If there is one point upon which ina jon states agitate with which it is mua fo be in agreement it must erispmile that raised by Italy demanding ron tion on the board of the Suez Cecin® and a reduction of the dues which present charged. With regard to tis gyi it Is apparent "that aly as one ce" representation on the board, and ints!
be believed that there will be any strong opposition to such a demand, the other hand the case for a further stantial reduction in canal dues it" \whelmingly strong, and in this connect should be pointed out that the recent duction from six shillings © ton to 54, 94, represents no very real concession shipping which uses the canal. Profs" the various scales of dues have always be high: in 1913 they were 33. per cents 1990 they had risen to 44 percent to 82 per cent. in 1932, Dues which wet 4s, dd, a Suez Canal ton in 1911 were six shillings in 1037, meaning that the trast sit dues on a cargo say of 7,000 tons coal from Swansea in a collier of 2,000 na tons—equal to 3,700 Suez Canal' tone would be about £1,100 or nearly as. 0d" ton, a crushing addition to the ci.t. value of 'a commodity which is shipped in tom, petition with that of other counirics, at an f.o.b. value of say 20s. a ton, From fuch an example it must be obvious that European countries trading in the Far Enst are one sequently at a very considerable disadvan tage as against such shipping as the Japan. ese which in this connection would' na have to use the Canal. This burden is a the more surprising when it Is recalled tat the dues of the Panama Canal,_ ship for ship are'from 10 to 20 per cent, Below thie of the Suez Canal, despite the fuet tht the former cost. three times as much construct, is much costlier to maintain and is still not run at a loss, The height of the Suez Cana! dues has been a matter of considerable concern practically since the inauguration of the company, and quite early in its history the agitation took such a form thal. the con struction of a second competing, canal was seriously considered. De Lesseps inet the agitation by giving British shipowners further representation on. the Buutd, and Promising to apply profits, accruing" after paying a dividend of 25 pot cent, in rede tion of dues to a minimum of Fr. 5, That however, was quietly allowed to lapse Since then the profits have risen shown above, but protests have been in effective whether they have emanated from British shippers, Dominion or foreign Governments. "It has to be admitted that the Canal Company have the law on their side Their business is to make profits for they are not a public utility concern, but a private French company. They have ae cumulated vast reserves, pay liberal salaries and provide generous pensions. But it is clear, and has been so for years that the existing scale of duos has operated seriously against shipping obliged to use the Canal Indeed they are so high that it has been estimated that the charges are equivalent to the cost of ten days' extra steaming for every ship, a serious handicap indeed upon shipping forced to use that thoroughfare It has been suggested that the present tom of fixing rates might with advantage be changed by adopting a scale which would fake a vessel's draught and the amount and nature of the cargo carried into consider tion, while another school of thought favour a three-part tariff based upon tonnage of cargo, draught and net tonnage. Of supreme importance of the ficiency and cost of the Canal to European and Asie countries alike there cannot be" the slight doubt, There is no suggestion that the Company is not demonstrating complet 'efficiency in the manner in. which it opel the canal, but it is contended that te charges are in the elreumstances rantably high, and that the time for further sealing down, and that the recent reduction by the small ssu 3d. a ton, Of the importance of greater reduction all trade east of Suez there cannot bet slightest doubt. In the Asiatic trade 00 the United Siates and Japan are int favourable position, for even cargo Droit from the eastern seaboard of Aer passing through the Panama Canal ci 3 carried to Asia cheaper than it cam fie Europe via Suez Canal. The disadvantiss which European countries trading With Far East are placed is a serious one, adil Lsseps' proposal to use surplus profits the reduction of dues to a minimum of 5 had been carried out, and there {to be no valid reason why it should not (Continued on page 487)
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.