BRITISH AND FOREIGN SHIPPING
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] • Sin,—Let me assure Sir Karl Knudsen that my letter was not written in any spirit of prejudice and to suggest to him that the legend is of his own making. I am, however, completely at sea in his ocean of generalities. It is no refutation of a statement on wage and manning scales to postulate -an equivalent standard of living. As to manning, Sir Karl will have read Mr. Hardy's letter and appreciated his reference to " a minimum number of crew." A more careful reading of my letter would have shown him that I am aware of the statutory obligation of all vessels using our ports, I am also aware that many of the old ships sold at scrap prices to foreign owners are not covered for this risk, and that third parties would be left to get what satisfaction they could out of a damaged old vessel of little or no value in the-event-of a claim arising. My letter suggested the compulsory insurance of all users of our ports to the same degree as the users of our roads.
Mr. Hardy comes out with his usual paean of praise for the Scandinavian shipping interests. Mr. Hardy and progress seem to have their union solely on oil, a very slippery basis, coal has no place in his picture, yet the probabilities are that future ` Empress of Britains ' will be funnel-less pulverized coal-burners, whose machinery weights and fuel costs will about halve those of equivalent motor-ships.
Tramp shipping is essentially bulk carrying, operating at the most economical speed, and I am afraid that fruit, locomotives and lightships cannot be classed other than liner traffic which requires scheduled collection and delivery. It will be news to most shipping people that speed makes for low freights and that electric winches arc essential to a quick turn round in port. As to subsidies, if they must be, then apply them at the source, that is to say to coal and other exports shipped in British bottoms. Raw materials and foodstuffs imported
Previous page
