DEMURRAGE AND LAY-DAYS.

the ship having been unable to obtain a berth at the quay named in the Charter. The Captain presented the Consignees with Demurrage account for three days, which they declined to pay, on the plea that it was not their place to find a berth for the ship. Do you consider Demurrage due, and. if so, whether by Shipper or Consignee ?-Yours, &c., Briton Ferry, Aug. 10, 1876. A SUBSCRIBER.

[By the Charter-party the vessel was to proceed to "Terminus Quay, Glasgow, or as near thereunto as she may safely get." A regular turn was to be allowed for loading, and "30 tons per working day for delivery." The Bills of Lading say nothing about the time allowed for delivery, and merely stipulate that the cargo is to be delivered at the Port of Glasgow. There is no reference to quay berth or turn in discharging. As regards the Charter-party, the Lay-days would commence to run from the time the vessel reached as near as she could safely get to the quay; and if there are any customs of the Port under which the Merchant would be exonerated from complying with the terms of the Charter-party, the Charterer would be liable for all detention caused by not discharging 30 tons daily.]

DAYS OR HOURS OF DESPATCH.

SIR, We lately chartered a vessel for mineral with the following clauses in the Charter-party :-"The cargo to be shipped at the rate of 200 tons per Running-day. Despatch money to be paid at the rate of 10s. per hour on any time saved in loading." The vessel in question loaded 1,000 tons in four days, thus making one day saved. Should the day saved consist of 24 or 12 hours? For, as you will readily perceive, it makes a considerable difference in the despatch money; in the former case it would be 127., and in the latter 61.-Yours, &c., AGENT.

London, Sept. 9, 1876.

[The Charter-party stipulates for Running-days. In the ordinary interpretation of Charter-parties this means the regular daily hours of shipment or discharge at the Port. After Custom-house or working hours the ship may not be at the command of the hirer, and therefore the hours between the cessation of work one day and the commencement of Jabour the next morning should not count as Lay-hours. The exact intention of the Charterer is not clearly defined in the memorandum, but the words, "on any time saved in loading," might be reasonably construed as applicable to working time. In many steamship Charters Running-hours are mentioned for loading or discharging, and then it is understood that all time counts, but Running-days is a different affair altogether. As 10s. per hour is named, and not 10s. for each consecutive or Running-hour, working hours only should govern the contract. There is no such thing in the language of Charter-parties as a day of 12 hours.]

BLOCKING THE PASSAGE.

SIR,-I fixed a vessel to clear in a certain number of days and after she was loaded the Master still remained in Port

SIR,-We enclose for your inspection a copy of a Charter on the terms of which we lately fixed a little vessel from the Morocco coast. On arrival at her loading Port, the Captain found 18 vessels there waiting for cargo, two or three partially loaded, the others being delayed in consequence of insufficient lighters at the Port, and he has, therefore, had to wait his turn for loading. First, are you aware of any custom of ships taking turn there to load? Second, would her Lay-days not commence from the date of the Captain's notice to his Consignee of readiness to load? Third, what is usually considered a "weather working" day, and would not all days on which any ships may have been loading at that Port count as Lay-days under this Charter?-Yours, &c., London, March 22, 1877. OWNER'S AGENTS.

[1st. We know of no custom to wait turn at Saffi (or Asafi). The Charter stipulates that the vessel is to load a full and complete cargo, and no mention is made of waiting turn. 2nd. The Lay-days would commence from the time notice was given to the Consignee. 3rd. Twenty-five weather working days were to be allowed the Freighter for loading and unloading the cargo; detention from frost or quarantine not to count. "A Shipowner," whose letter will be found in the Shipping and Mercantile Gazette of Feb. 15, 1877, stated that his vessel had been at Saffi 64 days, and out of that time there were only 11 "weather working days." If vessels can be loaded on certain days, those days should be included in the Lay-days. A weather working day is determined by the heavy surf breaking on the beach at Saffi.]

NEWFOUNDLAND FISH CHARTER.

SIR,-A vessel, 59 tons register, was chartered to proceed to Cadiz and there load a cargo of salt for St. John's, Newfoundland, with the usual clause to proceed to the Labrador coast, if required, and load a cargo of first new fish. The vessel arrived out at St. John's on the 20th June, and the Merchants kept her there with the salt in as a warehouse, and only finished discharging on the 5th August. How many days do you consider due as Demurrage to the Owners, and what rate per day?-Yours, &c., SUBSCRIBER. Aug. 22, 1876.

[Where no stipulation is made in the Charter-party or Bills of Lading to unload a ship in a given number of days, there is an implied contract that the Consignee shall discharge or take delivery of the cargo within a reasonable time, according to the custom of the Port. Whoever unreasonably detains a ship and does not restore her to her Owners at G

DEMURRAGE AND LAY-DAYS.

the end of the stipulated time, said Lord Fllenborough, is liable to pay Demurrage. The vessel should have been discharged in at least four working days, and, for every day beyond 4d. per ton should be claimed from the Charterer.(See Pages 7 and 13, Maritime Notes and Queries, Vol. I.)]

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT. SIR,-After we had read your excellent leading article of the 28th of December with regard to the Demurrage claim tried here in Gloucester County Court, we appealed for a new trial and lost again. Feeling convinced that the case could never be lost if we appealed to a higher Court, we asked the judge for permission to appeal. This he refused. Is this consistent with the law of England, or can we take any step towards obtaining permission at least to appeal ?Yours, &e., SHIPOWNER.

Gloucester, Jan. 23, 1877.

[Our Correspondent has applied to the County Court for a case, and has been refused. He has power to appeal from the "determination or direction of the Judge in point of law, or upon the admission or rejection of any evidence," under Section 14 of the County Courts Act, 1850 (13 and 14 Vie., e. 61), to any of the Superior Courts of Common Law at Westminster. This course is now open to our Correspondent. (See also Order 29 of Consolidated County Court Orders and Rules, 1875.)]

NOTICE OF ARRIVAL.

SIR,-Have the Consignees of a ship incurred Demurrage by keeping a vessel at a Port of call, waiting orders, over 48 hours under terms of Charter as follows:-" Twenty-five days (Sundays excepted) are to be allowed the said Merchants (if the ship be not sooner despatched) for loading the said vessel abroad, and to be discharged with all possible despatch as customary; to proceed to Port of call for orders, which are to be given within 48 hours after notice of arrival, or Lay-days to count"? Fifteen days have been expended in loading, and the Consignees have kept the ship several days at Port of call, waiting orders, over and above 48 hours. Under such circumstances, is Demurrage payable after waiting 48 hours until orders are received? SUBSCRIBERS. Liverpool, March 15, 1876.

The usual stipulation is that orders shall be given within 48 hours after arrival; but in the case of " Subscribers," the Lay-days are to commence "48 hours after notice of arrival." A notice would not be complete until a telegram or letter was received by the Consignees. The agreement must be literally construed, and, therefore, the Lay-days would begin at the expiration of 48 hours from the time the notice was delivered to the Consignees.-(See page 70, Maritime Notes and Queries, Vol. I.)]

STOCKWITH AND THE EAST COAST. SIR,-1st. When at Caen I chartered my vessel with a firm in London to take a cargo of barley to London or a safe Port on the East Coast. When laden I received orders for Stockwith, on the Trent. I protested before the British ViceConsul against Stockwith being on the East Coast, and telegraphed to my Charterer that I could not go there for 6s. 6d. per ton, but offered to go for 8s. per ton, or my charges to be paid from Hull Roads to Stockwith, and back again to Hull Roads, which offer was accepted, and I was paid the difference in freight of 18. 6d. per ton on 106 tons (74. 19s.), and for this specific arrangement I gave a separate receipt. 2nd. I afterwards tendered the Consignees a Demurrage Note for six days' detention beyond the 10 clear working days specified in the Charter, amounting to 121. They refused to pay, questioning my right to detain my vessel in Caen three days awaiting an answer from the Charterer in London. 3rd. I summoned the Consignees for the 12. Demurrage in the County Court, when I was non-suited on the following pleas: That Stockwith was on the East Coast, and that I ought to have sailed there in the first instance without questioning

DUES AND CHARGES.

where it was; and, also, that the Demurrage ought to have been charged before settling up the freight. Do you consider that I am entitled to Demurrage under the circumstances. If so, can I charge for the delay at Caen? and is the Charterer or the Consignee liable for the amount, and how can I best recover it? 4th. Is it usual to charge Demurrage with the freight ?—Yours, &c., SHIPMASTER.

March 3, 1877.

[1st. In our opinion, Stockwith is not on the East Coast, or any other coast, but an inland river Port. The Master was justified in demanding extra freight for going there. 2nd. The vessel, having been detained in waiting for orders to a Port on the East Coast, would be entitled to count the time so spent in the Lay-days. 3rd. We differ from the dictum of the Judge. The Master was not bound to proceed to a Port not in the Charter, and this was admitted by the payment of extra freight. 4th. Freight and Demurrage are distinct liabilities, and the failure to make a claim for disputed Demurrage on settlement of the freight would not, we think, defeat the claim for Demurrage in a Superior Court.]

DUES AND CHARGES.

CALEDONIAN CANAL DUES. SIR,-A vessel was chartered at a foreign Port to load a cargo and proceed to Queenstown for orders, and, on arrival there, was ordered to proceed to Inverness to discharge. The Captain, in lieu of going by the English Channel or throu h Pentland Firth, took the vessel through the Caledonian Canal, without any arrangement with the Owners of the cargo. There is a local law at that Port that the charges for using the Canal shall be paid by the vessel and cargo in proportions. The question is-are the Charterers or Owners of the cargo, not having made any contract in the Charter or Bills of Lading for the vessel to go through the Canal, liable to pay any portion of its charges ? If so, can you name a case decided to that effect ?-Yours, &c., SHIPBROKERS. Liverpool, Jan. 11, 1877.

[If, under the circumstances, and considering the recent weather we have had in these islands, the Master exercised a sound discretion in going through the Canal for the general benefit, the cargo should contribute to the Canal expenses in accordance with the Act of Parliament.]

CALEDONIAN CANAL.

SIR, I chartered my vessel in Newcastle-on-Tyne for a cargo of bone manure to Portrush. It was not inserted, either in my Charter-party or Bill of Lading, which route I was to come-viz. by North of Scotland or Caledonian Canal; but, before signing the Bill of Lading, I mentioned to the Shippers that I intended to go through the Canal. When I arrived in the Canal, after paying dues on the ship, I had to give a note of hand for dues on the cargo, owing to my Bill of Lading being made out to order. If the Consignee refuses to pay the Canal dues on the cargo, how am I to act to recover the money, I having forwarded same to-day? M'CABE, Master, St. Patrick, Portrush. Portrush, Oct. 5, 1877.

[If there was an understanding that the ship was to go through the Canal, the dues on the cargo would fall on the Merchant. (See page 24, Maritime Notes and Queries, Vol. II.)]

DUES AND CHARGES AT FOREIGN PORTS. SIR,-Can you inform me the name and price of the most reliable book on the Port Charges &c. of the various Seaports in the world?-Yours, &c., J. S. P.

Glasgow, Feb. 6, 1877.

["Dues and Charges on Shipping in Foreign Ports," by the late G. D. Urquhart, published in 1872 by Philip & Son, London; and "Port Charges of the United Kingdom," by Robert Thurbon, issued in 1872. There is also the "Directory

SIR,-I brought a part cargo of salt to the Tyne Dock, consigned to the Jarrow Chemical Company, on the understanding that there were to be no Dock Dues on the ship, as is usual with vessels bringing goods to this Company, by virtue of an arrangement they have with the Dockowners. On my arrival I at once docked the ship, and then found that, as all the free buoys assigned to my Merchant's ships were occupied by their vessels, my ship had to be placed at the Dock Company's buoys, and in consequence I have h..d to pay Dock Dues. Having brought the salt for a nominal freight on the understanding that the ship was free of dues, I am in this way a loser of 6l., and the Chemical Company will do nothing beyond expressing sympathy. Can I recover the Dock Dues? SHIPMASTER.

Newcastle-on-Tyne, Dec. 30, 1875.

[If there was a written agreement its terms would govern the contract; but if no Charter-party was entered into, and only a verbal understanding arrived at, it might be pleaded that it was the custom to berth ships in certain places in the dock free, and that our Correspondent's vessel might have been berthed there had he chosen to wait. On the other hand, if it can be proved that the vessel was to be free of Dock Dues absolutely, the fees paid might be recovered.]

DUES AND CHARGES.

sailed the day after she finished loading, after being in the Port two months and one day?-Yours, &c., A SHIPOWNER. Lyme, March 28, 1877.

[Under the Cobb Act, 1 and 2 Geo. IV., cap. 99, every vessel of 10 tons and upwards entering the Cobb or Harbour is to pay 2d. per ton; and "every ship, hoy, barque, or other vessel that shall be laid up unemployed within the said Cobb or Harbour, an additional sum of 2d. per ton for every and each month she shall be so laid up after the expiration of the first month." Under that Act the additional tonnage rate could not be legally levied on our Correspondent's vessel.]

GRAIN DUES AT LYNN.

SIR, I chartered my vessel in London to come to Lynn (with cargo), and there load a cargo of grain or other goods. After arrival the Merchant loaded my vessel with wheat. At Lynn there is a charge of 1d. per qr. on all grain shipped, besides the Town Dues, Mooring Dues, Pilotage, &c. This the ship has to pay; but as the Charter does not state the freight in full, ought not the Merchant to insert the 1d. per qr. Lynn dues on the Bill of Lading for me to receive with the freight at the Port of discharge? If so, and the Merchant refuses to insert the above on the Bill of Lading, how ought I to proceed under the circumstances?

JAMES LEWIS, Master of Alliance, of Goole. Lynn, Jan. 26, 1876.

[All dues on cargo fall on the Merchant, unless there is a stipulation in the contract of affreightment to make the Shipowner liable for their payment.-(See "Payment of Dues on Cargo," Maritime Notes and Queries, Vol. II., page 24.) The Shipper could not be compelled to charge them forward to the Consignee of the cargo, but he might be sued to refund the same if the Shipowner has been compelled to pay the dues.]

CRANAGE DUES.

SIR,-Shipmasters who take loam from London to the Welsh Ports should have inserted in their agreements a stipulation as to wharfage charges. The ordinary agreement says: "To be put in free at London Wharf and taken ont free at" the Port bound to. If the vessel discharges the loam into barges alongside, of course there are no wharfage dues to pay; but if it is discharged at a steam crane or ballast crane, they look to the vessel for wharfage dues, as the receivers of the loam always make objections to the 3d. per ton charged by Dock Companies. Is the vessel liable for it? -Yours, &c., SHIPMASTER.

Newport, Jan. 18, 1877.

[Custom-house Guard 400 reis per day, discharging and wharfage 4,000 reis per 10 tons, mooring 6,000 reis, Harbour Master 1,000 reis, labourers 1,200 reis per man per day, ballast 600 reis per ton, Brokerage on freight 3 per cent., entering and clearing 2,400 reis. To this add Consular fees, about 4,000 reis, the cost of health visit 5,300 reis, and hospital subscription 2,400 reis. The sovereign sterling is equal to 5,600 reis. It is said that the Port charges and expenses of loading a steamer of 660 tons at St. Michael's are about 150l., exclusive of commissions, which are heavy.]

[The rate of exchange being 51 pence per 20 reals, the 5,106 reals must be multiplied by 51, and this gives 260,406. Divide the latter total by 20, and the quotient is 13,020 6-20. Dividing this again by 12 and by 20 reduces the currency to 541. 5s. 06-20d. in sterling, the equivalent to 5,106 reals at 51 pence. This would be a charge payable by the Shipowner of a fraction over 10s. per ton on the 209 tons of coal delivered, and on the homeward freight, for the ship's expenses in Port and Pilotage outwards.]

HARBOUR DUES AND PILOTAGE ON DECK
TONNAGE.

SIR,-A vessel arrived at Swansea, from Quebec, with timber, including a deckload. On paying the Swansea Harbour Dues at the Harbour Office, I was charged both Harbour Dues on the register tonnage and on the measurement of the deckload, as given by the Board of Trade Surveyor. The Pilotage is also collected at the same office, and this is also charged for on both register tonnage and measurement of deckload, as named above. I objected to pay Pilotage on deckload measurement of cargo, believing it to be an illegal charge; but eventually had to pay it in order to obtain the ship's clearance. Have the Swansea Pilotage Authorities any Act by which they are empowered to enforce dues and Pilotage on the deckload measurement of ship's cargoes at their Port?-Yours, &c., AN OLD SUBSCRIBER.

Briton Ferry, March 2, 1877.

[The Harbour Dues and the Pilotage are assessed on the register tonnage; and as the tonnage of the space occupied by deck cargo is added to and forms part of the register, the Authorities would be justified in charging dues on the same. Section 23 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1876, says, "All dues payable on the ship's tonnage shall be payable as if they (the deck spaces) were added to the ship's registered tonnage."]

LOCAL DUES ON CARGO.

SIR,-Have the Customs Authorities the right to refuse clearance of a ship and to keep the papers back for want of payment of Local Dues on the cargo from the Shipper, which they say are payable at time of clearing the vessel; and is the Broker obliged, in order to have the ship cleared, to pay or encash such dues for the Customs from the Shippers? Yours, &c., A SHIPBROKER.

Middlesborough, March 5, 1877.

[If by the Local Act the Shipowner is made liable for the payment of dues on cargo, and the Custom-house Authorities ale empowered to detain a vessel until they are paid, he should insist, if necessary, on receiving the money before shipping the goods; but, if compelled to pay the dues on cargo, he could recover them from the Merchant.-(See page 24, Maritime Notes and Queries, Vol. II.)]

DUES AND CHARGES.

CUSTOM-HOUSE RECEIPTS.

SIR, Are the Customs Authorities justified in refusing to give receipts for amounts paid by Brokers or Ship Agents on behalf of vessels-for instance, Customs overtime &c.? We have sometimes to pay considerable sums, and, when settling our account with the Captains, they demand receipts from the Custom-house, which we are unable to produce, as the Authorities refuse to give them. It appears to us that every person who pays money is entitled to a receipt, and we should like to know if the Custom-house Authorities are exempt from such rule, as it causes us a deal of inconvenience if they are, and it ought to be remedied. SHIPBROKERS. June 15, 1876.

[The Authorities are not bound to give receipts for moneys paid if the payments are not made they have the law at their command, and the release alone is evidence of settlement.]

CUSTOM-HOUSE DISCHARGING FEE.

SIR,-My vessel arrived here from abroad, and was ordered to a certain dock, but as she could not obtain a ready discharging berth, she had to lie a number of days at the buoys, and while the discharge was being proceeded with I was under the necessity of stopping the work for a day or two in order that the ship should receive stiffening. For these silent days the Customs claim overtime for attendance. Am I entitled to pay this charge?—Yours, &c.,

ROBERT CROSBIE, Master of Sancta Bega. Leith, Aug. 8, 1876.

[In the absence of any special agreement, the stoppage in discharging for stiffening would make the Shipowner liable for the Custom-house dues.]

SURVEYORS' FEES.

SIR,-I owned a vessel which was recently surveyed by the Board of Trade Surveyors, but not at my request. The result of the survey was that the vessel was found not to be seaworthy, and to make her so would involve a great outlay. I therefore resolved to sell her, but before I was allowed to do so the Collector of Customs requested and had a deposit of 107. I have since received the sum of 4l. 17s. 7d., being the balance returned after deducting 51. 2s. 5d. for Surveyors' fees and expenses. Am I liable to pay such amount by law? -Yours, &c.,

April 27, 1877.

D.

[The cost of survey is determined by the Board of Trade according to an authorised scale of fees.-(Section 7, Merchant Shipping Act, 1871.) Any Surveyor who demands or receives, directly or indirectly, from the Owner or Master of any ship surveyed by him, any fee or remuneration otherwise than as the Officer and by the direction of the Board of Trade, incurs a penalty not exceeding 504-(Section 308, Merchant Shipping Act, 1854.) Subject to that explanation, the fees would have to be paid.]

SURVEYOR'S MEASURING FEES.

SIR, A few days since I gave notice to the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine at this Port to measure a vessel now here, and at the same time paid the usual measurement fee. It appears that the Measuring Surveyor of this Port is away for his holidays, and the Surveyor from Cardiff was sent here to measure the vessel, and the authorities now claim 1. 11s., being railway fare, cabs, personal attendance, &c., of Surveyor, besides 15s. fee already paid, and they refuse to give the usual measurement certificate unless the amount be paid. Can they compel the Owner to pay this? The Surveyor being away for his holidays, ought not the Authorities to put another in his place until his return? As the ship cannot clear without the measurement certificate, has the Captain a right to claim for detention of his vessel as long as the Authorities refuse to give him the certificate?-Yours, &c. Swansea, Aug. 10, 1876. SHIPBROKER.

[The table of maximum fees to be paid for the measurement of ships is appended to the Merchant Shipping Act,

DUES AND CHARGES.

1873. Surveyors are instructed by the Board of Trade not to measure any ship unless form "Survey 6" has been filled up by the Superintendent of a Mercantile Marine Office, and three clear days' notice must be given. "In order to prevent inconvenience and de'ay to the Owners, the Surveyors are to be careful to be on the spot at the time prescribed, so far as is consistent with the due performance of their duties, but should they be unable to attend as required, notice should be given to the Owners."-(Board of Trade Circular.) If all the regulations were complied with, and the Owner of the vessel has been put to increased cost through the fault of the Surveyor, the circumstance should be respresented to the Board of Trade. The Surveyors are not authorised to issue certificates before the fees are paid.]

FINES AND "FREE ON BOARD."

SIR,-We have generally understood that firms who contract to deliver goods "free on board" a ship here are required, in fulfilment of their contract, to pass the necessary Customs entry. But now that goods can be shipped without a" stamped note " being first lodged on board, does the obligation of clearing within the six days from vessel's departure fall upon the suppliers or the Merchant whose name appears on the Bill of Lading? Who would be responsible for any fines that might be imposed by the Customs Authorities in consequence of any neglect to clear within the time

allowed ?

London, June 16, 1876.

SHIPPING AGENTS.

[It would depend, in the first instance, upon the agreement between the parties; as regards any transaction between the Shipper or Merchant with the Shipowner or his Agent, the matter would be one of personal liability. With respect to obligations to the Custom-house Authorities, we are of opinion that the Merchant should complete the formalities. The Merchant whose name is on the Bill of Lading, as the representative Owner of the goods and the Shipper of the same, would be liable under that document.]

MANIFESTS AND FINES.

SIR, I am Master and Part-Owner of a vessel trading from London to a Dutch colony, the remainder of the vessel being owned there by my Consignee. On my last voyage from London, on arrival at destination, I handed my papers to my Consignee, including a correct Manifest made out by the Shipbrokers in London. In copying the Manifest into Dutch, in compliance with the Customs' regulation, at the Port of discharge, the Consignee's clerk omitted some rope and some gunpowder, for which omission a very heavy fine was levied. On whom, in your opinion, should this loss fall? I should add that the Consignee charges 101. each voyage for doing the ship business at the Dutch colony. London, Sept. 10, 1877.

CAPTAIN.

DUES AND CHARGES.

WHARFAGE DUES AT CARDIFF.

SIR, We have read in your issue of the 20th inst. that some Dock Companies have the power to arrest goods shipped on board a vessel for the payment of Wi arfage Dues thereon, and that it is the duty of a Shipper, before he puts goods on board, to give in an account of the cargo and pay the amount of the dues. It is the first time that we have heard of this power being exercised, and we wish to ask you whether or not it has been determined in law that a Shipper s responsible to the Shipowner for any loss he may sustain in consequence of such power being exercised, and, if it has not yet been done, what your opinion is in respect thereto. The case in question was that of the Constantine (s); and although the loss which accrued by detaining her may not, upon that occasion, have been very great, there are instances in which it might be considerable in the case of a steamer about to sail at a late period of the year for a Baltic Port. In such a case a few days' detention might lead to her becoming ice-bound abroad, and then 1,0007. might not compensate the Shipowner for that. If the latter were to pay the Wharfage Dues, could he recover them from the Owner of the goods, and, if requisite, attach the cargo therefor at the Port of discharge? At first view the latter does no appear equitable, but, under the circumstances, it might be held to be reasonable. SHIPOWNERS.

Cardiff, Jan. 26, 1876.

[Mr. Justice Lush held that it was the duty of a Shipper before putting the goods on board, to give an account of the cargo to the Dock Company, and to pay the dues. The failure of a Shipper to comply with the law would render him liable for the detention of a ship through having to discharge goods; but a question might arise as to whether the Master of a vessel would not be bound to see the dock receipts before receiving the goods on the gangway.]

WICK AND CASTLEHILL PORTS.

SIR,-My vessel, the Loch Ryan, of Stranraer, arrived here laden with potatoes, which were shipped at Castlehill, a creek of the Port of Wick (or six miles east of Thurso), according to the Berwick Harbour Rates of Dues on Shipping. They run thus: "For every ship or vessel voyaging between the harbour and any place between the North Foreland and Shetland, for every ton 4d." Instead of charging me 4d. per ton they have charged 6d., or the rate which applies to vessels to and from the west side, as they assert it is a West Coast Port. Is this so or not?-Yours, &c., GEO. SWANSON, Master of Loch Ryan. Berwick, April 3, 1877.

[Unless the authorities have power under their Act to charge a special rate on vessels loading or discharging at the West Coast creeks of the Port of Wick between the North Foreland and Shetland, the sixpenny Tonnage Dues could not be legally exacted.]

TOWAGE AND DECK SPACE.

SIR,-Do Towage charges come within the term Dues under the 23d Section of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1876 ? Is it the law and practice to charge Towage on deck cargo where Towage is not compulsory ?—Yours, &c., Drogheda, Nov. 22, 1876. SHIP AGENT.

[Towage is not specially mentioned in the clause quoted, but the meaning of the Act is that a ship's registered tonnage shall be increased by the addition to the register of all deck space occupied by cargo; and, consequently, all dus of any kind whatever, or fees, or charges, which are levied on the ton of register, would be made on the registered tonnage, with the deck space added. If a Towage rate is agreed upon, the register would govern the case. Where the Towage is charged as dues the same rule would apply.]