SHIPPING FREIGHTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume L, Issue 15251, 14 March 1913, Page 8

SHIPPING FREIGHTS.

AN UNFAIR PREFERENCE. BRITAIN'S LOSS; GERMANY'S GAIN. NEED FOR LEGISLATION. Much interest was manifested by members of the Trade of Empire Royal Commission in evidence given at yesterday's sitting by Mr. George Elliot, recently presidents of the Chamber of Commerce, regarding the detrimental effect of differential freights upon British manufactures. Instances were given by him in support of his statement that the freight on cargoes shipped from Hamburg to New Zealand via London was lower than the rate charged for British goods shipped direct from London. His evidence was corroborated by Mr. S. J. Nathan, president of the Chamber of Commerce. Freights from England and Germany to New Zealand were discussed by Mr. Elliot. He stated that some years ago he was connected with the glass bottle business. The freight from Germany via London, including transhipping charges, . on glass bottles was 22s 6d per ton. Freight from London in the same ship on the same articles was 42s 6d per ton. The cost of freight on the British-made quart bottle was 9s 6d per gross, and on the German 5s per gross —a difference in favour of the German-made article of something like 27£ per cent, on the original f.o.b. price. Continuing, Mr. Elliot explained that on many articles New Zealand charges foreign goods 50 per cent, more duty than that paid on similar British goods. For example, if 20 per cent, is charged on certain., British, articles, it practically means that 30 per cent, is charged on similar foreign articles, or 10 per cent, more than on British articles,' but British trade can have no possible chance when it is handicapped by a difference of freights of 27£ per cent.,-.;: A Big Concession to Germany. A further instance. was given by Mr. ! Elliot. He said the present rate of I freight on gin from Rotterdam via London is 28s M per ton; from London on the same class of British-made goods the freight is 45s per ton. This encouragement to foreign manufacturers must inevitably, sooner •or later, recoil on the British shipowners, because as the sale of this cheaply-freighted stuff increases, so i proportionately must the sale of the highprice Weighted British stuff decrease, and as a consequence the total'ship's earnings on,' freight will also ? decrease. Mr. Elliot added that he was convinced that this differential shipping rate was the biggest problem British manufacturers trading with Australasia *have to face to-day. He suggested . that if the New Zealand Government threatened to charter vessels; for the British trade the various shipping companies would* immediately reduce their freights, Device to limit Competition. • . Numerous questions were addressed to Mr. Elliot by members of the commission. Replying to them, he said he believed the differential rates applied to all.classes of goods in favour of Germany, and he made it clear that both high and low rates were charged on the same voyage. Some years ago be made exhaustive inquiries among too shipping companies, who virtually told him they knew now to run their businesses. He believed the system originated when tiers were not full cargoes offering in the United Kingdom, and the German manufacturers offered to guarantee to supply the deficiency and were given preferential rates. The shipping companies argued that by. accepting- low freights on foreign goods they were keeping out competition by foreign shipping. -Mr. Elliot said that* no representations on .the matter had been made by the Chamber of Commerce, and he admitted some such action might be effective. f . An. Injudicious Policy. ; The chairman asked Mr. Elliot to supply the commission with documentary evidence in' support Of his ■■ statements. Sir Edgar; Vincent added that the shipping companies were probably,, defeating their own object. ;. The system of preferential freighting would .probably foster a sufficient trade to justify the establishment of direct German steamers., • .:'■■. Long Routes and Cheap Freights. Mr. Nathan said he had considerable experience of the preferential freights, and knew; that they applied to almost everything imported from Germany and London. . :He mentioned a . shipment of goods which ho had received from Newcastle-on-Tyne, via Hamburg and Sydney, on which the » freight charges, including the cost of the two transhipments, was "less than the direct freight ; would have been. The Nord-Deutscher-Lloyd and the Messageries Marithnes were heavily subsidised by their respective countries, and if the British lines did not accept low freights they would lose the cargoes. The arrangement was no doubt a selfish one. He had also had goods carried from New York through Liverpool or London at rates cheaper than the freights from London. • To his knowledge, the reduced freights had been allowed 'to / foreign shipments for many years. He suggested that the only effective remedy; would be restrictive lecrisla-