The post-war development of road transport has imported a new problem into the question of dock layout, and the need for providing facilities for economical loading to road vehicles in docks equipped only for loading to barge and rail requires many modi fications of design.
Port Ownership.—The several descriptions of port ownership and operation may be classified under the following heads—(i) National ownership, (2) Trust ownership, (3) Municipal owner ship, (4) Railway ownership, (5) Private ownership.
(I) Examples of National Ownership Are :—Rotterdam, and all the larger French ports. None are to be found in the United Kingdom except naval dockyards which do not come within the scope of this article.
(2) Examples of Trust Ownership Are England, London and Liverpool; in Canada, Montreal and Vancouver; in United States, New York and New Orleans; in Australia, Sydney and Melbourne.
(3) Examples of Municipal Ownership Are :—In England, Bris tol and Preston; on the Continent, Hamburg, which is the property of the Free City of Hamburg, and might perhaps be classed under national ownership; and Antwerp, the financing of which is divided between the State and the City.
(4) Railway Ownership.—Before the amalgamation of the rail ways of Great Britain in 1921 a number of docks were railway owned, some having been acquired by railways when they had difficulty to maintain themselves as independent authorities, ex amples—Southampton, Hull; and others had been constructed by companies which, though nominally railway companies, were mainly ports (examples Cardiff and Newport), to serve the sur rounding coal fields. Abroad the outstanding example is South Africa where all the ports are worked as part of the State owned railways. A few examples may be found in the United States, but the tendency in that country is to separate the port and railway ownership.
(5) Private Ownership.—In the United Kingdom few ports are to be found in this class, but the Manchester ship canal and the Gloucester Docks and Canal Company may be instanced.
The acceptance as a national liability of a larger or smaller proportion of the cost of construction, maintenance and working of a port prevails on the Continent much more largely than in the United Kingdom. For example, at Rotterdam and Antwerp
the construction, dredging and maintenance of the harbour up to quay level are carried out by the State, as a national charge against the general revenues of the country, the super-structure above water level only being provided by the municipality and being the only portion of the charges to be recovered from the trade pass ing through the port. This is a potent cause of the lower charges prevailing on the Continent as compared with the United King dom. Under the policy which has generally prevailed in the United Kingdom of non-intervention by the State, economic forces have been allowed free play.
Public Ownership.—In the British dominions the policy of state or national ownership is almost universal, but the methods differ widely. In Australia the ports are financed by State loans and administered by nominated commissioners under the control of the Minister for Public Works; in South Africa, they are combined with the State owned railways under the general man ager of the latter; in New Zealand and in India the ports finance themselves, but with the Government guarantee behind them, and are administered by a State appointed chief commissioner assisted by commissioners elected by the users of the port with, in some cases, representatives of the local inhabitants. In Canada ownership and administration are with the several States through the agency of nominated commissioners.
Port trusts are statutory bodies not working for a profit but they are obliged, in order to keep themselves solvent, to levy charges high enough to cover all their outgoings. The capital account has to bear all the cost of construction and equipping the port, and the revenue account has to bear the interest and sinking fund on such capital expenditure. Charges, therefore, have to be fixed so as to bring in sufficient revenue to pay this interest and sinking fund in addition to current working expenses. Surplus revenue is applied either to improving the facilities or reducing the charges of the port.