PORT OF LONDON.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 743, 16 February 1910, Page 7

PORT OF LONDON.

S-v!S'ift/THE;'NEW."iDUES. : V : :;. ; ;';; ':'•"•: By ii:- ; ';'. ::^:j!i\- r 'Lotidoti,'.February '14.'-', •:; The; committee^of ''the /'London ... County' Council, states (that the,' ne^'vPort'''of'iLonr' suggests ? exported ': ■'A specialvcorrespondent 7 of!a ''.'British financial... paper J '■ writes':—The.- tentative: scheme., of .dues' drafted by,;the .'.-Port of 'London; Authority,! is. being .subjected to. a': great; deal. of. criticism by the .various; large .trading':associations;to which it has. been,'.submitted;.for'''consideration..; ! ; A' . number. of. societies /affiliated '■ to; .the-'Lon-don' Chamber,: of ' Commerce'.have already deliberated;; on., the?., new i. schedule; ;'and. careful;.inquiries ■ .go.: to;? show .that;. in nearly; .every Jnstahce'.'these...bodies-.are. hostilei to;.'the.Vproposed ;tariff. •;'';/ :; :';;.:,. ;.; The Port Authority; is'only empowered ■.tomake.a'charge'equal to one-thousandth' part of 'the .'value of "the 1 trade; of the . port, ;: or,; roughly; '■ about a. year;' but it is '.-contended'that hot only are. the", maximum charges' proposed'excessive, .but that;they are .unfairly, apportioned,'.both ,in' respect;of • the,'values,;of..the 1 different' ■ "classes of goods 'and in respect'-'.to', the'ac'-' tiial.work'involved.in'dockuig..;;.The fol-| lowing..resolution;'of :• the >respective''coinmittoes.of the:Ceyl6h'Tea'Association,'the' Indian Tea:'Association','and. the'Tea''Buy-: era' '"Association .may: be..: taken:' as' .typical' of those-/being-'passed by'the commercial bodies viterestea:—;,.: ; , ; ','-;': i V,r;.\ ;: '.-'.-, .; "That' this ''committee-, are unanimously: of ..opinion., that. the' maximum port rate' on. tea should:not exceed ls. : per ton,; and provision .should:'be;made"in; the'.case of, any tea: being; subsequently,:.:';'re-exported, .that ;it ..should be ..exempt not ; 6nly from; export .rates,' but,; that. a. rebate, .of the; port rate-already, loyied-should*be granted.; This: committee, opinion, ;that'the maximum-port 1 rate for tea, coffee,.: and. cocoa /should 'be the. same; ■ ahso .that the maximum .'rats for rubber should not exceed' 2s. 6d.;;per ton.v'alsd ithat v al]. rates should be. levied' as', net rates only." ' ;';Tho general: apprehension seems'.to be that ;if thevschedule,/goes' through :uh- : : amended "the Port -Authority :'; will. :hav'e •power to;levy an .exorbitant: charge.'This; is; causing much; uneasiness 'and' arousing hostilitydn.'the,.trading.'circles of y.-the'' city,..and /some .guarantee ;is 'demanded. : that: there-.will.,be'general;fairness';of. treatment—that. :.one: trade.-" shall - no,t' be allowed'.to.benefit; at,.thb' expense of an-. ;other.\ , The ;controversy,, that .'• this' new :■ schedule, has'brought about has'assumed too large proportioris'to' be gone into here; -but.taken,as a whole the trading,sections' •are in ' f avbur.-jof -some; sort of rebate 'or differential system' like that which; is in force;at':Liverpool.''>■'■'-'.■■■ -; -.;. .'.■;-,•,/;;;■ '„■.■ :',-As::the.:;experieflcegainedyby Liverpool' may; be .useful. in ; the settlement 'of Lou-' denV difficulty,, it, :'.may;. hot be- out' of place, to;, trace; the, history;- of; the ; ■ phases .through which'the, Liverpool "dues .have v ■passed;;;;;;; ,'■ v:'"; ':';;vV. ';;:,;,;'■:;:.■'';'■;.; . .When" the Mersey, Docks !and. Harbour Boardwas. created, by; the 1858 Aot it was' given, power; to'charge.diiferential rates for certain-goods .as.; well'tyas compulsory rates, '.'but/a .vessel;only,, -/entering''the River: Mersey; and not \ using, the docks .is liable to no more;than the narbour rates.' All' vessels .using.' the- Liverpool', and Birkenhead Docks ;are.''liable.;to'. dock, 'tonnage rates;.but:specified cargoes, such as' .coal,''. coke,'.: rails and '/salt,: when ' loaded' outwards: in' certain: dbcksT-Branley-Mooro or Wellington and; the! Birkenhead Docks■. —are only charged'half rates. Such rates as anchorage,:''..wharf,: \dock '.rent, , and; graving dock rates do not come -within the purview: of .this article,' but the dues' ongoods at!Liverpool'may be.mentioned. These rates may ; be classified-thus:—. '~. '■'■ AH goods imported into,,or exported out; of, the port aro liable to.'dock rates as specified in the dues b6ok,'-:but by order, of the Docks Board the' dock rates' on goods imported, and, exported coastwise; though legally-chargeable, are not at present collected.. All goods imported into, or, exported from, the port are'also, liable to town dues, unless they come under,,tho differential arrangements;; which are only : in force during the pleasure of the board. -The basis for the rates is, in the case of; Liverpool, on ■ the, bulk amount 'imported' or exported, .and hot on tho value of the goods.,:-And; further, all ratos'at, the port are .upon, the;, weight, and not upon the value of goods,' as has been proposed in the case-of London. Lf, then, the'Port-of. London-.Authority, was dpsigned, after'the Mersey Docks Board in so,many ways, .why'is'not the same basis for dues adopted,as is in force at Liverpool? Atleastj'such a courso would have led to,less.grumbling;over the.provisional schedule, and, perhaps, to a more satisfactory, result.,,,: -.- ...