these would be in itself a strong stimulus to trade. That "time is money" has never been so true as to-day in view of the present cost figures for ship operation and high prices in general.

Secondly, re-export trade moves both in and out; in that way it provides employment to ships in both directions. It tends to equalize inbound and outbound traffic and by doing so remedies one of the most serious defects of our present foreign shipping situation, the lack of the proper balance of cargo movements to and from most parts of the world. With Europe we have an export surplus, with South America an import surplus, etc., in each case, a situation which interferes with the most economical operation of shipping. In so far as free ports or free zones create or encourage re-exporting they contribute to a better equalization of import and export cargoes.

The free zone also offers better facilities for such operations as mixing, sorting, cleaning, repacking, etc., than does the bonded warehouse, and this again aids in building up re-export business. Furthermore, some manufacturing processes, such as the making of fertilizers for export out of raw materials gathered from different corners of the globe, would likewise be stimulated by the establishment of free zones. Finally, the re-export trade would be rendered immune from the handicaps which arise out of a fluctuating tariff policy. Minor advantages are: a reduction in the cost of drayage, opportunity for displays of goods, greater value of warehouse receipts, etc.

Surely, enough has been said in defense, or rather on behalf of free zones to prove the advisability of their

establishment in this country at a time when every encouragement should be given to help establish our newly created merchant marine and to assist our export trade, the employer of our ships, to safely weather this difficult period of readjustment.

REFERENCES

CLAPP, E. J. The Free Port as an Instrument of World Trade in American Problems of Reconstruction, edited by E. M. Friedman. (1918).

The Port of Hamburg. Chap. III. (1911).

MAC ELWEE, R. S. Ports and Terminal Facilities. Chap. XVII. (1918).

MERCHANTS' ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK. Comparative Study of

Economic, Industrial and Commercial Conditions in the Free Ports of Europe and the Port of New York, by P. B. Kennedy. (1914).

NATIONAL CITY BANK OF NEW YORK. The Coming of the Mechanically Perfect "Free Port," and other articles in The Americas. Ross, P. H. W. The Western Gate, 1911.

SMITH, A. R. Port of New York Annual, Second Edition (1921). SMITH, J. R. Industrial and Commercial Geography, Part II. Chap. XIII. 1913.

UNITED STATES. Senate Committee on Commerce. Free Zones in Ports. Hearings before Subcommittees on S. 3170, Oct. 1919. House Committee on Ways and Means. "Foreign Trade Zones." Hearings on H. R. 9778, Oct. 1919.

Tariff Commission. Information Concerning Free Zones in Ports of the United States. (1919).

CHAPTER VI

THE WORLD'S LEADING PORTS WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE PORT SITUATION IN THE

UNITED STATES

Difficulty of comparative statistics.-Comparative port statistics is a precarious subject. Together with all international comparative statistics it shares the difficulties which arise from the lack of a satisfactory common denominator. If we make value the basis, comparison becomes vague because of exchange fluctuation, and if we try to base our comparison on the weight of cargo handled we either find no data at all for most countries, because of the manifest difficulties of obtaining such totals, or else we discover that a ton in our country weighs more than a ton in other countries. In the table appearing in the Statistical Abstract of the United States, giving the vessel tonnage movement in the foreign trade of the principal ports of the world, due warning is given. We read: "The figures are not comparable." Authorities state that if the same vessel were measured according to the laws of the various countries the tonnage results would vary at least 30 per cent. Moreover, there are several kinds of tons to choose from: gross registered tons, net registered tons, and dead-weight tons. Some countries differentiate tonnage with cargo from tonnage in ballast; others do not. Some countries count the same ship at each port on the same voyage; others do not. We see that the variations are plentiful and

that all these difficulties are accentuated to-day. The war has thrown foreign exchange into a chaotic condition; it has dislocated-partly temporarily, partly permanently—the trade of the world, pushing new ports to the fore and blotting out others. Large sections of the world are in a state of economic upheaval and are for the time being "hors de concours." While these considerations detract much from the value of the table on page 99, nevertheless, it may not be without interest. figures are taken from a table given in the Statistical Abstract of the United States, which, in turn, is compiled from the official reports of the respective countries. Types of ports.—A glance at these figures will show us that ports may be divided into three classes, thus:

The

1. Ports with fairly well balanced trade, such as Kobe, Singapore, Shanghai and Glasgow.

2. Ports with excess of imports over exports, such as Liverpool, London and Manchester.

3. Ports with excess of exports over imports, such as New York, Montreal, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Buenos Aires and Sydney.

In the first group we find great entrepôts like Hamburg, Antwerp and Singapore. Before the war the "unfavorable trade balance" of the ports in the second group reflected the position of the various countries as creditor nations. During the war the excess of imports continued, though for entirely different but well-known reasons. In the third group we find the New World ports with their heavy exports of grain from Montreal and Buenos Aires, of cotton from New Orleans, and of manufactured products and all else from New York.

VALUE OF FOREIGN COMMERCE OF PRINCIPAL PORTS OF THE WORLD ARRANGED BY COUNTRIES

(The data are based on the latest official information available in this country) VALUE IN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS

In comparing these figures the rapid decrease in the purchasing power of money between 1912 and 1918 should be borne in mind.

In this table we miss many well-known names such as Antwerp, Hamburg, Marseilles, Genoa, and so on. In the case of these ports the latest available data are either too old to be of any value for purposes of comparison, or else they merely reflect the unfortunate results of the war. We therefore omit statistics of the trade of the ports of the continent of Europe. According to latest reports, Antwerp has become the leading port of Europe and the second port of the world.