Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1915-01-22
THE GREATNESS OF OUR PORT
1t, and Not Boston, Stands Second to New York
in Volume of Water-borne Commerce.

1t, and Not Boston, Stands Second to New York
in Volume of Water-borne Commerce.
To the Editor OF the EUenin0 Ledger:
Sir-The article appearing in your columns
under date of January 20, "Bgston a Miracle
of Port Development" and concluding with
the statement, this makes Boston the sec
ond port in North and South America and
the fifth port in the world" is so manifestly
unjust to Philadelphia that l had hoped 1t
would be answered by some one more
capable than I.
Having given 80 years to the study of the
question of port development, 1t having been
my privilege to watch the rapid forward
strides made by the port of Philadelphia
during these years. challenge the contradic-
tion Of the statement that Philadelphia and
not Boston occupies at this time the dlstinc-
ton of being the second port of the United
States with respect to her tonnage from
over-sea points and the quantity of freight
handled, this statement being based upon a
just, true and scientific computation of her
commerce. During the calendar year just
closed 5626 vessels, with tonnage of 1885,
976 tons, arrived here Quoting from the
customs receipts of the fiscal year ending
June, 1914, after New York came Phlladel-
phia, $18,OS3,714.92; with Boston following
her receipts being s15,673 s0S.9O In a state
ment recently issued by the Harbor Master
of Boston the total arrivals for the year
1914 are given as 10,44O, striking figures, in
deed, but upon analysis it Is found that of
this number 4944 were oyster boats and 916
were tugs, neither of which type of craft is
classed by us as maritime commerce. Tugs
are merely the motive power for other craft
and oyster boats are certainly not vessels of
commerce. Deducting them from this grand
ton to 1850 vessels, while during the cor
responding period there arrived at the port
of Philadelphia 1925 vessels, and we stand
ready to produce names and all particulars
to show that this number of craft actually
arrived from points without the Delaware
Capes. Now, in these two instances, Phla-
delphia certainly is not second to Boston.
1 personally made an investigation of the
manner of keeping statistics at the various
ports last year and found Boston one of the
places where no official or reliable figures
were obtainable with reference to coastwise
commerce.
Following are a few comparisons from
statements issued by the Boston Harbor
Master;
Philadelphia Boston
2s 400 tons. .logwood ...,..... 14lO tons
2232s tons ...,..., .laths ...,.....,.. 925 tons
3s355O tons ....... lumber .......... 3056s tons
Boston's Harbor Master claims the total
receipts of freight for 1914 to have been
S.O25,6 ,645 tons, and her largest receipt seems
10 have been coal, 2.196,7s5 tons while our
shipments of that product for that period
totaled s,907,s5S tons. The author OF the
article in question claims that there are ss
lines of steamships in service between Bos-
ton and foreign parts. Now, Philadelphia
plessa not guilty to having this number of
lines Of steamships to foreign ports. and
feels Boston should do likewise.
Boston should be commended for the
strides she has made in her port improve
ments up TO date. but she has still a long
way to 20 before there can be offered to the
commerce OF the world for the handling OF
vessels facilities such as exist at the port
OF Philadelphia. What our people should do
is study the wonderful resources OF the port
OF philadelphia. Only few days ago in
answer to a query. one OF our leading eve
ming papers made the statement that there
were no direct lines OF steamships between
here ana San Francisco via the Panama
Canal AS a matter Of fact there are noa
IN operation out Of this port three such
lines. GEORGE +. sfkouLh.
Philadelphia. January q. 1915