CHEAPEST PORT.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 880, 28 July 1910, Page 6

CHEAPEST PORT.

.WELLINGTON TRANSHIPMENT

CHARGES.

KEPtY TO CRITICISM.

.:.■',. ,At the meeting; o£ the Harbour Board -.llast evening tlio chairman (Mr. E. Fletch- :. ' er),'reviewed.'the question of 'tranship- ■ .mcnt diarges at Viellington. There had . been, he said, a great : deal of controversy ' both; in, the nowspapers and amongst a ; large number of citizens with regard to ■ ".'. an. alleged■■ inorease in! the. charges for '•■;".■■ transhipment; When this allegation, appeared -in -.flie"newspapers.he' took im- ;'■ mediate Estops to : contradict it. . Never- . theless,. it'was still circulated." As a : : matter, of fact, there had been no increase...' lii.':'l!)(lß,the-board very'foolish- \ ..ly, took .off tlureitrn charge of Gd. per .'"■.■ ton for carting goods more than 'a. qnar- . ! tc'r of. a'mile, and is.' per ton for a dis- '•■.■' tance exceeding half a mile.- lively mem- •'•' ber 'of the board and anyone who irodcr- ._■ stood.the ppsition'knew that the board '; '-.could,' not' undertake to tranship goods . over-' the ,long distances that existed owing ;V to .the. expansion of. the wharves, with- • ■■.-. out this extra charge. The "AVangnnui •>" Chronicle" had stated that the tranship- '■■ ping charges at "Wellington had been in'■■..creased to'4s.' 6d. There was.no such /.charge at ..all. ~ The highest levied was .-'"■■'4s.; and that occurred very seldom. .. In 1908 the' charge was •3s.' pev ton. In 1916 the 6d.:and Is; charge had bcen.ore- ; imposed. .This was a natural - outcome of. the increase in Harbour Board business.. For. the. lis. per ton . ordinarily ■■■' ohirged'.the. board received-goods at .the chip's side, passed them into the receiving shed, und'accepted .all. responsibility. I'arther,: it atored.the. goods for seven days, got them" out,/trucked them.to. the receiving shed, and handed them over to tho ship, taking receipts and removing ■-' all. responsibility, irom .the shipowner and ■consignee, ''No other port north- or 6oVth of ; the'Line'took the same re-Bpon'sibility-'for a payment of 8s per ton.

■? : ii. :■■•' : Rates "at Other.'PoHs."' •'."■■■ A prcparod statement before members showed the rates •'charged, at- various .Dominion port*. . -They woro told that if ithe.transhinment were done at Nelson or ij'iofcii.thciii. -ports would bo prepared to .provide tho necessary ■ harbour accom- "■' iraodatiou and • .storage.: .At Nelson, the 'charge now was 2s. 6d. per ton, and at , ;Pictoit 2s. per ton. It was only leasonablo ,to. expect that these charges would __ bo >'.. 'increased!.in proportion to.the expense, .incurred' ill providing, increased, accom-jniodation..-At .."Wanganui-the.. Harbour '■ rjioard* levied, a ,chargo ; of 3s.'pcr,fQn. on i. vgoods,: and the' Railway Department 'an : ■ ■ : additional 2s. 6d., for/handling.. .• And .the ■• 'Wanganui:Board did not employ a single individual to handle the goods. It was ■ all dono by i tho Railway Department. It Vrould scarcely, bo said that.this compared ■very favourably with.Wellington. As to. !tho.extra'charge .complained of, during : tho months of May and : June, 1910, a total ,s ;of IB7Gtons of goads for Wiinganui. passed over the .Wellington wharves.. Tho extra •■•''. charge: of :6d. and Is. was levied on only. ::. 82 .tons'of this ..amount, and-it produced 'only .£2 ,15s. Id., .equivalent '.to an .extra ,: charge, of .3-.Bths of ,a ; penny, per ton on '■' : tho 'total quantity,of goods'for.Wanganui . during that period;. As a matter of fact the ' .extra",transhipment .charges; on all. goods ''.-■'• handled during the period named (18,600 • tons)..amounted to.only ;.£169.. They,triod 'as far tis pbssiblo : to have.vessels.berthed >.'■'■. at the; Queen's ■ Wharf, but when these .'vessels had! to : have goods-carted to-them tho board-had to'be reimbjufsed for-tho :,'■"■ extra, expensed'lt. had been! claimed that ■'■:■ transhipment'was:, cheaper in Lyttelton.' '. In fact,' tho , lyttelton Board 1 charged -Vnothiiig, for goods, transhipped over tho .!-!'i wharf,: but: the.- 'Railway :•. Department .: charged lsi 6d. tor ton;for taking ithem ;•', Vtb. store;; and , the same on the ;: return ''•:'. .journey..' If■ tho goods were• stored for 28 .' days, .a'charge of; Is. ' 9d. was made, ' making a total charge of is. 9d; per ton. ''In- Australian, ports transhipment was ':■ more' costly 'than in Wellington. In .:■ Sydney-goods', landed :at Circular Quay .had to be removed to, the Union Com- '•-. .-pony's;; 'or,- • Hnddart-PaTker '■ . Company's "wharf at ; a cost for cartage'alone of 4s. | .'■per ton.- Wellington was absolutely tho ■:■' cheapest .port, for :.th? service • rendered, south' of tho. : liihe, and there.were not ... many ports! north of tho Lino that ac- . cepted. the same responsibility and per---...■■formed..-tho. same• service. Some years : rpreviously a. proposal had been made at ~:the board' table to alter the whole sys-,-iem .and-'-chaDge : to that in vogue at Auckland. ,■ If Wellington did that, the Harbour Board would be a very rich cor- ... poratibn'-'in 'no 'time, for in Auckland,. :■;. although a-charge.of only. 2s. per .ton was. .r'Jevied,: merchants- had .to find .all necessary'labour.-'! ■;;' "■.'.''-' "■„ ''.■"■'■' Mr.' Cohen remarked'.'that 'in; conse- . quence of the almost universal irritation' ■'■ ..which seemed to exist in the minds of -merchants in contributing. territories hehad ' deemed it necessary to bring this matter under tho chairman's notice. Tho

•:..'■ statement prepared by the latter would fall short of its benefit unless, it .were ■'•circulated among the Chambers : of Com- :;■ merce in the rarious districts interested. The chairman'said it had been .already , i'arranged 'to do this.: V

Mr..,Cohen said that under the .new railway regulations in regard to pramBacks these now held ; only 3J bushels instead of 4, and .shippers had- to pay har'.DOnr; charges, on eleven' tons, where : before'they had paid on ;ten,

.;.',■'■; V Why Not Lighters? /■MT.'.-HarKness,suggested that a time lad , amved : in the history of ;the port !"rben- ; the-point should be taken into consideration wbetKcrvit would not be-pos-sible, in order to save cartage, from one wharf to another to.discharge cargo from tne"ocean .boats' into; lighters. It was'a matter tbat had'been considered in the past,-and objections had.been offered, but as.time went by and the wharves extended- over : a greater, area, it would bo necessary to employ lighters.as'was .done in other ports','land it weald-be yery.'much cheaper. - .Mr. Jones: said he had no desre to depreciate Wellington, but'his firm in the ■triatter'*>f : -transhipments .patronised Dunedin whenever it could,''in order to savo money.'.'-,,;' ;-. -. : '""•',.-'.- - •-. • '•■• "The.; chairman said, he'-had .caused a measurement, of'the. reduced .weight sacks .to betaken that moriiin<». •-Even under the 'new. measurements shippers were get.ting a'.toir.of nearer,so.than.4(l feet.. In the, past they'had. tiad a good.thing, fc-r with. ; the -old: sacks they .had been permitted a. ton, of 60 feet. I

:As to-lighters, in years to come, the lighter, question, would hecome, very much more; prominent, than .it ivns ; to-day. But how '.was it. possible, at present to send goods into ■ a, .lighter that carried cargo lor. various, ports .in the-fame-hold?. ;.lfr..'Harfchoss: It is done in every large port- in the. world. . ..•■ . The; chairman:' The'first thing is. to get the "shipping" companies to .put,cargo for different.places in' dijferent.holds., .' ;Mx. Harkness: That could be done. ,

Continuing, the chairman opined that the cost of lighters might prove to ,bo more'than. the'cost of cartage. Dunedin had been-.cited-, as.'a cheap port, but as a. matter,, of fact, the port of Otago had an.extensive scale of cnarges. There was a,' charge of Is. per ton for harbour improvements alone. •It was agreed that, the various Chambers of Commerce be circularised as re- . commended. • ~