ملف رقم ١٢٨٣\١٩١٣ الجزء ٥ "التجارة في بلاد الرافدين، إصدار تقرير تجارة جديد" [و‎‎٩‎٢] (٢٧٠/١٧٩)

5
/
In response to similar complaints regarding high freights in the past, the
Company have on various occasions declared that their Gulf Lines were unre-
munerative and that they could not afford to lower their rates. It must be
remembered that except in the date season, cargo from the Gulf is very scarce
and therefore the upward rates have to bear the expense of running the steam
ers. As trade expands after the war, the rates will probably tend to fall and,
in any case, the surest remedy for high rates is to he found in healthy com
petition between the shipping companies. So long as foreign shipping com
petition between India and the Gulf need not he feared, there is no reason to
favour a monopoly. There should be plenty of room for more ships and the
investment of Persian and Arab capital in Muhammadan steamship lines is
deserving of every encouragement, since it will do much to consolidate political
as well as commercial relations between the Gulf and India.
(2) That owing to want of proper supervision and unsatisfactory arrange
ments for storing ca^go on board ship, a great deal of pilfering takes place on
board all the vessels to India.
The Company’s answer to this charge is:—
(a) that goods are pilfered not only on the ship but (1) in the port of
shipment, (2) between the ship and the shore at the port of con
signment, nnd (3) in the Customs :
(b) that losses are due largely to imperfect packing. Cases and pack
ages are often only held together by means of outside wrappings,
and gunnies used for grain, etc., are far too light to stand
ordinary handling.
It must be admitted that the systematic pilfering and breaching of cargo
which is carried on is a serious blot on the shipping trade between India and
the Gulf. The shipping companies cannot, however, be regarded as solely
responsible in the matter, since the packing of local Indian goods and produce is
notoriously bad. The Indian, Persian and Arab coolies who handle the cargo
have a well-developed propensity for thieving, and before the war the customs
arrangements at most of the ports were such as to favour dishonesty. It may
be possible after the war, at some ports at least, to improve the conditions under
which cargo is landed and stored but, so far as pilfering on the ship is concerned,
the best remedy would seem to he the placing of a responsible European officer
in each ship as super-cargo, the policing of the holds when in harbour, and
better supervision of cargo, coolies and passengers as they leave the ship. This
would be an advantage from the shipping company’s point of view, as it would
ensure that cargo in bad condition would not escape notice. It is difficult, how
ever, to suggest any means of remedying the bad packing which is responsible
for a very great deal of the loss of cargo and there is not likely to be much
improvement in this respect until both the shipper and the consignee view the
matter ip a new light, and realise that no shipping company can be expected to
safeguard their property, unless it starts on its journey in a reasonably secure
condition. At the same time loss is not confined at present to frail articles, hut
is experienced in the case of well packed bales, and the merchants complain
that it is the more valuable bales in particular which are especially liable to be
opened. The shipping companies might conceivably be able, in combination to
quote a lower rate of freight on goods, if in strong cases, and grain shipped in
double gunnies. When the fine steamers newly constructed for the Gulf last
and slow mails before the war, are again employed on the run, it should be
easier for the British India Company to take measures against pilfering of
cargo in their ships in the future. There is nothing which causes so much
resentment against a shipping company as the receipt of goods or parcels in a
condition which suggest that they have been badly treated or wilfully broken
open while on board the steamer.
(3) The third charge is procrastination and reluctance in giving and
paying certificates of shortage of goods undelivered.
The British India Company, and other lines also, disclaim in their bills of
lading responsibility for loss, damage, etc., due to theft on board, and wdiether
by persons in the service of the Company or not, or by any act or neglect of the
officers or other agents of the Company on board or elsewhere. In fact, the