vessels head and stern. Without the aid of tugs such moorings would be impracticable, but their provision would not otherwise be expensive. We are informed that clump moorings would cost about £3,000 each, an outlay of £6,000 being necessary to provide the two moorings for the first ship. The other moorings would be arranged in chain from the first. 24. The loading and discharging of cargo into and from lighters is at present undertaken on a narrow front. Works are now in progress for the lengthening of this front and it appears that these should suffice for the present needs of the port, taking the traffic of 1926 as a basis. We have already shown that in our opinion the development of the port is likely to be gradual. Nevertheless it is clear that as the traffic increases more extensive warehouses, transit sheds, and railway sidings than the narrow space on the present front can accommodate will be necessary. According to the evidence of the Consulting Engineers this will involve the reclamation of the foreshore and a scheme for that purpose is now under the consideration of the Tanganyika Government. Arrangements have already been made for the delivery of five new cranes. The Joint East African Board have, however, represented to us that these will not suffice and that three further cranes will be needed forthwith. 25. We must now consider the cost of the foregoing schemes. If we assume that moorings are laid down for six berths, there would be a charge of some £21,000 under that head. Two tugs will cost £40,000 and £5,000 may be allotted to the survey of the harbour. Thus these three items will total some £66,000. The works at present in progress for lengthening the wharf are estimated to cost £135,000 including equipment. If to these two sums we add from £140,000 to £150,000 for reclamation and additional accommodation ashore, provision for which cannot, we consider, be long postponed, the total capital expenditure in sight on the port will be in the neighbourhood of £350,000. 26. On such a capital outlay of £350,000, allowing an annual charge of at least 6 per cent. for interest and sinking fund, a sum of £21,000 will be required annually. To this must be added say £7,000 a year for the maintenance and depreciation of the tugs. Thus the Port Authority will have to face a charge additional to their present annual expenditure of at least £28,000. Against this must be set the economies in working traffic due to the new facilities provided. 27. It will be seen that the proposed improvements which we have passed under review fall into two groups, namely, those we have discussed in paragraphs 22 to 26 relating to wharfage, reclamation, tugs, and moorings, and those in paragraphs 19 to 21 which would call for permanent works in the channel and for dredging in the harbour basin. We are of opinion that, whatever may be the result of the survey to be undertaken, the second group of these improvements, which are roughly estimated to cost between £200,000 to £300,000, should be postponed until the trade of the port has reached a point where the increased annual charges could be more easily borne. 28. In regard to the future, it may be noted that the programme of works which we have sketched out in the foregoing paragraphs admits of gradual extension. The reclamation of land and the wharf frontage may be carried southwards across the mouth of Kurasini Creek, and the number of berths at moorings may be extended up the Southern Creek. Indeed we understand that the Consulting Engineers have already sketched such plans. If at a still later stage of development, deep water wharves are called for, these might perhaps be constructed along the side of the Southern Creek. But in regard to such ultimate prospects, it would be useless to say more in the present state of our knowledge of the harbour bottom and shores. 29. In the course of our Enquiry certain suggestions were brought to our notice that before any appreciable sum of money was spent at Dar-es-Salaam, the question of establishing a new Port at Msasani Bay, some miles north of Dar-es-Salaam, should be considered. The weight of the evidence which we have received is against any such idea, for Msasani Bay does not present the natural facilities for a relatively small port; from the beginning great engineering works would probably be necessary. CONCLUSIONS. 30. We were asked to give our opinion on the draft of ships likely to use Dar-es-Salaam during the next ten years. We hesitate to express any opinion in regard to so long a period; the trade of the port is likely to grow, but during the next few years, we think that that growth might be sufficiently met by : (a) the provision of tugs which should render it practicable for ships of somewhat greater length and draft than at present to enter Dar-es-Salaam Harbour. (b) the fixing of moorings in the Southern Creek which will permit of a greater number of ships being berthed than at present. (c) the construction of increased wharfage space and of facilities ashore which should suffice to give quick despatch to vessels. 31. When the effect of the foregoing improvements has been tested and the results of the survey are available, the question of widening and deepening the channel and of dredging the harbour basin may be taken into consideration in relation to the development of trade which may then be visible. In our view, the limitation of immediate expenditure which we are suggesting will not in any way prejudge future developments or the results of competition as between Mombasa and Dar-es-Salaam. H. J. MACKINDER, Chairman. H. LLEWELLYN SMITH, United Kingdom. E. A. EVA, Australia. C. J. PARR, New Zealand. G. GRINDLE, Colonies and Protectorates. T. HARRISON HUGHES, Shipowner. R. D. FENNELLY, Secretary. London, 10th June, 1927. (62324-22) Wt. 2689-164 1000 8/27 H. St. G. 71 INDUSTRIAL ASSURANCE REPORT OF THE INDUSTRIAL ASSURANCE COMMISSIONER For the Year ended 31st December, 1926. (Presented pursuant to the Industrial Assurance Act, 1923 (13 & 14 Geo. 5 cap. 8), Section 44) Ordered, by The House of Commons, to be Printed, 14th March, 1927. LONDON: PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE To be purchased directly from H.M. STATIONERY OFFICE at the following addresses: Adastral House, Kingsway. London, W.C.2; 120, George Street. Edinburgh; York Street, Manchester; 1, St. Andrew's Crescent, Cardiff; 15, Donegall Square West, Belfast; or through any Bookseller. 1927. Price 3s. Od. net. 41. B. Reports of Selected Cases heard by the Commissioner under COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT. The Misses McCarthy and the Liverpool Victoria Friendly Society Committee of Management-Pension-Contract for pensions to dependants of a member of the committee of management of a collecting society-Allegation of ultra vires-Construction of rule and resolution of the Society ... FORFEITURE. Jessie Cooney and the Macclesfield No. 1 General Burial Col- ... ... HUSBAND AND WIFE, see PAYMENT ON DEATH. JURISDICTION. Samuel Sandlant Taylor and the Co-operative Insurance Society, Limited Jurisdiction of the Commissioner-Concurrent jurisdiction with the county court and the police court-Claim for sum assured and defence of breach of the warranty on the proposal form by an untrue statement as to health-" if fraud or misrepresentation is not alleged Industrial Assurance Act, 1923, Section 32 (1) LIEN. 8 12 13 14 18 British Legal Life Assurance Company, Limited, and David Leighton and Jane Lindsay-Lien-Payment of premiums at request of policy owner-Law of Scotland 21 MISREPRESENTATION [see also Proposal]. Georgina Alice Syson and the Refuge Assurance Company, Jane ... ... Woodruff and the Britannic Assurance Company, Limited-Misrepresentation-Application for return of premiums on ground of misrepresentation by agentReliance on the misrepresentation-Evidence Robert William Chatt and the Prudential Assurance Company, Limited-Misrepresentation-Representation by agent in contradiction of the written contract-Ostensible scope of agent's authority T. D. G. Dickinson and the Prudential Assurance Company, Limited-Misrepresentation-Assurance obtained by misrepresentation of agent-Application for rescission and return of premiums General principles-Evidence ... |