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

20 THE MaRINE REVIEW DEVOTED TO EVERYTHING AND EVERY INTEREST CONNECTED OR ASSOCIATED WITH MARINE MATTERS ON THE FACH. OF THE EARTH. Published every Thursday by The Penton Publishing Company CLEVELAND. CHICAGO: MONADNOCK BUILDING. PITTSBURG: PARK BUILDING. NEW YORK: 150 NASSAU STREET. Correspondence on Marine Engineering, Ship Buslding and Shipping Subjects Solicited. . Subscription, $3.00 perannum. To Foreign Countries, $4.50. Subscribers can have addresses changed at will. Change of advertising copy must reach this office on Thursday preced- ing date of publication. The Cleveland News Co. willsupply the trade with the MARINE REVIEW through the regular channels of the American News Co. European Agents, The International News Company, Breams Building, | Chancery Lane, London, E. C. England. Entered at the Post Office at Cleveland, Ohio, as Second Class Matter. FEBRUARY 8, 1906. PRINTED IN, AN: OPEN SHOP, AN ANALYSIS OF SENATOR MALLORY'S SPEECH. More attention is being given in the senate of the United States at this time to the shipping bill than to any other pending measure. It is a bill in- troduced by Senator Gallinger, chairman of the Merchant Marine Commission appointed by congress to investigate the subject of our shipping. Its pro- visions are approved by the entire commission, con- sisting of six Republicans and four Democrats, ex- cept as to one provision--the one that provides a bounty of $5 per gross ton per annum to cargo as distinct from mail carrying vessels. On every other feature of this measure the entire commission is unan- imous. in their opposition to the one feature specified; there is reason to believe that the minority is evenly divided on that point. This indicates how near to complete agreement the commission is, and should be indica- tive of where the congress will eventually stand in voting on the bill. The commission has made two reports, and the minority has made one, that of a year ago. The bills are referred, in the senate to the commerce committee, and in the house to the mer- But the Democrats are by no means united © chant marine and fisheries committee. While the min- ority members of the cominission have made no min- ority report this year, the minority members of the senate committee on commerce have made a report. They made a report last year. The minority report of this year is different from that of last, in that the last one advocates no alternative policy, the minority report of last year advocating a mutch abridged form of the old discriminating duty policy. * x * x ** Senator Mallory is credited, and we believe cor- rectly, with having written all of the minority re- ports but one, that one being the house merchant marine and fisheries committee minority report of last year. The other three, as we say, were written by Senator Mallory. Since writing his last minority report, for the commerce committee of the senate, which was signed by but four of the six Democratic members of that committee, Senator Mallory has made an extended speech in the senate in opposition to the bill. In his speech Senator Mallory advocates the old discriminating duty policy without abridge- ment--that is to say, in all of its early vigor. The query naturally arises, if Senator Mallory believes, as he undoubtedly does, in applying the old dis- -criminating duty policy without abridgement, did he recommend abridgement in his minority reports of a year ago in order to secure the assent of the other minority members? The query also properly arises, if he believed, when he wrote the last minority re- port, in an unimpaired discriminating 'duty policy, why did his report not advocate it? Was it omitted because his colleagues in the minority would not concur with his own views as to policy? These queries are not. made in a spirit of banter, but to suggest that there is a considerable diversity of opinion as to policy among the minority members of the senate commerce committee, which could not be united in a mere recital of objections to the bill, and least of all in advocacy of a fixed policy. li this conclusion be a correct one, then it should re- ceive the very careful consideration of the majority members of the senate commerce committee. Like- wise, the surmises herein indulged in should be exploited by some senator upon the floor of the senate, in order that the real- facts may be laid bare, and for this very pertinent reason: If the minority has no fixed, or united, views as to an alternative policy by which to build up our deep-sea shipping and the majority has, the course of the majority is obvious. 7K *k ok ok *K A large part of Senator Mallory's speech is de- voted to categorical objections, section by' section, to the features of the bill, some of which: have since been remedied by amendment or withdrawal, and others of which are merely technical, none of which, as we see them, are important, except those that it