DEARTH OF TONNAGE

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 195, 13 May 1919, Page 5

DEARTH OF TONNAGE

FAR-REACHING EFFECTS 1 : - CHAMBER OF, SHIPPING REPORT (From the London "Times.") ' ■ London, March io, Evidence continues, to pour in of the jenous effect of the present deficiency of liner tonnage. The disturbance at Kinrnol Military Camp, Rhyl, was chiefly due to delays in providing transport home for Canadian soldiers; a message from Paris states that Mr. Massey, Prune Minister of .New Zealand, lias received advice that lack of insulated tonnage has seriously affected the meat freezing awl So ''interests in Jiew Zealand; and the Secretary for India has explained thd allotment of such available passenger accommodation as there is from India. On Monday there .was the statement of Lieutenant-General Sir John Monash 011 the difficulty of 'securing adequate tonnage for the repatriation of' Australian troops, and last'month the South African House of Assembly discussed the question of the large numbers of South Africans who were waiting to return Home, As has been recently pointed out in "Tjio ■Times," there are waiting lists of many thousands of passengers who .want: to travel but cannot secure accommodation. The effect of the present lack of tonnage Is world-wide. ..... Liners Not Replaced. The principal causes of the present un satisfactory situation are really quite 6imple, and have lately been explained. The outstanding fact is that a large proportion of liner tonnage was destroyed ouring the war and has not. been replaced. When the shipyards of the country Were at last empowered to undertake . mercantile work, they had to concentrate ' on cargo ships, since , the maintenance or the food supply was imperative. It 1 is right to remember at this time that one of the aims of the submarine.campaign ■was admittedly to destroy British tonnage, so that this country would not be able to resume commerce after the war. The fact has to be recognised that th's ' cami>aign has had a very far-reaching effect in diminishing the supply of tonnage needed even for returning troops to the Dominions overseas and the , United States. ... In connection with til's present luck of tonnage some; figures included in ■ the annual report, now issued, of the Chamber of Shipping of the United Kingdom are important. The report states:—' ''Under peaco conditions, without either, national yards or Government control, the output of merchant shipping was, according to the 1913 figures,- approximately 2,000,000 gross tons a year. Tho last publish; Admiralty official statement of the British,' shipbuilding output for the S'ear 1918 -was 1,841,250 gross tons. The actual' ontput has proved to- be from 1,500,000 to 1,600,000 gross tons only. ' As against this country, losses were about , 1,940,000 gross tons, ;co ;that tho Govern'uient failed even io keep pace with current losses. 111 this, connection- it is desirable to recall that the total net losses of tho British mercantile marine i since the outbreak of war, 1914, to the end of October, 1918, were something over 3,443,012 gross tons. These figures were taken from-an Admiralty White Paper (C.d. 9221) stating the. position as on October 81. The full figures, exclusive of transfers to an'd from the British flag, were is follow:— • ' . • ' ; Gross tons. . £05503 .' 0,031,828 Gains— 1 ■- ... New construction, ~ U.K. ...., 4,342,296 ' ' Purchase abroad 630,000 Enemy tonnage captured - 716,520 —- 5,588,816 3,443,012 "It is not known what proportion of the 716,520 tons of lenerjy shipping is condemned or merely detained.' Of the 031,828 gross tons losses, 86 per cent, of the loss was duo to enemy action. If .a oorrcct appreciation of British losses is to he had, -account must be taken of. the loss of. normal;progress,;which may, i 'be- stiiteckon .nnvaveruge- of- rceerit years - ■at 400,000 tons per annum. On this basis it will he seen that* in addition to aotual losses of approximately 3,500,000 tons there has been a loss of headway amounting to 110 fewor than 1,600,000. It may, therefore, fairly be stated that the country is. 5,100,090-gross tons worse off than • it would have been but for the war. As against this it is to be desired and even expected that' the'terms of peace will provide'for the restitution of some , portion of our war losses by the application <>f such proportion of the available enemy tonnage as cur losses boar <to the whole , losses, of the Associated Powers." In another part of the report it is stated that:—"Tho enemy tonnage in enemy ' and neutral ports on the conclusion of hostilities was approximately 4,000,000 gross tons; a further quantity was at the outbreak of war either in or brought to British or Allied ports. Part of this ttas detained, and part has been condemned, but figures are not available distinguishing between 3hips condemned ant' those merely detained, so that the total of enemy V shipping which.. is capnble of being disposed of may be estimated to amount to approximately. 5,000,000 gross tons in all. .'British war losses alone have been 47,935 gross tons,, and Allied . losses ..2,653.749 gross, tons approximately, so that even though there be 5,000,000 tons of available enemy shipping, it will .only enable the enemy to. make restitution in respect of about half of the losses which they have deliberately inflicted." The, placing of enemy shipping in Allied service is one of the immediate needs.. Another ,is the clearing up of the shipbuilding situation,'since, iri view of . tho uncertain costof labour and material, and the existing tremendously high cost of tonnage, there is great hesitation about placing new contracts.