It is very difficult to realise that, up to the last decade of the 18th century, the Thames only possessed its one dock (and that devoted to the whaling trade), while Liverpool had but three, and these of inconsiderable extent.

It was left to the 19th century to witness a great revival in dock and harbour engineering. Great forces which had been slowly gathering throughout the Georgian period eventually came to a head. The sudden growth of commerce consequent upon the advent of steam power, the expansion of the empire and the opening up of virgin territory, gave an impetus to national policy which resulted in the adoption everywhere of vigorous and energetic measures. The history of the Victorian era is a long and triumphant record of feats of maritime engineering skill adorned by the names, amongst others, of Rennie, Smeaton, Stevenson, Hawkshaw, Messent, Coode, Hartley, and Lyster, and attested by the splendid array of docks and harbours which line the English coast to-day.

Nor is there any sign yet of a diminution in the activity which has produced such magnificent results. Fresh undertakings are demanded daily to correspond with each succeeding development of naval architecture and with each access of national prosperity. From the point of view of national vitality this is, indeed, no time for relaxation of effort. Powerful trade competitors have arisen in nations who, admittedly outdistanced before, now openly dispute the British claim to the sovereignty of the seas. Renewed exertions will have to be made, both to retain trade and to cope with its altered conditions. Hence the necessity, on the part of port authorities, for a watchful and attentive attitude, ready to note each impending change and its probable consequences; to seize each favourable opportunity for fresh enterprise, and by decision and energy to utilise it to the fullest extent. Only in this way can ports, as well as nations, hold their

own.

Dock Administration.-Docks are to be found under five different systems of management, and though the question of administration is one of economics rather than of mechanical science, it merits at least a passing reference. The five systems of administration may be enumerated as follows:

(1) Private or Public Companies, ad hoc.

(2) Railway Companies.

(3) Municipalities.

(4) Public Trusts.

(5) Government Departments.

Of these it may be said that private companies are in the least favourable position for maintaining their docks in an efficient condition, or for meeting the needs of a growing port. Dock engineering works are particularly costly, and the return on capital thus invested, except in rare instances, will not bear favourable comparison with dividends arising from securer sources.

DOCK ADMINISTRATION.

7

Hence there must inevitably be undue economy and even parsimony in management, and a reluctance to undertake fresh expenditure on works, however beneficial or necessary.

Railway Companies derive a considerable amount of indirect benefit by the proprietorship of docks in touch with their respective systems, quite apart from any specific receipts locally. The facilities for the direct transfer of goods from rail to ship, and vice versâ, are greatly increased without any corresponding augmentation of staff and without friction of negotiation. The diversion of traffic to their lines is often sufficient to compensate a company for the otherwise unremunerative working of their docks.

Municipal Councils, nominally the controlling authorities, generally delegate their powers of dock management to a sub-committee, with results that have not been uniformly successful. Town Councillors are elected on a variety of grounds, sometimes personal, but mainly political, and often without the remotest bearing on shipping matters. Now, however versed in the direction of purely urban affairs a councillor may be, it is obvious that, without some active participation in maritime affairs, he will lack the requisite technical knowledge to enable him to deal satisfactorily with important questions affecting the mercantile marine. Hence in such a committee the likelihood of uncertain counsels, sometimes unduly timorous, sometimes the reverse.

Public Trusts, specially elected from the classes most intimately associated with the use and exploitation of docks, constitute perhaps the most satisfactory of all forms of government. On a body of this kind would be proper representatives, chosen by an electorate of shipbuilders, shipowners, merchants, and traders; of all, in fact, who were connected with the shipment of goods, the qualification being the payment of dock or port dues. The particular knowledge possessed by such a body would be, and is eminently calculated, to develop the efficiency and prosperity of a port, the efforts of the members being stimulated by a certain amount of self-interest. It must not be overlooked that the welfare of the port involves the welfare of the town, and that the two suffer or flourish together. Hence the necessity for specialist management in both cases.

Control by a Government Department, which would naturally involve the inclusion of all ports within one national jurisdiction, cannot be considered a desideratum. Speaking generally, it is admitted that there is a lack of initiative and a diffusion of authority in governmental departments which are not adapted to the successful carrying on of commercial undertakings. The almost inevitable result of this system would be the stifling of private enterprise, and the abandonment of that local patriotism which constitutes the best guarantee of the vitality and energy of a port, at the same time that it affords the best augury for its continued prosperity.

We now pass on to a brief résumé of the more prominent historical facts connected with the development of some of the most important ports of the world. It would be difficult to assign to them any satisfactory order of

precedence. Navigation returns fluctuate considerably, and with them the relative positions of the ports concerned. No attempt, then, will be made to preserve any particular sequence except that attaching to general prominence and representative character.

THE PORT OF LONDON.

The Port of London has long maintained an indubitable supremacy. At the beginning of last century, however, it received no more than 4,000 ships annually, of which number more than half were coasting vessels, and the aggregate tonnage scarcely exceeded half a million. In 1901 the number of ships which entered and cleared the port was 53,230, and the tonnage 31,157,015.

THE GREENLAND (or HOWLAND) Dock, with its area of 12 acres and quayage under a mile, held its unique position until the year 1790, when the BRUNSWICK DOCK was constructed by a shipbuilder on the site of the present WEST INDIA Dock. The shipping at this time was mainly accommodated at "legal wharves" at the river side or at moorings amidstream. The delay which arose in this way from stoppages of the navigable channel and the enormous losses sustained by robberies, created a scandal of such moment that the Government of the day was obliged to take action, and parliamentary powers were obtained for the redemption of some of these legal wharves by compensating their owners. At the same time an Act was passed authorising the construction of the West India Dock. This dock was so named from its appropriation to the West Indian trade, and all vessels engaged in that trade were compelled to use the dock, which had the monopoly conferred upon it for twenty-one years. The date of opening was 1802. It was followed in 1805 by the LONDON DOCK, which was endowed with a monopoly of vessels engaged in the conveyance of wine, spirits, and tobacco. The EAST INDIA DOCK was opened on equally protective lines in 1806. The first free dock (St. Katharine's) did not come into existence until the years 1827-28. After this a long interval elapsed, until the construction of the ROYAL VICTORIA DOCK in 1855. This dock, situated nearly opposite Woolwich, is a very important one. Its length is 3,000 feet and its width 1,050 feet; and, with its appurtenances, it added 90 acres to the water area of the port.

The MILLWALL DOCKS-in reality but one, shaped like the letter L— were next built in 1868. They have a water area of 35 acres. In 1870 came the opening of the SOUTH-WEST INDIA Dock, parallel to the other two India Docks; like them, stretching across the Isle of Dogs, and having a river connection at each end.

In 1880 another large dock, the ROYAL ALBERT, added very materially to the extent of the port. With its entrance basin it has an area of 84 acres. It is in close connection with the Victoria Dock, being joined to it by a channel.

THE PORT OF LIVERPOOL.

9

The available space in the higher reaches of the river was now becoming very restricted, and, moreover, the congestion of traffic caused much interference with, and even prevented, any rapidity of navigation. Accordingly, the next group of docks, the TILBURY DOCKS, were built lower down the river, opposite Gravesend. They consist of a main dock with three parallel branches, in addition to a tidal basin, entrance locks, and graving docks. By this group, opened in 1886, the port was enlarged by 571 acres.

The water area of the port now amounts to about 570 acres, exclusive of shallow timber ponds, and it is being added to by important improvements at the SURREY COMMERCIAL DOCKS. These docks, which are situated on the south side of the river, consist of two groups-the Commercial Docks, dating back to the Howland Dock, reconstructed in 1807, and the Surrey Docks, opened in 1812. They are mainly used for cargoes of timber and grain.

The present position of London as a port cannot, however, be regarded as satisfactory. The navigation of the river is impeded by tortuous channels beset with shallows, while trade is hampered by insufficient dock accommodation and diversity of management. The docks in London are the property of several distinct companies, with conflicting interests and independent jurisdictions. They are under the necessity of paying dividends, and their capital is insufficient to meet the growing demands made upon it. The amount of interest earned can only be described as meagre, so that there is little inducement to find additional capital for investments of so comparatively unremunerative a nature. Yet, without this expenditure the docks must rapidly pass into a state of inefficiency and disuse.

How to provide funds for the purpose is a delicate and difficult question. Shipowners complain that port charges and dues are already excessive, while other sources of revenue are not available. Radical constitutional changes are impending, including the formation of a Port Trust, with the absorption of all interests in one body. This will undoubtedly lead to considerable economy in management, and a solution of the financial difficulty will, no doubt, be forthcoming. The matter has little interest from an engineering point of view, and concerns but indirectly the province of the dock engineer. Hence, we may with advantage leave so thorny a topic for debate in other and more appropriate quarters.

THE PORT OF LIVERPOOL.

The second port in the kingdom, has a history dating back to the year 1338, when it was first made an independent port. Up to the beginning of the 19th century, however, the docks, for which it is now famous, did not cover a greater area than 18 acres, nor in 1816 were there more than 34 acres; but in 1846 the water space had increased to 108 acres, and in 1857, after the inclusion of the Birkenhead docks, to 209 acres, until at length, in 1901, the combined system comprised no less than 558 acres, with a quayage

of 35 miles, the latter being equivalent to two-thirds of that of the quayage of all other wet docks in the world, excluding British ports.

The docks constructed during the latter half of the 18th century were the SALTHOUSE, the GEORGE's, the KING'S, and the QUEEN'S. These were devoid of quays, and much time and labour were wasted in the transfer and cartage of goods. The PRINCES DOCK was opened in 1821, and five years later the Old Dock was closed. The CLARENCE DOCK was built in 1830, the WATERLOO in 1834, and the VICTORIA and TRAFALGAR DOCKS in 1836. These earlier docks were of very small size, rarely exceeding 10 acres. The CANADA and HUSKISSON DOCKS, constructed between 1850 and 1860, marked a decided advance in this respect, and the size was still further increased in the case of the LANGTON and ALEXANDRA DOCKS, opened in 1881, the former of which contains 21 acres and the latter, 44 acres. Larger, again, than these are the EAST and WEST FLOATS, on the Cheshire side of the river, containing 592 acres and 52 acres respectively; but none of the docks in the Mersey Estate approach the size of the Victoria and Albert Docks at London.

An immense floating landing stage, built in 1847, forms a prominent feature of the river frontage. It was burned down in 1874, but afterwards restored. There are similar, but smaller, floating stages at Woodside and Wallasey.

The tonnage of vessels entering and leaving the port, which in 1831 only amounted to 1 millions, had nearly reached 19 millions before the end of the century, with a total of about 40,000 vessels. For the year just closed (Midsummer, 1903) the tonnage exceeded 23 millions.

The management of the dock system, which is perhaps the finest under single control in the world, passed from the hands of a committee of the Town Council in 1858 into those of a public Trust, created by Act of Parliament, and called the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board, which, since that time, has administered it with striking success.

THE PORT OF NEW YORK.

The premier city and port of the United States is possibly somewhat lacking in attraction for the dock engineer in that it has no docks, in the strict sense of the word. What are, by courtesy, termed docks are open areas of water formed by the projection of numerous timber jetties from the face line of the river quays. The city itself lies on an island between the Hudson and East rivers, in a well-sheltered position which calls for no further protection, while at the same time it is close to the open sea. Α further reason for the absence of docks is the small range of tide, which does not exceed 5 feet, on an average. The construction of the river wharves, despite some supervision introduced at the beginning of last century, seems to have proceeded on no definite plan or system until the year 1870, when a special department was constituted for that purpose. The city is now