New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-01-10
MORE ABOUT SALT.
MR.. HAZARD SAYS RATES FOR SAILING 'H''H''S
ARE NO CRITERION OF THE AVEhA"H
COST OF IMPORTING

AZ, u.z.pn sAys RATES FOR SAILING VESSELS
ARE NO CRITERION OF THE AVERAGE
COST OF IMPORTING.
To the Editor Of The Tribune.
Sir. In answer to the letter of Mr.. Edward W.
Brown in your issue OF January T. replying 10 mime
OF December g. I desire to say that my oher 10
contract with Mr. Brown for freight from LiVerpooi
to New-York on ali salt that my firm may require
during The wear 1894 at 5 shings sterling per ton
distinctly read "steam and sail" Now, Mr.. Brown
states that the shipments by steam are insignificant
IN number, and that the great bulk OF sai' suppeu
from England is brought here by sail. upon th's
mistaken assumption Mr.. Brown wouid nave you
believe that he Is willing to accept my oHer as APP
plying to sail shipments only. Knowing that Mr.
Rrou,n has been in the salt business for a number
of wears am rather surprised at his error, which
need not say believe to be quite unintentional
As an actual fact. am prepared 10 prove that our
ing 1892 the number of shipments Of English salt by
steam to New-York exceeded those by sail IN inc
proportion of at least ten to If Mr. Brown
considers tho shipments by steam as a mere Daga-
tee and that the average rate OF freight as stated
IN his first interview Is 2 shllings and pence.
why does he not accept my offer Of shlllngs as
sands-namey, steam and sail-wnch Is lower tnan
our freights have averaged during the last year?
II must be plain to Mr.. Brown that sailing YES
sells are very When we want the salt II mas
to come by steam II a sailing vessel Is offered at
pendence upon the date Of her arrival, and large
quantity OF most sail cargoes has to go into store.
as It Is difficult TO provision for their DISPOSE
ton owing to this very uncertainty regarding the
time OF their reaching their port. Another great
disadvantage under which the importer labors In
chorterng sailing vessels Is that under the terms
O. the party the cargo has to be discharged
at rates varying from 100 to 200 tons per working
day, and that If the salt is sold Ito arrive,
the difficulty of arranging for the proper reception
Of such large quantities for each working day neces-
states putting the salt into store. as buyers trucks
and lighters cannot be obtained on short notice.
The storage charges that must ensue from the con-
dtlons mentioned above very often more than coun-
terbaiance the advantage gained between the rates
Of freight by sailing vessel and steam rates. Just
here / may state that this means an expense for
labor in and out and storage for the first month"; of
about shlllings per ton and 1t frequently remains
of little less than shilling per ton month,
whereas the domestic t ms ms sar
age charges. burdensome to the Importer. Thus
Charters that can possibly be made during any year
basis for an average freight Even though
sa MefT eghts of shRngs per- ton am he
would not bind himself by written contract to fur
nish vessels might require them, and In case
of his failure so to do stand the loss resulting
therefrorn.
sold at s. 80 per ton in New-York was met by my
offer to purchase of him 5000 tons of Liverpool COM
at s. per ton. Concerning this offer Mr.. Brown Is
silent, from which infer that he has had occasion
TO doubt the accuracy Of his previous statement
His only reference to this part of my letter contains
the inference that he did mean English salt
when he named 50 80 per ton. AS his interview to
which my letter a reply said that this low
price 90 5O is made possible because the salt is
brought from England or the Mediterranean as bal
last at merely nominal freight" and further
stated that "the British Salt Trust could sell salt
with the duty off at 81 80 ton. It certainly me
good reason to suppose that he meant just what
took him to mean. ] should be happy to have Mr..
Brown specify any foreign salt that be sold at
g 30 per ton delivered In New-York duty paid,
cept under peculiar and extraordinary circun-
stances. from which no general argument can be
fairly deduced to the effect OF removing the tariff
on salt Mr. Brown aludes TO the ship John Nc
Donald now the way from Liverpool to this port
at unusually low rate of freight, carrying salt
for my firm of the grade which understood Mr..
Brown TO state In his interview could be sold at
50 80 per ton, delivered in New-York Much to our
regret, and quite contrary to what we understood
Mr.. Browns inference to be 10 cost, find on
making calculation this salt will cost something
s. 80 per ton the vessels side notwithstand-
ing the unusually low rate Of freight.
My other statement that the salt from the mine
of which Mr.. Brown Is selling agent sold a
lower price at the works than the existing duty
calls forth no comment from Mr.. Brown In his re-
ply so l assume that he considers my statement
accurate. WILLIAM A. HAZARD
New-York, Jan. 6. 1894.