matter whether intended for foreign or domestic trade,--thus admitting
ships built from foreign materials, in whole or in part, to the
coastwise trade, from which they are now excluded. The minority held
also that it would probably "be necessary to remove the duties not only
for materials but from all materials sold cheaper abroad than at home,"
meaning steel and iron products. "In this way, and in this way only,
will our shipbuilders be enabled to obtain our materials at the prices
at which they are sold to foreign shipbuilders."[HV]

The report of the commission was submitted to the Fifty-eighth Congress,
third session, January 4, 1905.[HW] No action was had on the bill in
that Congress. It was referred to the committee on commerce; reported
back to the Senate with sundry amendments and a minority report against
it;[HX] was debated tentatively; and finally passed over at the request
of its sponsor, Senator Gallinger, who expressed himself as satisfied
that the bill could not receive the consideration it deserved at that
session. Meanwhile both Houses had directed a continuance of the
commission's inquiry. In May the chairman, Senator Gallinger, held
conferences in New York with several representatives of the shipping
interests who had not been heard; and later sessions were held in
Washington, at which other statements were received and considered.

At the opening of the Fifty-ninth Congress, December 4, 1905, Senator
Gallinger submitted a supplementary report of the commission, and with
it introduced a new bill--the previous bill in a new draft.[HY] At the
same time Representative Charles H. Grosvenor, of Ohio, the first House
member of the commission, introduced the bill to the House.

This draft added several new features to the original bill. The most
important were provisions for increasing the subsidies payable under the