N.Z. CONDITIONS.

Hokitika Guardian, 11 January 1922, Page 3

N.Z. CONDITIONS.

TOO MANY LOADING PORTS. f A statement as to the conditions of the New Zealand trrade was placed before the committee by the Shaw, Savill and Albion Company, Limited. In this t the company said: “The difficulties which have to be contended with and which cause much , direct and indirect expense to the shipowners are chiefly the following: (a) The numerous freezing works whose output has to be lifted, and the number of ports which have to he visited. (b) The multiplicity of hills of lading required by shippers from each freezing works, the multiplicity of separate marks on most of tho hills of lading, I the number of consignees and the splitting np of the deliveries by the consignees, i (c) Tho inadequacy aj> times of tho storage accommodation in Britain, leading to excessive delays in discharge. (cl) The go-slow policy here and in New Zealand of the workmen. “In regard to (a) there are thirtynine freezing companies or works in New Zealand, each with a separate output. There are eighteen ports, each of which the .steamers are required to visit to lift the meat- at least once a month during the season. Many ,of the j works have limited storage accomino- ; dation, and all desire the promptest clearance of their prepared output. “In regard to (b), probably the experience of the Matatua, now discharging here, will give some idea of the ; conditions. This 'vessel is not exceptional, except that she does not carry as much meat as some of the other steamers in the trade, and the details of marks, etc., are rather better than the average; moreover, she loaded : meat at only two ports: Carcases I shipped 116,002, separate bills of lading , 181. separate marks 701, separate marks each of ten carcases or less 158, I consignees 32, deliveries 196. Under . such conditions mis-deliveries are inevitable, and cargo left on hand never realises the amount claimed and paid for abort deliveries, j “In regal’d to (d) the company gave j instances of 1 the time occupied in New . Zealand in loading (a portion of the ; time being occupied in changing ports) I and in Britain ’in discharging the steamers. The time in New Zealand ranged from 33 days .for the AVaimana to 6-1 days for (the Raranga. The average for seven ships was 46i days. , The time in London from arrival to discharge ranged from 24 to 44 days. The average time for the same seven ships was 37 days. “In our view,” proceeds the statement. “(a) is not likely to be remedied materially, the New Zealand desire for. iocalisaltion being so strong that, however, is beyond the shipowners’ influence or control. AVe believe (b) might he materially improved without disadvantage to individual shippers. but this again lies outside of the shipowners’ province. Undoubtedly (c) can be remedied, and wo trust (d) will gradually bo improved as the general disruption during and following the war is replaced by a more moderate attitude on the part of the workmen and an approach to • normal conditions ensues. “Manifestly any diminution in the number of ports visitpd, any reduction in tne work of sorting and delivering with resulting claims, any more rapid discharge and any better work done will, separately or in combination, result in diminished expenses and so enable the shipowner to carry tho cargo at lower rates of freight.”