it would give to our own industries. I have seen a list of more than 400 different industries that are employed in building a great ship, including the barber, who shaves the builders, and their laundryman, who washes their clothes.

No one can deny that the conditions are very unfortunate and that every possible effort should be made to recover our fair share of the ocean-carrying trade.

A number of years ago this question of free ships was considered a great deal by commercial bodies and some effort was made to secure the passage of an act that would give our merchants the rights to buy ships abroad and give them an American register.

About twenty years ago the matter was brought up before the Board of Trade and Transportation. Mr. John Roach, one of our famous shipbuilders, with others was there to oppose it. The matter was discussed for four special sessions of the Board and every argument that could be used on either side was advanced. In the beginning I was in favor of the movement and spoke in its interest, but after I had heard all that was said I changed my mind and voted with a large majority against the proposition, and the conclusion was reached that we not only wanted to own our own ships, but to build them as well. Since that time I have heard but very little about free ships, either in the commercial bodies to which I have belonged or in the public press.

About eighteen years ago an organization was formed which was called the American Shipping and Commercial League, of which General Wheeler, of Alabama, was president and Captain Ambrose Snow and Mr. Arthur Sewell were vice-presidents. A number of conventions were held, some of which I attended. A law was finally proposed providing for a subsidy of 30 cents per ton for every thousand miles sailed between an American and a foreign port. It passed the Senate and failed passage of the House for lack of three votes. If this bill had become a law it would without doubt have restored our merchant marine to its normal condition, and added greatly to the wealth and prosperity of the whole country. During the year 1903 the Board of Trade and Transportation took up the question again and under the leadership of Aaron Vanderbilt, Darwin R. James, Oscar S. Straus and others, brought to a successful conclusion a movement which resulted in the appointment of a Congressional Committee composed of five Senators and five members of the House with Senator Gallinger as chairman. They were instructed to investigate carefully the entire subject and if possible to agree upon a bill that would best promote the object sought. They gave hearings in a large number of places on the Atlantic, Gulf, the Pacific and Lake coasts, and held a continuous session in Washington, beginning November 22d, and lasting until December 12, 1903.

After listening to all the testimony given, there can be no doubt that this commission had a broader and more intelligent and more comprehensive knowledge of the entire subject that was ever enjoyed by any body of men before. Among the great many things they learned I will only enumerate a few.

They learned that Italy granted construction and navigation bounties to all vessels both steam and sail, and that Austria-Hungary, Holland, Spain, Russia, Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Japan, all paid subsidies and mail subvention, and some of them loaned money at very low rates of interest to aid their merchants to build ships.

They found that England had paid from 250 to 300 millions of dollars to enable her ships to reach every port on the entire planet, that she pays the owner of the Lusitania and the Mauretania $1,100,100 annually as bounty and that she loaned them $13,000,000 with which to build them at the low rate of interest of 234 per cent. per annum. That she pays $200,000 per annum to aid a line running from Vancouver to China and Japan and that if anyone wants to go from the United States to many parts of South America, they will have to go to England first in order to get there and that most all of our South American mail goes by the way of England, and very many other things that time and space forbid me to mention.

They concluded that in view of the enormous payments made to the ships that carried the North Atlantic trade, it was useless to try secure legislation that would recover for our vessels any portion of that vast business. But they did agree upon a bill that would in their opinion establish and maintain lines from the east coast of the United States to the West Indies, Mexico, and the east coast of South America and lines from our Pacific Coast to the west coast of Mexico, South America and to enter China, Japan and Australia.

It is useless to trace the history of these bills for the last four years. President Roosevelt has always been in favor of the bills and has earnestly urged their passage. The Senate has always been ready to pass them when they have been presented. But the Democrats in the House have always opposed them and have had enough Republicans on their side to defeat them. Just before the adjournment of the last Congress a bill passed the Senate, but was defeated in the House, 172 voting for it and 175 against it. If I remember rightly, 22 Republicans voted against it, and 4 Democrats voted for it.

This is a sad, sad story that I have been writing and the case seems almost a hopeless one. I believe that the only hope for the future is to be found in our commercial bodies. If they could once come to a realizing sense of the paramount importance of this question, could see what vast interests are involved, what enormous benefits could be derived from the restoration of our American merchant marine to its ancient position on the waters of the earth, I believe it would not be long before the necessary legislation could be secured. My experi

ence and observation have taught me that when the commercial bodies of America want anything and enough of them want it, and when they work hard for it, they are sure finally to succeed in securing it. But it will require a long pull, a strong pull and a pull altogether before it can be accomplished.

There is but one cause for satisfaction in the entire marine situation and that is found in the fact that our coastwise trade is in a fairly satisfactory condition and is making reasonable progress, as while in 1894 we had but 3,096,276 tons of ships engaged in this trade, in 1904, we had 5,335,164 tons. Certainly, a very satisfactory growth. Of course, this is caused by the fact that no foreign built ship is permitted to engage in the coastwise trade or to carry freight or passengers from our American ports to any other, thus confining the business to ships built in our own shipyards.

Mr. E. R. WOOD, of Philadelphia.—Mr. President and gentlemen, the figures which Mr. SMITH has given us are startling enough, but there are some considerations in this question which go beyond figures, which are immeasurable in their consequences, and cannot be weighed by any system of mathematics. When they make their impression upon the mind which they deserve to make they must make every man who feels their force aware of the cowardice and the pessimism of those weak creatures who have failed to meet the necessities of the situation in our National Congress.

In the latter part of the eighteenth century and the early part of the nineteenth century, American commerce, the ships of the United States, were almost the controlling factor in the world's progress. The battles, the wars of Napoleon, centered around that commerce. The Milan decrees and the Berlin decrees, the English orders in council were caused by and affected and intended to affect the New England, the New York, the Philadelphia and Baltimore vessels which carried the commerce of the ocean during those years.

Later those sailing vessels opened up the Pacific, introduced missionary work to the islands, carried it on and established the great American agencies in China and introduced a missionary system there.

Still later, in the latter half of the century, they opened up Japan, and the great commercial position which Japan occupies to-day is largely owing to the effect of American shipping and commerce.

In other words, the nineteenth century owes its controlling features to the commerce of the North American continent. Now, I am sure that when this nation, which controls and produces one-fourth of the products of the Christian world, can be brought directly into touch, can bring its commerce and the feelings and sentiments of its people face to face and hand to hand with the other nations of the world, they can affect a new generation so that there will be a start for the twentieth century brilliant beyond what we can foresee, that will affect the twentieth century in the same way that the American commerce affected the nineteenth century.

I agree to every word of the report. I would like to have it made more specific. But our committee did not feel that without technical knowledge we could go into certain questions. It would be well, however, to state certain facts, which all here are not familiar with, but which are true, I believe; that is, that the laws which were made to control the crews of the sailing vessels a hundred years ago or so are still in effect, and they make it necessary, as they are applied to ocean steamers, to carry larger crews than English or German vessels are bound to do, from seven to perhaps fifty men, according to the size of the vessel, as an additional number. This, of course, in addition to the higher wages which American labor expects to get, makes a serious matter, one which ought to be thought out and corrected. There can be no doubt, I think, that with the usual mechanical excellence of American work, we would be able to produce ships which could work with a smaller crew than English or German ships, instead of a larger crew, and our ship owners and ship builders have the advantage of American mechanical skill. I hope the resolutions will pass. [Applause.]

Mr. FURLONG, of Milwaukee.-I should like to ask a question of some of the gentlemen who have given this matter thought, and I ask it for the purpose of obtaining information and not with any desire to start a controversy.

I should like to know if, in their opinion, the application of the subject of the expenditure of large sums for subsidy

would be anything more than a stimulant, rather than effecting a complete cure, and bring our merchant marine to that height which it had in that golden age to which they have referred. In other words, whether subsidies are necessary and would accomplish all that is claimed, or whether it is not a fact that changes in our tariff laws have not had a great deal to do with the decadence of our merchant marine. I repeat, I simply desire information on the subject.

Mr. WOOD.-I do not see any reason why Congress should not be able to acquire such wisdom as would enable it to counterbalance the subsidies paid by Japan or Germany or England to vessels. There must be a money equivalent somewhere and they ought to be able to find it.

Apart from that, it has been suggested that all goods imported into this country on American vessels should have a rebate in the tariff, and to my mind that would be a very good thing to have. It would relieve our friends who worry about the extent of the tariff imposts if IO per cent. were taken off occasionally on American ships, and at the same time it would be an immense encouragement to the owners of the ships, and it would act automatically. But it is too radical a thought yet, I believe, to be offered. I do not suppose Mr. DOUGLAS would approve that, if so, I would be glad to hear from him.

Mr. DOUGLAS.-That is an old idea.

Mr. WOOD.-Yes, it is an old idea, but sometimes old things come around again.

Mr. DOUGLAS.-For many years American ships enjoyed a preferential tariff, and that was one of the causes which gave us an American merchant marine at one time, a merchant marine which carried from 80 to 90 per cent. of the merchandise coming to our ports and going from our ports. Many people have advocated a return to that method of giving a discriminating duty in favor of goods coming to our ports in American ships. The only difficulty that has arisen is one that we have debated at previous meetings, the fact that we have treaties now with some twenty nations (favored nations), and we would have to abrogate those