AMAZING FIGURES

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XVII, Issue 214, 24 August 1927, Page 5

AMAZING FIGURES

CARGO PILLAGING IN AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND SERVICES. HUGE SUMS PAID IN CLAIMS. [By Cable — Press Assn. — Copyright.] (Received 28, 11.25 a.m.) London, Aug. 23. Amazing figures showing the extent of pillaging in the Australian and New Zealand services are disclosed in the report of the sub-com-tee of shipowners and merchants of the Chambers l of Commerce and Protection and Indemnity Associations. Amongst the startling discoveries is the fact that 80 per cent, of one indemnity association’s round-the-voyage claims in three years arose in the Australian and New Zealand trade, 50 per cent, being in Australia and 30 per cent, in New Zealand, the remaining 20 per cent, covering all other ships carrying cargoes on which this association’s figures are based. These ships totalled 742, of which only 50 were exclusively engaged in Australian and New Zealand trade. One ship trading to Australia paid £176,000 in claims during the past three years. Further figurues embracing 110 steamers show that claims average 12 per ton of pillagable cargo. The amounts that nine lines paid for pillaged or short landed cargoes are as follows:— 1924 £41,723 1925 £50,154 1926 £42,368 One line’s figurues, says the report, shows conclusively that pillage in the Australian trade is greater than in others. The amounts in pence per ton are as follows:—Kobe, .8; Singapore, 1.0; Yokohama, 1.2; Shanghai, 2.5; Hongkong, 3.3. Then Australian ports: Adelaide, 1.7; Melbourne, 2.2; Sydney, 4.8; Brisbane, 15.9. Another line reports the loss of 14.15 pence per ton on the homeward cargo from Australia, compared with 1.3 from the East. Sydney importing firms set down losses for 1925 at £5600 and for 1926 at £7OOO. The reports points out that merchants who adopted metal seals on the, joints of the case boards are finding their pillaging loss reduced. BRISBANE WHARVES. The. committee draws attention to the fact that, as they are privately owned, the wharves at Brisbane are not placed under the Police Offences Act. The police have no right of search until a suspect outside the wharf makes efforts to get on to the wharf. Employees appointed as special constables failed. This should be rectified.

The report recommends that the London committee should remain in existence in order to consider further information and suggests that the same bodies should form a similar committee at the principal ports in Australia and New Zealand, cooperating with London,—(A. and