CARGO PILLAGE

Auckland Star, Volume LXXII, Issue 173, 24 July 1941, Page 3

CARGO PILLAGE

GOODS IN CARTONS

WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY?

Reference to the pillaging of cargo was made at a meeting of the council of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce this morning, when the i experience of a local firm was under review. This firm recently had occasion to ship a consignment of canned fish packed in cartons to the South Island. The consignment was shipped from Auckland to Lyttelton and then railed to its destination. On arrival one carton was found to have been pillaged, and a claim was lodged for the shortage. The ship ping company held a clean receipt from the Railway Department, and the claim was eventually declined as the railways, it was alleged, would not accept responsibility for pillage from goods packed in cartons. Mr. .1. A. C. Allum thought the chamber should communicate with the General Manager of Railways direct. It was apparently a case of the regulations lagging behind modern practice. The matter was not so much one of the containers, but lack of co-operation between the shipping companies and the Railways Department, he said.

Mr. N. B. Spencer supported Mr. Allum's suggestion, and referred to the losses which occurred with respect to cargo from Lyttelton and Christchurch.

Another member .«aid that thousands of pounds' worth of goods were dispatched in cartons. If the position was really analysed he supposed that the largest percentage of the pillage occurred between Lyttelton and Christchurch.

Mr. G. S. Reid said the Railways Department appealed to business people to discard cartons which became worn. The tendency was to use them too long. Finally, on the motion of Mr. \V. J. Truscott. it was decided to ask "he Associated Chambers of Commerce to confer with the Manufacturers" Federation and other interested organisations with a view to making united representations to the shipping companies and Railways department, and ascertaining whose responsibility it. was if cargo was pillaged.