OCEAN TRADE

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 135, 4 December 1926, Page 10

OCEAN TRADE

JAPAN AS A SEA CARRIER

HER POSITION IN THE PACIFIC

WANTS SHARE OF AMERICAN

TRADE.

At Kobe recently Mr. S. Murata, the managing director of the Osaka Shosen Kaisha, gave an interesting address at a luncheon held in honour of Dr. E. B. Johnson, an American transportation expert, and inter alia, after alluding to the fact that the United States, with her new mercantile marine, wanted to cany 50 per cent, of the exports and imports, and that she was self-contained, whereas Japan had to rely for her existence on her. imports, he said:—

"Shipping is not only the artery of our industrial organism, but also it is an essential asset for us to balance the trade with. The excess of imports over exports is reaching an enormous amount, and this can only be relieved to some extent by the earnings which our mercantile marine acquire abroad.

"In these circumstances I should venture to think that what shipping is to America is not, exactly what it is to Japan. If the ship is a comfortable limousine for her, it is a. taxi-cab for us, on which we earn, our living.

"Whether we liked it or not, we have to keep our ships running all over the oceans of the world. Particularly, the Pacific is the most important arena on which we are destined to play our part. The Pacific is an international highway that connects a young continent! full of potentiality with an old continent awaiting development. And, here we stand just like a stepping-stone from one. to the other. Our trade on the Pacific is larger than in any other direction. Our ships on the Pacific cater for not only our own trade with either of the two continents, but also the trade direct between the two continents themselves.

"Here, I have come to consider in what relation the two maritime nations on the Pacific —the United States and Japan—are going to: stand in future. The United States is, now after,...the establishment of a mercantile marine aimed at carrying half, of her. seaborne trade. Japan has got to keep up her shipping for no other purpose than to ensure, her own existence.

"Could, then, the interests of the two aspirants after maritime enterprise be allowed eventually to. conflict one against the other, if ■ ever . there should be the slightest chance of their doing so? I should most emphatically say: No. Why should they? , , "In these days of high organised international trade, no single nation can attain prosperity at the expense of others. Especially, in the case of our two countries the waves, thatwash the shores of Kobe form the start of .an uninterrupted waterway that extends right through to the waves that wash the shores of Puget Sound. ■• Our interests in the Pacific are direct, common, •and interlocked. It is a case, not of competition, but of co-operation. I always believe x that the welfare of international community can best be attained by means of what may be termed an international division of labour. In the ease of our two countries, America should be the producer and Japan should be the carrier.; That teems to me what the two nations are respectively destined to' be. America's resources are almost' inexhaustible."'The. marvellous development of her industry has been achieved simply through her own production,.and.the.absence of national shipping did not matter at .all in the past. Now, the enormous mercantile marine she has come into possession of is, I should venture to say, a sort of white elephant,: which. Bhe could very well dispense with, and which no other nation in the world could afford to keep.

"The PScific is the world's emporium, and the future growth of its trade depends upon the open-hearted co-oper-ation between America and Japan. Would it not, then, be a wise policy if we approached the problem-.along, the line peculiarly fitted to each of us? "If our friends across the Pacific should recognise the vital interests we have in shipping and give us a fair share of their trade for our ; ships | -to carry, we should bo most willing to perform our function by providing improved facilities for transport over the ocean highway, and contribute towards further development of the trade of the Pacific, which will undoubtedly lead to the, ultimate benefit of our friends."

Upon the important question raised by Mr.'Murata in that utterance, the British shipping journal "Pairplay" made the following comment: —

"There is considerable force in Mr. Murata'a conclusions, for certainly the United States would be' the gainer if she were to concentrate on her import and export trade and allowed' foreign nations to do the carrying, often at a loss. But, unfortunately for Japan, and also ourselves, America has, for good or ill, decided that she must have a mercantile marine • worthy ■of : her position among the nations, and, cost what it will, there seems to be no doubt that she will continue in the shipping trade. At present her losses are colossal, and will remain so aB long as the boats are under Government control, and they will be increased by the dumping of tonnage into a trade without any justifiable reason except political— aSj for instance, in the Gulf grain trade to Europe—a policy which cannot but at the same time tend to render it more difficult for the foreign owner to make ends meet. The United States attained her present greatness by concentrating on the development of the country, leaving it to others to carry her cargoes across the sea. Fortunes have been lost by these foreign owners in competing for the trade, and are still being lost, but this fact . will not affect the decision of her Government to go on running its ships; and this competition is a fact which must be reckoned with for, at all events, many years to come. Efforts may, of course, contirfue to be made to transfer the Government-owned tonnage' to private hands, but, in view of the present state of the world's freight markets, there is not likely ,to be any rush for the vessels, unless they are sold at less than breaking-up prices."