THE CHEAPEST PORT?

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 881, 29 July 1910, Page 8

THE CHEAPEST PORT?

REPLY TO MR. FLETCHER'S STATEMENT. TRANSHIPMENT CHARGES. Sir. Neil Galbraith, acting-manager in Wellington for tho New Zealand Shipping Company, made a statement to a Dominion representative yesterday, in reply to certain statements made by the chairman of the llarbour Board (Mr. E. Fletcher), at Wednesday evening's meeting. Mr. Galbraith says he believes Mr. Fletcher Is correct in what ho says iu reply to tho Wanganui charges ro transhipment, but when he compares Wellington with Lyttelton there is a good (leal to be said in support of the charges mmli: at Lyttelton compared with those mado in Wellington. "I can quote instances of absolute fact in regard to these two ports, which proves quite conclusively that the southern port is the cheaper. U.uite Recently ire had a consignment of about 400 tons of harvesting machinery and cheese from ports south of ■Lyttelton to ship away, a large quantity of which was landed from the Union Company's steamer, and was not taken into a shed, but ( was carted to our steamer, lying at the Glasgow Wharf, at a cost of 4s. per ton. For this service, the board received the cargo from the Union steamer's slings, carted it between the wharves, and placed it on the wharf, alongside tho Home steamer. Finding that such work could be done more conveniently and cheaper at Lyttolton, an arrangement' was made to tranship the next two consignments at Lyttelton (instead of Wellington). These tivo shipnlents, consisting of 1000 tons, were transhipped from the coastal to our own steamer at Lyttelton, at a cost of Is. Gd. per ton, including the labour in trucks, receiving and- delivering. The total cost to our .company in tranship, ping those two consignments was .£75. For the same, work at Wellington, thu cost would have been about £IW. Storage Heavy in Wellington. "At present we are milking it shipment by the Kuapehu, which arrived in Wellington on July 8. As a rule, we try to arrange for the shipments to arrive whilst our steamer is loading, but sometimes, owing to unforeseen circumstances, that cannot be done. The shipment ia now costing us Us.. per l.on, including storage, and owing to the more favourable conditions existing at Lyttelton in regard to storage, this work could have been done there at a little more than hall the Wellington cost.

The chairman of the Harbour Board is reported to have said that the Lyttellon Board charged nothing for goods transhipped over the wharf, but the Hallway Department charged Is. Cd. per ton for taking them to 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. This, I am given to understand,, is not the impression, he wished to convey, but, supposing, for instance, that it was necessary, owing to circumstances, to store goods at cither Lyttelton or Wellington for 2S days, I find that including a week's free storage at Wellington the charges for transhipment and storage here wuuld be Us. 3d. per ton, made up as follows— wharfage 35., cartage l≤., and storage for 21 days 10s. 3d. This could all bo done at Lyttelton at half the cost. It may be explained that tho excessive storage charged at Wellington is made up by way of a penal.rate which the shipping companies consider most unreasonable in respect to these transhipments. Then, in reference to the chairman's statement in regard to a proposal made some years ago to alter the whole system and change to that in force in Auckland. At that timo tlie shipping companies were not in favour of. this, but in the light of recent experiences- it, is more than probable that they might now change with v advantage; and at the same thno'givo Hie' Wellingto n, Harbour Board a'ii' opportunity of becoming a rich corporation, as the chairman suggests, and give a further opportunity of enabling the board to reduce the present high charges paid by the shipping companies. "With a dual control of stevedoring and delivery of cargo the shipping companies would probably be able to do the work at a considerably reduced cost. ' :...-•

"I notice that an agitation has recently taken place in Wanganui on the score of transhipment charges. I would point out that if the Wanganui merchants were to combine and get shipments of 100 or 150 tons by «aeh steamer from London for transhipment at Lyttelton they could easily arrange for a coastal boat to be in Lyttelton to receive the cargo Whilst it w'as being discharged, which would mean a 6aving of at least Is. Gd. per ton. Is Thero Discrimination? "Another matter wo have recently taken up. with the board is one in connection with the berthing of the Rimutaka. This steamer: , is-due here to-day with ■ nearly GOOO tons of cai-go to bo landed , here. On the completion of the King's , Wharf (erected at a very large cost) tile Atheuic ■ was berthed there to discharge. Owing to restrictions which enabled the steamer to work the board's cranes only, the discharge was very much delayed, but in view of those conditions being relaxed and permission being given to work the steamer's winches in conjunction with tho cranes, and, further, the improved working of the board's cranes, the conditions have changed for the better. Noting this we made application to have the Rimutnka berthed at tho King's Wharf, which application was refused by the harbourmaster, without any reason being given. The matter was referred to the board in ■ committee, through the secretary, and, we are informed, tho result is that for reasons given , by tho harbourmaster (which the board has not seen fit to inform us), tho notion of that officer has been upheld.. To us it seems very extraordinary that with two berths at the. King's Wharf vacant, and ample storage 'accommodation, that wo should be declined the use of the wharf. In past years wo havo frequently suffered inconvenience at the Queen's Wharf by having to take an inferior berth owing to the expected arrival of boats of the Athenic, lonic, and Corinthic type. This, we recognised, was unavoidable, as No. 1 berth was the only suitablo one for those steamers, but we do not think 'this reason can be urged at the King's Wharf, although the lonic is expected in from ten tto twelve days after the Rimutaka. Thero should be ample berthing and storage accommodation at tho King's "Wharf for both. I might say that included in the Rimntaka's cargo is a line of 01S rails.(each 42ft: lone, weighing in all some -100 tons), which is very awkward cargo to handle at tho Queen's Wharf. At the King's Wharf these rails could be placed directly on to railway truck.?,, and delivered at once to the Department free of cartage, and without obstructing other work on the wharf, which is not the case on tho Queen's Wharf. "With regard to the concrete cases quoted above regarding transhipping I would suggest that as the board intends to circularise chambers of commerce on the lines of the chairman's remarks, might it not include tho fncts I have pointed out?"