WAR & BUSINESS

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 60, 8 September 1914, Page 3

WAR & BUSINESS

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MEETING PRIZE SHIPS & DETAINED SHIPS Several matters moro or less relative to the war came before the Chamber of Commerce Council yesterday. There were present Messrs. C. W. Jones (chairman), J. G. Harkness, G. Shirtcliffe, T. Ballingev, R. W. Waterhouse, W. J. Thompson, and F. W. Manton. The question of reimbursing New Zealand consignees for transhipment charges on caigo in German ships detained by the Commonwealth Government was brought up on a letter from the Minister of Marine (Hon. F. M. B. Fisher), who (replying to the council) wrote that after consultation with the law officers of the Crown the Minister advised the chamber that it was not possible to make transhipment charges a charge against German vessels detained in Australia which vessels have goods for New Zealand consignees on board. Sncl> v»««|«, it was pointed out, are not liable to condemnation and hale, but nn.i«.jy lo detention, and must be restored to Germany on the termination of the -war. Article 2 of the Hague Convention provides that, where an enemy mei chant ship is at the commencement of hostilities in a British port or has left its last port before the commencement of the war and enters a British port in ignorance of hostilities, such ship may not be confiscated but may only be detained under an obligation of restoring it after the war without indemnity. The ships in question, the Minister held, no doubt come within the terms of this article, which the Government is bound to observe. The chairman of the chamber remarked that it seemed to him most unfair that Australia should retain these ships and put New Zealand consignees to great expense. Supposing that they were to be returned to their German owners, surely the expenses that consignees of cargo now brought out in these German, ships were compelled to incur in connection with transhipments should be refunded before the vessels were liberated. The expenses of transhipping and attendant charges really amounted to a. very considerable sum. It was only reasonable to stipulate that delivery could not be made of the ship after the war until the out-of-pocket expenses had been paid. Mr. Ballinger said his firm had incurred a quite small amount on transhipment of goods from a German vessel detained in Australia; but it was not the amount he objected to. The matter was one of principle. However, on those grounds his firm had decided to make a. protest against bearing the transhipment charges. v The Minister's reply to the chamber's suggestion that transhipment and other charges incurred should be refunded by the German owners or paid out of proceeds of the sale of their vessels, was received. PROTEST AGAINST INCREASED FREIGHTS. A communication from the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce, protesting against the increase of freights was received. The Wellington chamber was requested to co-operate in giving the protest Dominion force, also to join in urging the Government to arrange with the Imperial Government for nationally insuring direct steamers. Mr. BaJlinger said the increased freights were a result of the increased insurance rates, and war risk rates. The insurance companies had really .caused the rise in freight rates. Mr. Shirtcliffe observed that besides increased insurance rates there was increased price of coal. He understood it had advanced £1 per ton in Monte Video. Mr. Harkness : Who says so? Mr. Shirtcliffe : The shipping companies. Mr. Harkness : Exactly. Well, we are not sure that coal has been increased by £1 per ton in Monte Video. Mr. Shirtcliffe : Well, the statement was made by a responsible man, who certainly would not state anything contrary to fact. Mr. Harkness : What ie the war risk on the hulls? One and a-half per cent., I believe. The Chairman s I believe it is higher than' that. , Mr. Ballinger thought the Wellington chamber should certainly support the Canterbury chamber in this matter. The other members of the council assented. PRICE REGULATION. The position of exporters in England who are anxious to keep up relations with importers "here was next Taised. Mi 1 . Harkness said he understood that there was a committee set up by the Government to take evidence on freights and insurance charges. That committee was independent of the one now enquiring into the prices of food and drink. It -was further elicited that the Government had been waited upon by a deputation of importers who wished to know how they stood in regard to charging for articles usually sold by them. They could not tell now what they would be able to sell goods, at by the time such goods would arrive. As an inetance, prices of hardware had advanced 50 per cent, to cover war risks, increased insurances and freights-. If they ordered now morchants might find themselves with a lot of goods on hand that had -cost the enhanced prices and for which, in consequence of changed circumstances, they could not obtain those enhanced prices. " It was felt that, they should be able now to make a little extra profit on present stocks to meet possible loss on stocks later on. They wished to know what the intentions of the Commission of Enquiry were- with regard to such prices. The Government not only proposed to fix the prices of necessaries but also to make the selling of them obligatory. This uncertainty as to the future had led to merchant* at this end stopping their orders from British manufacturers. The Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce observed that since the Government had been waited upon, the merchante had the assurance that the Commission appointed had confined itself to food and drinks and not to things in general. A LOCAL FIRM'S DILEMMA. A local firm wrote, explaining its difficulties over a transaction with a German importing house in New Zealand. Through this concern it had obtained £40 worth of goods from Germany. It acknowledged its indebtedness, and expressed its willingness to pay. But what was the legal position? Could it, a British firm, legally pay money over to a German firm? Should it provide sinews of war ito the enemy by paying this sum; further, would such payment be contrary to the proclamation forbidding British subjects having dealings with enemy firms? The secrefary (Mr. Vickery) was instructed to ascertain the position and to communicate the facts to the firm propounding the question. A WANGANUI RESOLUTION. A few days ago a long resolution from the Wanganui Chamber of Commerce, urging the carrying on of business as before the wax in order to ensure the main-

tenance of trade in New Zealand and as between the Dominion and the Mother Country, -was forwarded to the Wellington Chamber. It has appeared in full in The Post. Mr. Shirtcliffe said the resolution of the Wanganui Chamber had only one omission, and that was the clause suggesting to the Government how the waishould be settled. It was an absurd resolution. The resolution was received. EMBARGO ON EXPORTS. From the Government a reply to the proposal of the Chamber that the embargo on the exportation of cereals should be lifted was received, to the effect that to do what was purposed ■would be inopportune.