee Union Iron Works ............e0..e00e 82 85 PrOVIG Mae isos sc detente nee sce Union Iron Works ...........0.cseeeee 79+- 80 DLGWALl secrete sheers ee neee ee cee Gas Engine & Power Co............... 40 AT TUK TONS cosas seiinato ook cle cee Maryland Steel Co.......... .cccceceees 47 51 WIP Pls ss caves seers dave biases es Maryland Steel Co...........ceecceeees 46 50 WéORGEM oie ose sa nenee aes ceteris Maryland Steel Co............eeeeeeeee 46 49 TORPEDO BOATS. Serineh amis. eee we teces one Re Harlan & Hollingsworth .............. 98 98 Goldsborough bE copcnutiocs Wolff & (Zwicker... 5. tcvecssss.ceecei es 99 99 Baileys isk) os caw cacsitresieiowtnewae Gas Engine & Power Co...............- 99 99 Bagley sc icicccecsecs caueanicue tice Bath, [ron -WOrkS :, i ccsesecs cause cuaees 96 98 Barney ince eon Vices eee Bath: Iron Works wide cusccticc cscs cones 98 99 Biddlets. casa aa else aeons Bath: Tron Works: sicassvinoetisn eer coke 92 96 Blakely: ee sie iee keene eeee ace Geo. Lawley & Som ............eeeeees 97 97 DOOM Ga cats nina ceceeu en accn ae ce Geo. Lawley & Son... 0.66 ccisieees 97 97 INICHOISON Gicsieens bebe eas cat cess Liowis! NIxOD f.aiecscce ccs cat Coen woes 82 83 OZBrien re eee wa tesa ete nieve bes Bewise Nixoniirs.c As iicsicackenee ete: 85- 86 ShHubbrick ss) ccccw sich esiwcckcnice es Wim Re Price COns ices cass ecevunweve 97 97 DLOGIMOM a... easak. ceeds ses cos Wins Re rigecCos cis seas ooo eeeeus 97 99 TRHOLPNGONI aig tee eaions socte wre teens Wm oRy Trige (CoOsces are ts esos teens 92 93 SPIN SOY: iciee Maia cscle cases hetae eae te Columbian Iron Works ............... 67 67 Wilkies= 255 icin one eaten viene Gas Engine & Power Co............... 68 70 SUBMARINE TORPEDO BOATS. PUM BOT sa site cotaieslc leon ened se Lewis Nixons esos tees ss eccieea ee oaks 0 3 Adder ......... Aicalel ctulalacoveienste were! slave bewiss Nixon eo a cccsnculionsion ote cweawe 15 20 GTAMPUS 3.45% sie 5 see aoc nee Union Tron: Works casas cr aec eae 0 2 MOCCASIN = ts e.hic i ehinc cose coe es Lewis Nixon ................ Rane eon 10 ab f PUK Ge irs caus ea eatelaee ab caste oman Union Tron: Works <4 esse sk coawene es 0 2 Porpoise icawseias cae cre sae cute cue BewiseNixone jcicce cece weeks siea eens 9 10 SHAT Oe ta eeine seme soak Pewis NiIxOnio cess cence cae seine hae wes 9 10 SHIP SUBSIDIES A BUSINESS QUESTION. There is but one way to look at the proposed ship subsidy, and that is in the light of a purely business proposition. It is nothing else. We put up $9,000,000 a year, considerably less than that in fact when the mail contracts are taken into consideration, and we aim at securing a goodly proportion of the $200,000,000 a year which we are now paying foreign steamship companies. There is a vast difference between $9,000,000 and $200,000,000. If we put up our money we shall expect it to return to us many fold. As to the argument that only rich ship owners will be bene- fited that is false on its face. When we build ships we give employment to American workmen and American ship yards. When we sail these American ships we employ a large number of American seamen. When we pay freight rates to these American ships the money does not go abroad, but remains in this country. Ocean commerce is profitable, and it is worth while trying to get our share of it—Philadelphia Inquirer. PROTECTION FOR AMERICAN SHIPPING. _ Ocean transportation is engaged largely and to an increasing extent in carrying American products and millions of American money go to pay the freight. Other nations subsidize steamship lines to the extent they find necessary to make them succeed, and to get into competition with them and independent of them we must pursue the same policy to the extent that we find necessary. Not only have we built up great industries by protection, but we hastened by a generation the construction of the transcontinental systems of transportation and their profitable results by means of land subsidies and government credit. Both policies have bee amply vindicated. The ship subsidy carries the same principle in a new direction, where it applies with equal force and will be equally fruitful of results—New York Mail and Express. HI(IGH-GRADE RUBBER GOODS. ‘Messrs, Sayen & Schultz, proprietors of the Mechanical Rubber Works, Philadelphia, issue a very attractive 1901 calendar illustrating the legend of King Solomon and the iron worker. This firm manufactures high-grade rubber goods, such as air hose for pneumatic riveters and chippers, fire, steam and water hose. A specialty made by them is the celebrated Melville oxydized sheet gum packing for steam and hydraulic use, after the patent issued to Rear Admiral Geo. W. Melville, chief of the bureau of steam engineering, United States navy.