In presence of the declining role played by the French merchant fleet in the national mari time traffic it is permissible to enquire into the general causes which have brought about such a state of affairs.
Causes of the Inferiority of the French Merchant Fleet.— It should first of all be re membered that up to 1866 the French flag had been protected by adequate measures, such as reserving certain traffic for French ships and giving them an advantageous differential treat tnent for other traffic. A very close interest, therefore, united the exterior maritime trade with the national flag, as was the case, more over, in foreign countries. In 1860 the English were the first to renounce this system of privi leges and protection which had been followed by all the merchant fleets of the maritime countries of Europe during the 17th and 18th centuries. There was every advantage to the English in taking this step as their trade did not fear rivals at that time. France was dragged into the movement, and by the com mercial treaties of 1860 suppressed the greater part of the customs dues which protected its markets, and established by law of 19 May 1866 complete equality for all ships entering its ports. It was, however, found that the French com mercial fleet was unable to support the com petition to which it was suddenly subjected. Despite the general increase of commercial ac tivity, the French merchant fleet only made slow progress and was outstripped by those countries she had formerly rivaled.
As far hack as 1869 public opinion became uneasy regarding this situation and an in vestigation was ordered with a view to placing the French merchant fleet on a better footing. The tragic events of 1870 prevented the pro posed program from being carried out, and it was in 1881 only that a law was promulgated protecting the merchant fleet. In 1893 a new system was inaugurated, which was replaced later in 1902 and once more modified in 1906. The main lines of this new legislation were the establishment of certain premiums and com pensations for equipment of French ships, the conditions varying with each new law. At times sailing vessels were favored, while at others they were harshly treated. Sometimes navigation premiums were paid according to the distance covered and sometimes compensa tion for equipment was granted corresponding to the number of days taken up in the adminis trative equipment of the ship. At other times ships constructed in France alone profited by these laws while at other periods vessels built abroad were placed on the same level as the former. The same criticism can be applied to all these legal texts, i.e., that instead of en couraging French shipbuilding they established a certain policy which had to be strictly fol lowed and which did not tend to improve the shipping industry. However, the law of 19
April 1906— the most recent one — instituted a system which has been in vogue for the last eight years before the war and which has given interesting results. The gross tonnage of the French commercial fleet in 1906 was 2,047,952, and 2,498,285.92 in 1914.
The abnormal situation in which the French merchant fleet was placed on account of the return to a protection tariff greatly favoring agriculture and various categories of industries should also be noted. It is a fact that mari time transports do not trade throughout France to their full capacity. Customs protection can not therefore be extended to them. On the other hand it can do them a lot of harm indi rectly because it impedes international trade dependent on maritime transports. It was to parry this abnormal state of affairs that the system (an artificial one) of allowing premiums and compensation for equipment was estab lished; or in other words privileges were granted, theoretically, with a view to counter balancing the serious situation outlined above. But other causes of a geographical and economi cal order, independent naturally of custom§ legislation, explain why the French commercial fleet is not on the basis it should be with spect to the exterior trade of France.
Let us commence by examining the geo graphical causes. It has frequently been con sidered that France derived great advantage from the fact that she is bordered by three dif ferent oceans, with an important number of ports. This was, of course, of undoubted ad vantage when ships were of small dimensions and when land transports did not concentrate on a certain number of ports. To this system of dispersion, modem conditions of maritime transportation and transportation by railway have substituted a system of concentration. The large ports of to-day are the cross-roads of sea routes and land routes serving as junc tions for distant destinations. Secondary ports of course play a lesser role. On the other hand it is in the national interest that every effort be made to confine activities to limited numbers of ports, of modern construction and equipped with adequate machinery to deal rapidly with the loading and unloading of large tonnage ships. Whereas in some countries, Germany for instance, a choice of ports is limited Bremen and Hamburg — a certain indecision was maintained in France, due to local jeal ousy, with the result that competition has been keen between quite a number of French mari time ports. In other words; if there are numerous French ports able to harbor ships of an average tonnage, none of them are as well equipped as Antwerp, Hamburg or Liverpool. This naturally makes its repercussion felt on the French commercial fleet which is practically dependent on national traffic.