SHIPS AND THE SEA.

Evening Post, Volume LXVIII, Issue 134, 3 December 1904, Page 12

SHIPS AND THE SEA.

A correspondent of the London Daily Telegraph writing on 6th October, states that the American Shipping Trust iB experiencing difficulties in New York very similar to those of the shipping companies in London, who find port expenses extremely heavy. The city lately built ten new piers,_ along which vessels discharge and load cargo and land passengers. These have cost about £4,000,000. What constitutes a fair rental per pier is a question which is now being thrashed out. Unless lower rentals are asked the Shipping Trust* threatens to go to other ports — Montreal 2 in Canada, for example — to which ports much commerce that formeriy came to New York has already been diverted. To talk of Montreal is like hanging a red rag to an infuriated bull in the eyes of the patriotic American investor, who was told when Mr. Pierpont Morgan organised the Shipping Trust that there was "a -good chance not only of wresting the monopoly of the Atlantic shipping from England, but of establishing American shipping on a solid base at her home ports." It would furnish probably another argument that the Shipping Trust since Mr. Bruce Ismay, of London, succeeded Mr. Pierpont Morgan in New York has been completely controlled by the British. To the generally accepted theory that war is good for shipping the Russo-Ja-panese campaign must be written down as an exception (says an English shipping paper). . The extraordinary theories of the Russian Government as to what constitutes contraband may have had something to do with it, but the subject is not even mentioned by Messrs. H. E. Moss and Co. in, their semi-annual circular. They go back to the outbreak of the war, and they remark : "Instead of an all-round improvement taking place, such as invariably has occurred during previous great wars, public confidence was shaken, trade restricted, and we may safely say that the last six months have been the worst experienced for a decade past." It was not, - however, the fear that we might be drawn into the conflict which affords, in the opinion of this experienced firm, the principal explanation. The main cause, they assert, was the over-supply of very large carrying steamers, and the great falling off in ex*ports,to Europe from the United States. In short, we have to thank our old friend over-building for the bulk of the trouble. If, then, the war is in great degree a thing apart, what has it done for us? A few shipowners, who took the risks which were well covered, have doubtless done well by it. Some who perhaps thought it might .afford an opportunity for the disposal of tonnage, at good prices, have been disappointed. Messrs. Moss and Co. say that, with the exception of one English cargo boat of 10,000 tons, they arc not aware of sales of any importance to Russia on British account, whereas, as we know, the Germans have disposed of fast liners and cargo boats, and expect to sell more. Even the demand from Japan has for tjie present ceased to affect us. Perhaps we shall see a better enquiry when the war is over. As to what will then happen, Messrs. Moss and Co. are rather sanguine. When peace is concluded they anticipate "a great improvement, such j as we have not seen before for many | years, especially in the Pacific trade, whjch we have always predicted is capable of enormous expansion." But an identical prediction was generally made j when the Transvaal War should close, and since then trade with South Africa has been desperately bad. We hope, of course, that the expectation of Messrs. Moss and Co. will oe realised. Meantime it is pleasant to find that, while war is still in full blast, the tone of the shipping trade is distinctly more cheerful. This circular names the year 1906> for a "marked advance," tnless the war comes to an end sooner. But this Far East campaign "is so rapidly becoming chronic £hafc it may perhaps gradually t cease to affect the world's commercialpeace of mind. Can seafaring life be made more attractive to the British sailor? There are some who say that it is possible if shipowning is regarded as a philanthropic enterprise. There are others, happily, who answer the question affirmatively and without any such qualification. They say that at very little additional expense a vessel can be built with such commodious and comfortably-fitted quarters for her crew that tfhe British seaman can be rendered indifferent to the undoubted attractions of shore life. In other words, they assert that the dearth of British sailors is largely the result of disagreeable environment, which can and ought to be corrected. It is unquestionable that the process of correction is going on, but it is to be feared that it suffers some lack of force from the absence of personal interest in the subject on the part of the majority of shipowners. They are men with a multitude of cares, and devolution is essential in their case. Thus, it may happen tjhat they leave the question of crew accommodation to their superintendent, or perhaps even to the builder, neither of whom may be particularly concerned over such a question. Yet, if the shipowner gives the matter a thought he can but recognise that this is precisely pne of those points on which, even in hi& onn mieiest, a persopal initiative is desirable. We have at all events got to a stage when it is generally recognised that man is very much the .creature of his surroundings, and that it pays in the long run to treat him well. Therefore, from a merely selfish point of view, owners cannot afford to treat this question ac of no importance. There was much evidence before Sir Francis Jeune's Committee which showed that seamen revolt against housing conditions under which they lead the life of pigs, and that where decent accommodation is at their disposal they become better and more self-respecting servants. That was the contention, in the broadest sense, of, among others, Mr. Henry Radcliffe, of Cardiff, and we are glad to see that in his case 'precept has again been followed by practice. There were recently launched at Stockton-on-Tees, for Mr. Radcliffe's fixm, two fine cargo steamers, each of between 7000 and 8000 tons, which are notable for the pains which have been taken to secure the comfort of the crews. The forecastles are fitted throughout with baths, washhouses, and iron bedsteads,' and there is "headroom" to the extent of 7ft 6in. It goes without remark that the cubic space required by law is far exceeded, while special attention has been given to light and ventilation, matters in regard to which the average forecastle is frequently very deficient. Particular care appears to have been devoted to the ventilation of the engine-room and stokehold, so that if seamen and firemen are not> comfortable on board these two vessels it will be largely their own fault. There are people, priding themselves on being old-fashioned, who will doubtless say that all this means pampering the sailor. But, unless^ port medical officers have an unusual gift of romance, even a little pampering will scarcely be out of place, more especially if it will bring back the British sailor to the British ship.— Lloyd's Gazette and Weekly Summary. Advice has been received that the onetime E. and A liner Menmuir, well known in the Australian trade, has been sold to Japan. After being disposed of by the E and A. Company the vessel was renamed the Perla. 1 ' The Japanese are accredited'with having paid £10,000 for the vessel, which, after having been taken over at Hongkong, loaded at that port 2000 tons rice and 10,000 cases of dynamite, and sailed for Kobe.