The Brunswick times. [volume] (Brunswick, Ga.) 188?-1900, 1897-04-14

cargo SIS; and that they pay their
deputies $3.50 per month each (wlcked
shippers, why did they send this letter
here p The letter from Galveston
states that they are afflicted there the
same as we are here in Brunswick.
From the tone of that letter l would
judge that Galveston is afflicted with
Churchill, who in turn seems to be
afflicted with chronic case of COM
mercial nausea. Charleston and Savan-
nah are passed by with the casual re-
mark that their harbor regulations
are about the same as those of Bruns-
wick, and that Savannah is quarrelling
with the railroads, which of course
has nothing to do with the harbor
master, as he is not required to dock
the trains. =
The Advertiser seems to have fixed
the income of the harbor master at
more than 1922 per annum, and right
here, Mr.. Editor, if the Advertiser
wishes to purchase this income, am
willing to knock it down to him at
considerably less than his estimate.
Now Mr.. Editor, it is a known fact
that Brunswick is the cheapest port
on the South Atlantic coast, except,
possibly, Fernandlna. Brunswick
commands the preference as loading
port. and 1t is often the case that ves-
sells will accept less rate of freight
to load at Brunswick in preference
to Charleston, Savannah or any of the
gulf ports. These are facts which can
be proven, if doubted, by some of our
largest and best posted exporters.
1t seems to me that Mr.. Churchill
and the Advertiser have logically
failed in their attempt to find one
single port where shipping is not con-
trOlled by some port authority, and
their own evidence convicts them.
1t appears, Mr.. Editor, that the Ad-
vertiser's contributor is confining his
investigation of port charges to the
harbOr masters fee alone, which is a
very small matter. Why does he not
branch out and advocate reforms in
certain other matters relative to bur-
dens upon shipping? Why did Mr..
Churchill not tell him what he charged
for loading vessels with phosphate
when not chartered By lump sum or
when the charter provides that the
ship shall pay port charges? Mr..
Churchill has evidently not forgotten
the steamer Crown Prince, Captain
Coull, which vessel loaded here during
May of 1892. The captain thought that
40 cents per ton to dump phosphate in
his vessels hold was an outrageous
price, yet he was compelled by the
terms of the charter to employ ship
per's steyedOre. Had this clause not
been in the charter party, he could
have gotten this work done for %
cents per ton.
The same was the case with the Nor
weglan steamer Ulriken. Captain Berg,
which vessel loaded here during Oc-
tober, 1891, so says the captain.
Does 1t seem, then, Mr.. Editor, that
this great benefactor cares anything
about Brunswick and her port
charges only SO far as his own pocket
is concerned? l am reliably informed
that the customary charge for loading
phosphate into vessels at Fernandina,
when masters have the privilege of
employing their own stevedores, is %
cents per ton, and at Bull River, s..
c., 20 cents per ton. Is it right, then,
that vessels, when bound up under
ironclad charters. should pay 40 cents
per ton? This brings to mind the old
saying that "People who live in glass
houses should not throw stones"
No, Mr.. Editor, there is no real OBJ
lection to ordinance No. 43 of the city
of Brunswick. There IS no objection
to the harbor fee. There is no obiec-
ton to the office, but the objection is
to the man who fills the position.
In support of my judgment, as above
expressed, l will ask if there was any
objection to the ordinance, the office,
or the fees, why did Mr.. Churchill ask
the city council to elect certain man