THE SUEZ CANAL.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."'
Sia,—As the action of the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce has been specially commented on by you, it may be of interest to state that the minority who voted against the "very mild resolution" included more shipowners, representing a much' larger amount of steam tonnage, than the majority, composed of general traders, by whom it was passed. Not that any reasoning shipowner fails to recognise that the question of rates. concerns the producer and consumer of goods passing through the Canal, even more than it does the carrier.
I merely wish to remove any impression that the shipowners of Liverpool are, as a body, hostile to the arrangement which was proposed to have been made by the Government, or share in the general outcry—put down to the shipowners throughout the country—in consequence of which the arrangement has unfortunately been abandoned.
No shipowner objects to local or port charges, where all alike have to bear the same, in proportion to the tonnage of the vessels. What he particularly desires is the better management an& control of the Canal, and he was unable to see that this matter bad been sufficiently considered, and would be pat on a satis- factory footing, by the Government proposals.—I am, Sir, &c., A SHIPOWNER.
Previous page
