Chapter XVI: Section VI: How Can Mail Speed Be Attained?

THE TRANSMARINE COMPARED WITH THE INLAND POST: OUR PAST SPASMODIC
EFFORTS: NEED SOME SYSTEM: FRANCE AROUSED TO STEAM: THE
SAILING-SHIP MAIL: THE NAVAL STEAM MAIL: THE PRIVATE ENTERPRISE
MAIL: ALL INADEQUATE AND ABANDONED: GREAT BRITAIN'S EXPERIENCE IN
ALL THESE METHODS: NAVAL VESSELS CAN NOT BE ADAPTED TO THE MAIL
SERVICE: WILL PROPELLERS MEET THE WANTS OF MAIL TRANSPORT, WITH OR
WITHOUT SUBSIDY: POPULAR ERRORS REGARDING THE PROPELLER: ITS
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES: BOURNE'S OPINION: ROBERT MURRAY:
PROPELLERS TOO OFTEN ON THE DOCKS: THEY ARE VERY DISAGREEABLE
PASSENGER VESSELS: IF PROPELLERS RUN MORE CHEAPLY IT IS BECAUSE
THEY ARE SLOWER: COMPARED WITH SAIL: UNPROFITABLE STOCK: CROSKEY'S
LINE: PROPELLERS LIVE ON CHANCES AND CHARTERS: IRON AS A MATERIAL:
SENDING THE MAILS BY SLOW PROPELLERS WOULD BE AN UNFAIR
DISCRIMINATION AGAINST SAILING VESSELS: INDIVIDUAL ENTERPRISE CAN
NOT SUPPLY MAIL FACILITIES: THEREFORE IT IS THE DUTY OF THE
GOVERNMENT.

I have endeavored to prove in the foregoing Section that ocean mail steamers can not live on their own receipts. The question now arises, how can we secure speed for the mails and passengers upon the ocean? With so many expenses and so small an income the fast ocean steamer can not become profitable to even the most thoroughly organized and best administered companies. Much less can it be successfully run by individuals and individual enterprise, which has never so many reliable resources at command as a strong, chartered company. It is true that there are a few prominent transatlantic routes where steamers can run as auxiliary propellers; but the number of them is small, and the speed attained will by no means prove sufficient for postal purposes. The transmarine postal service has been a source of constant annoyance to almost every commercial nation. The overland mails have generally been self-supporting, and it has been a favorite idea that those on the sea should be so also; although there is no just reason why either should be necessarily so any more than in the cases of the Navy and the Army; branches of the service which entail large expenses on the Government, and yet without a moiety of the benefits which directly flow from the postal service to all classes of community. No nation except Great Britain has come up to the issue and faced this question boldly. Almost every other country, not excepting our own, has been hanging back on the subject of the transmarine post, "waiting, like Mr. Micawber, for something to turn up," in the improvements of ocean steam navigation, which might obviate the necessity of paying for the ocean transit. But every hope has been disappointed; and instead of realizing these wishes the case has been growing worse year by year, until we are at last compelled to move in the matter, or lose our commerce, our ocean _prestige_, and sink down contented with a second or third-rate position among commercial nations, and acknowledge ourselves tributary to the far-seeing and far-reaching, and superior policy of our competitors.

The United States have indeed become galvanically aroused now and then, as in 1847 and '8, to a self-protecting and a self-developing system; but as soon as one faint effort has been made, we have, instead of pursuing that effort and developing it fully, relapsed back into our old indifference, and given the whole available talent of the Government either to the administration, or to the everlasting discussion of petty politics. During the time that President Buchanan was Secretary of State, some of our noblest efforts for the establishment of ocean mails were made, with his fullest countenance and aid; but the policy then inaugurated with prospects so hopeful for our commercial future, and which has operated so healthfully ever since, is now half abandoned, or left without notice to take care of itself; until it may be to-day said that we have no steam policy, and run our ocean mails only by expedients. This ever has been and ever will be unfortunate for us, and costly. Individuals and companies build steamers for the accidents of trade, let them lie still a year or two, then pounce upon some disorganized trade, suck the life-blood from it like vampires, and at last leave it, the very corpse of commerce, lying at the public door. All such irregular traffic is injurious to the best interests of the country, destroys all generous and manly competition, and proves most clearly the want of a Government steam mail system. France has been awaiting the issues of time, and under a too high expectation for the improvements of the age, until she finds that unless she inaugurates and sustains a liberal steam policy, and becomes less dependent on foreigners for her mails, she will have the commerce of the world swept from her shores as by a whirlwind of enterprise. She has now become aroused, and has determined to establish three great lines of communication, one with the United States, one with the West-Indies, Central America, the Spanish Main, and Mexico, and one with Brazil and La Plata. She has found, that it will no longer do to abandon her mails to fate, and that in the end it will be far more profitable to pay even largely for good mails than to do without them. Hence, her offer to give to the American, West-Indian, and Brazilian service named an annual subvention of fourteen million _Francs_, or nearly three million dollars, to be continued for twenty years, which the Government deems a sufficient period for the establishment and test of a system. (_See _projet_ of Franco-American Navigation, page 198._)

Among the many expedients adopted for the transmission of the foreign post are those of employing ordinary sailing vessels on the one hand, or the vessels of the war marine on the other. Both systems have been effectually and forever exploded and abandoned. The objections to sailing vessels are very numerous. They are, in the first place, too slow. They are too uncertain in their days of sailing and arrival. They can never be placed under the direction of the Department because they are private property, devoted to private uses, and generally accomplish their ends by private means; one of the most prominent of which is, to keep back all letters except those going to their own consignees. If a merchant runs his ship for personal gain it is not to be supposed that he will carry the letters of his commercial competitors, and thus forestall his own speculations. Sailing vessels have no proper accommodations for the mails, and can not fairly be forced either to transport or to deliver them. The uncertainties of cargo are such that they can not sail on fixed days with punctuality. But the great difficulty is their want of speed and the uncertainty of their progress or arrival. Whenever they have been employed by the British Government for postal service they have always proven themselves inefficient and unreliable. Whenever they have been superceded by steamers, the postal income, before small, has gone up rapidly to five, ten, or twenty times the former income. This was well illustrated in the British and Brazilian lines. The Parliamentary returns for 1842, when postal service with Brazil and La Plata was performed by a line of fine sailing packets, give the total income from postages at L5,034, 13_d_, 6_s_ Lord Canning, the British Post Master General, stated that, in 1852, two years after the Royal Mail Steam Packets commenced running to Brazil and La Plata, the income from postages was L44,091, 17_s_, or nearly nine times as much as when the mails went by sailing vessels.[D] Ship owners have a strong aversion to receiving letters for the places to which their ships are bound. As a barque was about sailing from New-York for Demerara in 1855, I called on the owner, who was on the dock, just before the vessel got under way, and asked that some letters which I held in my hand, might be taken to Georgetown. He said that he could not take them; that he sailed his vessel to make money; and that he could not do other people's business. As I walked away from him rather abruptly, he called to me and wished to know to whom the letters were addressed. I told him, to Sir Edmund Wodehouse, the Governor of the Province; and that they related to the establishment of steam mail facilities between this country and that Province. He at once begged my pardon and explained; asked that I would let him send the letters; and said, moreover, that he would at any time be glad to give me a passage there and back on that business.

[D] See Parliamentary Papers for 1852-3, postal affairs, Report of Lord Canning, July 8, 1853.

The experiment of employing the steamers of the Navy in the postal service has been very fully made by Great Britain. After attempts on a considerable number of lines, and extending over a period of ten years, this service has been found inefficient, cumbrous, and more costly, and has been entirely abandoned. Murray, page 172, says that Mr. Anderson, Managing Director of the Peninsular and Oriental Company, said before the Parliamentary Committee as follows: "The postal communication can be done much cheaper by private contract steamers than by Government boats, because of the merchandise and passengers carried. The steam communication between Southampton and Alexandria, with vessels of 300 to 400 horse power, was done for 4_s_ 6_d_, per mile. From Suez to Ceylon, Calcutta, and Hong Kong, with vessels of 400 to 500 horse power, for 17_s_, 1_d_ per mile. The East-India Company's line (of naval vessels) between Suez and Bombay with vessels of only 250 to 300 horse power, cost 30_s_ per mile. Her Majesty's vessels in the Mediterranean cost about 21_s_ per mile." France also tried the experiment, but soon abandoned the system, as fruitless and exceedingly annoying. It is quite a plausible idea that our mails should go under the flag of the country, with power to protect them, and that vessels generally supposed to be idle should be engaged in some useful service. But this presupposes a fact which does not exist. No vessels in the world are more actively employed than those of the American navy, and there are many stations on which we could employ twice as many as we have with excellent effect on our commerce and foreign relations generally. We constantly hear the complaint that the Secretary of the Navy has no steamer for some immediately necessary or indispensable service. But if he had, and if two dozen steamers were lying all the time idle in our navy yards, they would probably not be installed six months in the postal service until they would be positively demanded in some way in that of the nation, and this diversion would at once frustrate all of the postal and commercial plans of the country.

But the difficulties in the way of this service are so numerous as to be readily palpable to all who examine it. No vessel that is well fitted for naval service is well adapted to that of the post. The post requires great speed, and hence, full-powered vessels. The navy does not require so great speed, and hence, the steamers are seldom more than auxiliaries. They are built heavier and fuller, and are not so adapted to speed. Filling them with the power necessary to drive them with sufficient rapidity for mail packets would unfit them for the efficient service of war. Naval vessels are, moreover, filled and weighted down with guns, stores, men, and a thousand things which would be in the way if they were employed for the mails. They have no state-rooms, cabins, saloons, etc.; and if they had them so as to accommodate passengers, they would be unfit for the war service. Unless so fitted they could not accommodate passengers, as they will not lash themselves up in hammocks under the deck, as thick as grass, as man-of-war's men will. If they are to be strictly naval vessels while running, they will be filled with their own men, and could not take passengers even if they had state-room accommodations for them. They would thus be deprived entirely of this source of income. Again, they could take no freight; and if a passenger mail steamer has to depend upon both freight and passengers for an income to meet the large expenses, which are generally three, five, and often even ten times the sum of subsidy received from the Government, then the naval vessel running in the postal service will be deprived of both these sources of income, and must fall back on the department for all of its expenses, which would be three, five, and even ten times as much as the sum paid private companies for carrying the mail.

The average round trips of the Pacific mail steamers from Panama to San Francisco and Olympia, and back, are, beyond doubt, enormously expensive; while they receive from the Government only $14,500. This is, consequently, but a small fractional part of their income. The trip of the "Arago," or "Fulton," to Havre and back, costs about $45,000, while the mail pay was only $12,500, under the old contract, and is now probably not above $7,500 per round trip.[E] These estimates are made exclusive of insurance, which is 9-1/2 per cent.; repairs, 10 per cent.; and depreciation, at least five per cent. Here, again, the Government gives but a meagre part of the large sum necessary to keep those packets running. Now, if naval vessels were carrying the same mails, and were deprived of the income which they receive for freight and passengers, it would evidently cost the Government six to eight times as much to carry the mails as it now does, saying nothing about the income from the mails, which is trifling. But this class of vessels never could subserve the purposes of rapid correspondence. If they could carry freight and passengers, the difficulties would still be insuperable. It would cost twice as much for the department to accomplish the same object through its officers and its routine as it would for private companies or individuals, who have but the one business and the one purpose in running their vessels. No man, company, or even department of the Government, can accomplish two important and difficult ends by the same agency at the same time. Either the one or the other must suffer and be neglected, or both will be but imperfectly and ineffectively performed. Many structures of this kind fall of their own superincumbent weight and clumsiness. If naval vessels thus running even had passengers they would never be satisfied or well treated. A captain and crew, to be agreeable and satisfactory to passengers, must feel themselves under obligation to them for their patronage, and would be compelled to exert themselves to merit the best feelings of their patrons. This could never be the case with naval gentlemen, who would be dependent for their living on the department only. It is probable that no one seriously entertains such a plan as this for the postal service, as this must be a distinct, partly self-supporting, unbroken, and continuous service, while that of the Navy must also be distinct, independent, and efficiently directed to one great cardinal object. Therefore, we can not secure postal service by this means.

[E] This line receives the total postages, ocean and inland, which in 1856 were, according to the Post Master General's report, $88,483.99, or $7,373.33 per round voyage. (_See Letter of the Hon. Horatio King, 1st Asst. Post Master General._)

As much has been said of Propellers during the few years past, I propose examining the question with the view of ascertaining whether they are adapted to the mail service, and whether we can secure from them sufficient speed without a subsidy from the Government. It is well known that the British are a far more steady-going people than ourselves, and not being so rushing do not require so much speed. They have had an easy control of the European and foreign commerce generally around them; and when competition aroused them to additional efforts they did not endeavor to outstride themselves, but took merely an additional step of progress and speed, and adopted the propeller for their coasting business, because it was a little faster than wind, and yet cheaper than full steam. And because so many propellers have been built for the peculiar short-route trade of Great Britain, many people in this country can not see why we do not adopt the propeller for our foreign trade. I have already shown (_See page 44_) that there are some short routes on which steam is cheaper than the wind, and that on others of greater length steamers can not transport freight under any conditions. (_See latter part of Section IV., on the Cost of Steam._) I do not propose making the Screw Propeller in any way an exception to the position stated; and shall consequently maintain that it will never be the means of attaining a rapid and yet cheap mail speed.

There are no greater errors entertained by the public on any subject connected with steam navigation than concerning the Screw Propeller. It is generally supposed that it is a more economical and effective application of power than the side-wheel, which is a mistake: it is generally supposed that, with the same amount of power and all other conditions equal, the propeller will not run as rapidly as the side-wheel, which is true of steaming in a sea-way or against a head-wind, but a mistake as regards smooth water: it is generally supposed that the engines weigh less, take up less room, and cost less, which is all a mistake. The best authors on this subject and the most eminent builders generally agree, that in England and Scotland, where the propeller has attained its greatest perfection, the difference between the side-wheel and the propeller as an application of power is very slight and hardly appreciable; or that the same number of tons of coal will drive two ships of the same size at the same speed in smooth water; but that the side-wheel has greatly the advantage in a head-sea or during rough weather generally. Many persons who do not understand the subject, have theorized in just the contrary direction. They say that in rough weather the screw has the advantage, because it is alway in the water, etc. Experience shows just the reverse; and theory will bear the practice out. If, in the side-wheel one wheel is part of the time out, the other has, at any rate, the whole force of the engines, and the floats sink to and take hold on a denser, heavier, and less easily yielding stratum of water; so that the progress is nearly the same. The back current or opposing wave can not materially affect it, because the float is at the extreme end of the arm where the travel is greatest, and is always more rapid than the wave. It is not so with the screw. The blade which meets the wave is not placed at the end of a long arm where the travel is very rapid and the motion more sudden than that of the wave. This blade extends all the way along from its extreme end, where the motion is rapid, to the centre, or the shaft, where there is no motion; and all intermediate parts of this blade move so slowly, that the wave of greater rapidity counteracts it, and checks its progress. The side-wheel applies its power at the extreme periphery, where the travel is greatest, while the screw applies it all along between the point of extreme rapidity, and the stationary point in the shaft. There is, moreover, much power lost as the oblique blades of the screw rise and fall in a vertical line while the vessel is heaving.

In the new edition (1855) of "Bourne on the Propeller," he says in the preface:

"Large vessels, we know, are both physically and commercially more advantageous than small vessels, provided only they can be filled with cargo; but in some cases in which small paddle vessels have been superseded by large screw vessels, the superior result due to an increased size of hull has been imputed to a superior efficiency of the propeller. No fact, however, is more conclusively established than this, that the efficiency of paddles and of the screw as propelling instruments is very nearly the same; and in cases in which geared engines are employed to drive a screw vessel, the machinery will take up about the same amount of room as if paddles had been used, and the result will be much the same as if paddles had been adopted. When direct acting engines, however, are employed, the machinery will occupy a much less space in screw vessels than is possible in paddle vessels, and the use of direct acting engines in screw propellers is necessary, therefore, for the realization of the full measure of advantage, which screw propulsion is able to afford."

Atherton says of the propeller in his "Marine Engine Construction and Classification," page 45:

"Its operation has been critically compared with that of the paddle-wheel, under various conditions of engine power, and experience has shown that, under circumstances which admit of the screw propeller being favorably applied, it is equal to the paddle-wheel as an effective means of applying engine power to the propulsion of the vessel." Again:

I recently addressed to Mr. Atherton the following question: "Taking two ships of the same _size, displacement, and power, or coal_, the one a side-wheel, the other screw: What will be their relative _speed and carrying capacity_ in smooth water? What in a sea-way, or in regular transatlantic navigation?" He replied under address, "Woolwich Royal Dock Yard, 14 Sept., 1857:

"It is my opinion, based on experiment, that a well-applied screw is quite equal to the paddle-wheel for giving out the power by which it is itself driven, that is, in smooth water. I can not say from observation or experience what is the comparative operation at sea."

I addressed the same inquiry to Mr. Robert Murray, of Southampton, who has written an able work, entitled, "The Marine Engine," and who is considered excellent authority, and have from him the following reply, dated Southampton, 19 Sept., 1857:

"With regard to the relative efficiency of the paddle-wheel and screw for full-powered mail steamers, I am disposed to prefer the paddle-wheel for _transatlantic_ steaming, in which the vessel has to contend with so much rough weather and heavy sea, and the screw for the Mediterranean and the Pacific routes.

"For auxiliary steamers of any kind the screw has manifestly the advantage.

"With regard to the actual speed obtained from each mode of propulsion in vessels of the same power and form, and with the propeller in its best trim, I am disposed to prefer the paddle-wheel, either in smooth water, or when steaming head to wind, but in other conditions the screw." What he means by "other conditions," is evidently when the screw is running with a fair wind, which is seldom, so as to use her sails. Bourne also states very clearly in two places that the propeller is by no means so efficient in a sea-way, as a side-wheel steamer, and admits that when a vessel is steaming at eleven or twelve knots per hour, the sails not only do not aid her, but frequently materially retard her motion. (_See Bourne, page 237._)

All of these authorities agree that the application of a given power produces about the same effect, whether through the side-wheel or the screw; and if so, it is evident that the screw can not attain the same speed as the side-wheel, without burning as much fuel, and having as costly and as heavy engines and boilers. Indeed, taking the whole evidence together, it appears well settled by these authorities, that the screw is equal to the side-wheel only in smooth water, and that, as a consequence of this distinction, it is not equal to it in general ocean navigation. It has been seen that much of its power is lost when it contends with head-winds and seas, and that when it has attained a fair average mail speed, the wind will help it very little, if any, under the most favorable circumstances. It is, therefore, reasonable to infer that it would cost more to attain a high average mail speed with the propeller than with the side-wheel. If in attaining this average mail speed the advantages are clearly in favor of the side-wheel, there is no hope that we shall accomplish the mail service at cheaper rates than heretofore, as this agency can not be introduced toward that end; for not only is the prime cost of the steamer the same, as also the consumption of fuel per mile, but there are other and numerous disadvantages connected with the propeller, which are wholly unknown to the side-wheel.

It is a well-known fact that propellers are compelled to be placed upon the docks three or four times as often as side-wheels. The screw either breaks, and must be replaced by another, or it cuts the boxes out, or works the stern of the vessel to pieces. Any one of these requires that the steamer shall be docked, however great the expense; and as these accidents are constantly occurring in even the best constructed and best regulated propellers, it follows that they must be constantly on the docks. This species of vessel being built necessarily narrower than the side-wheel, it rolls more, and is found to be an exceedingly disagreeable passenger vessel. Propellers have become deservedly unpopular the world over; and if it were possible for them to be faster than the side-wheel, it is hardly probable that first-class passengers would even then go by them, as they are known to be so exceedingly uncomfortable.

The propeller, I have before said, is erroneously supposed to run more cheaply than the side-wheel. I think that I have shown that as a mail packet it will cost more to run it at a given speed. But there are certain cases in which it does run more cheaply; these are, however, only where the speed is low, and the machinery not geared, and where, as a consequence, sail can be used to more advantage than on a side-wheel. The economy is not the result of the application of the power by the screw, as compared with the side-wheel, but of the sail alone; and this economy is more or less, just as canvas is employed more or less in the propulsion. The screw is the better form of steamer for using sail; and the low speed at which propellers generally run, is a means of making that sail more effective. We have already seen, in the section on the cost of steam, that it generally requires twice the original quantity of fuel to increase the speed from eight to ten knots per hour in either style of steamer. Now, it is a well-known fact that the transatlantic propeller lines are on the average more than two knots per hour short of the speed of the side-wheels, which makes their passages across the Atlantic from two to six days longer than by the mail packets. They thus save from one half to two thirds of the fuel, and deducting its prime cost from the bill of expenses, they add to that of receipts the freight on the cargo, which occupies the space of the coal saved. They consequently run on much smaller expenses; but only when their speed is less than that of the side-wheels, and far too low for effective postal service. Economy thus purchased at the expense of speed may do for freight, and enable propellers to derive some profits from certain cargoes; but it can never subserve the purposes of mails and passengers. It must alway be recollected that the effective speed of the propeller is reduced just in the ratio of the greater economy as compared with the side-wheel.

It thus appears that with any appreciable economy the propeller must be slower than the side-wheel; and that with any considerable economy it can be but little faster than sail. It has, however, the advantage over sail of being rather more reliable and punctual, and can make arrivals and departures rather more matters of certainty. This at the same time secures to it a better class of freights as well as vast numbers of emigrants which together, enable it to incur the extra expense over a sailing vessel. The cargo is less in the propeller than in the sail, as much of the room is occupied by the engines, boilers, and fuel. Hence, the prices must be proportionally higher to meet the deficit arising from the smaller quantity. But there are very few trades in which propellers can run as noticed on so long a voyage as 3,000 to 4,000 miles; and these lie between a few countries in Europe and the ports of the United States. Their support arises chiefly from the emigrant trade; as without this their freights would not on any known lines enable them to run one month. And this is not simply an assumption of theory, but the experience of all the European lines. I was recently told in England and France by many persons who had no interest or desire to deceive me, that propeller stock was invariably a burthen to every body having any thing to do with it, and could generally be bought at sixty to seventy cents on the dollar, while much of it would not bring half of its cost price. They cited as an evidence the fact that no line of propellers is permanent, unless in some way connected with a subsidized company, as in the case of the Cunard screws running between Liverpool and New-York. The Glasgow line is also an exception, and is said to pay dividends. The screw lines are always hunting a home and a new trade. (_See views of Mr. Murray, page 111._)

The only way in which some lines can run is by getting their stock at half its value and thus having to pay the interest on a smaller sum. The "General Screw Steam shipping Company" is an example. The Company had from the first lost money, although they had nine fine steamers, and were compelled finally to close up and sell out. Mr. Croskey, the United States Consul at Southampton, supposed that they might be put into a new trade and make a living on a smaller capital stock; that is, if the new company should get them at half their value. The transfer was made and the "European and American Steamship Company" was established. Some of the vessels were put into the trade between Bremen and London, Southampton, and New-York; some between Antwerp and Brazil; and some between Hamburg and Brazil. None of these lines have paid, except, perhaps, the New-York, which has had large cargoes of emigrants; and Mr. Croskey freely acknowledges that the new Company would have been ruined but for the Indian Revolt, which enabled him to charter five of the vessels to the Government at good prices, for the conveyance of troops by way of the Cape of Good Hope to India. Had the lines on which they were running been profitable they would never have been chartered to the Government. But like the whole propeller service of the world, this Company took the chances; and it may be safely asserted that but for the opportunities which vessels of this class find for chartering to the Government they could not live on their own enterprise three years. The number of these vessels is now very unnecessarily large; and many of them have been built to supply labor to the establishments, and for taking the chances of Government employment at high prices. Their largest employment results from casualties rather than from the pursuit of legitimate trade. But the business is overdone, even for the English market, when foreign war is rather the rule, and peace the exception. But few propellers are now building; these few being small and intended for the coasting, or the short-line Continental trade, where they will readily pay. (_See page 42 for propeller stock; also pages 44 and 45 for the propeller coasting service._)

It does not materially alter the complexion of this question to say that propellers are generally constructed of iron. There is not such a difference in their prime cost or their stowage capacity as to enable them to take the large receipts necessary to their support; while certainly there is no advantage to be gained in speed from iron as a material of construction. The iron propeller can be constructed cheaper than the wooden in Great Britain, because of the great scarcity of timber and the large and redundant quantity of iron; and an iron vessel has some advantage in being able to stow a larger cargo, from the fact that her sides and bottom are not so thick as those of wooden vessels; but these considerations do not very materially affect the consumption of fuel, and the quantity necessary to carry a ton of freight. Iron is probably a better material than wood for the construction of propellers, as the part about the stern, where the screw works, can be made stronger, and as all iron vessels can be rather more readily divided into water-tight compartments by bulkheads. Yet as a material of construction it offers no transcendent advantages over the side-wheel for transatlantic navigation, while it is not probably so safe, or so comfortable for passengers. Yet, it will be well for us to adopt the propeller largely in our coasting trade, and iron as the material of its construction.

We have thus seen that to save fuel and carry freight, the speed of the propeller must be low; indeed very low, if it is to live on its own receipts. It is therefore clearly impossible that with such comparatively low speed it should carry the mail. Neither can it support itself except by this low speed. By running thus but a fraction faster than the sailing vessel, it can command on a few prominent lines a large freight; but to give vessels of such speed a subsidy for carrying the mails would be both to render the mail service inefficient, and to enable the propeller to compete with the sailing lines of the country at very undue advantage, which would be an unfair discrimination against all sailing interests. Should the propeller, like the side-wheel, run fast enough on the average trips of the year to carry the mails, which would certainly be at the expense and abandonment of any considerable freighting business, then the Government might with propriety pay for the mails, as these steamers would not injure the freighting business of sailing vessels. The outcry by sail owners against steamers as competitors can not be against the mail packets; for these carry but little freight; but against these slow screws which should be treated like all other freighting vessels, notwithstanding the fact that some of their owners have had the impudence to propose them for the paid mail service and to ask a subsidy from the Government, but the better to cripple the interests of sailing vessels. As well might Government subsidize fast clippers, because they are a little faster than regular, ordinary sailers. When the steamer runs with sufficient rapidity for the mails, the sailing ship has nothing to fear from competition, and has all the benefits of the more rapid correspondence. Thus, Government must pay only where there is a fast mail, whether it be in a side-wheel or propeller; otherwise it destroys individual competition and cripples private enterprise.

If, as we have seen from all the facts regarding the expense of running steamers, individual enterprise can not supply adequately rapid ocean postal facilities, and if such facilities are yet wholly indispensable to the commerce, the people, and the Government, the only alternative presented is for the Government to pay for them, and to require, as it has of all the American lines, such a speed as to prevent injurious competition to sailing vessels and private enterprise. Much capital is made by certain ship owners out of what they call the undue discrimination of subsidies against their vessels; but they can never lay this charge at the door of the fast and very expensive mail packets, or elsewhere than upon the slow auxiliary propellers which any of them have a right to attempt to run, and which the Government never did and never will subsidize. This is the source and the only source of all the vaunted injurious effects of steam on the sailing stock of the country. It is a question with which the Government has nothing to do, and which must be settled between propeller owners and sail owners themselves, and with reference, perhaps, to the wishes of their customers. Mail steamers have enough to do to get money to pay their coal, provision, repair, and innumerable extras bills, without wrangling over the freighting business. And, from all this we conclude that the only means of the Government securing an adequate mail speed is by paying for it. (_See remarks of Committee on this subject, Paper E._)