Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:08:24.368Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Suez Canal and World Shipping, 1869-1914

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2011

Max E. Fletcher
Max E. Fletcher
Affiliation:
University of Idaho
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The opening of the Suez Canal took place in a century crowded revolutionary changes in the shipping world. In sharp contrast to the slow pace of change and development in the preceding era, major changes occurred in almost every sector of the shipping industry in the nineteenth century. While many of the new departures can be explained, at least in part, by the application of the techniques of the Industrial Revolution to shipping, the opening of Suez went far to accelerate and give direction to these changes. The canal significantly altered shipbuilding techniques and practices and contributed to the precipitous decline in the importance of the sailing ship as a major world carrier. Suez helped to bring about die realignment and relative decline of the European entrepot trade. And the new channel led to significant shifts in the patterns of Eastern and Australasian trade.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 18 , Issue 4 , December 1958 , pp. 556 - 573
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 1958

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Parliamentary Papers, Report from the Select Committee on Steam Navigation to India, XIV (1834), 188Google Scholar, testimony of McGregor Laird, steamship-builder; Holt, Alfred, “Review of the Progress of Steam Shipping during the Last Quarter of a Century,” Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, LI (1877-1978), 2Google Scholar.

2 Clapham, J. H., An Economic History of Modern Britain (2d ed.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1952), II, 71Google Scholar.

3 , Holt, “Review of the Progress of Steam Shipping,” 7Google Scholar.

4 Report of Glover Brothers (London) in “Commercial History and Review of 1865,” supplement to the Economist, XXIV (03 10, 1866), 19Google Scholar.

6 At £6 per ton, incidentally, double the usual freight for cotton. Times of India (Bombay), 05y 12, 1869Google Scholar.

6 Parliamentary Papers, Annual Statement of Trade and Navigation, LVIII (1868-1869), 402-8, 462–63Google Scholar.

7 Shipping and Mercantile Gazette (London), 12 6, 1869Google Scholar.

8 “The Suez Canal and its Relations to Commerce,” Banker's Magazine, XXX (1875), 270Google Scholar.

9 Samuda, Joseph D' Aguilar, “On the Influence of the Suez Canal on Ocean Navigation,” Transactions of the Institution of Naval Architects, XI (1870), I, 8Google Scholar.

10 “Nautical Topics of the Day,” Nautical Magazine, XXXIX (1870), 223Google Scholar.

11 Economist, XXVII (1869), 1158Google Scholar.

12 Based on data compiled from Parliamentary Papers, tatistical Abstract for the United Kingdom and Tables showing the Progress of Merchant Shipping in the United Kingdom, LXXI (1910)Google Scholar.

13 Mitchell's Maritime Register (London), XVI (1871), 17Google Scholar.

14 Report of C. Moller (London) in “Commercial History and Review of 1872,” supplement to the Economist, XXXI (03 15, 1873), 44Google Scholar.

15 , Samuda, “On the Influence of the Suez Canal,” Journal of the Society of Arts, XVIII (1870), 505Google Scholar.

16 Allen's Indian Mail, XXIX (1871), 113Google Scholar.

17 Times of India (Bombay), 06 7, 1871Google Scholar.

18 Ibid.

19 Published in “Produce Shipments from Calcutta to Great Britain,” supplement to the British Trade Journal, XXI (08 I, 1883)Google Scholar.

20 Ibid.

21 Cornewall-Jones, R. J., The British Merchant Service (London, S. Low, Marston & Company, 1898), p. 203Google Scholar.

22 “Commercial History and Review of 1871,” supplement to the Economist, XXX (03 16, 1872), 29Google Scholar. The method of calculating these profit figures is not described in the article.

23 XVI (Nov. 3, 1871), 1391.

24 In 1882 Robert Giffen expressed his belief that the 3:1 ratio grossly underestimated the efficiency of steamers. He was convinced that if sailing ships had to do all the work of steamers, it would be found that the steamer's efficiency would be nearer four to one. See his remarks on the paper presented by Glover, John, “The Tonnage Statistics of the Decade 1870-80,” Journal of the Statistical Society, XLV (1882), 37–58.Google Scholar

25 Graham, Gerald S., “The Ascendancy of the Sailing Ship, 1850-85,” Economic History Review, 2d ser., IX (08 1956), 75, italics in the originalGoogle Scholar.

26 Fayle, C. Ernest, A Short History of the World's Shipping Industry (London, G. Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1933), p. 241Google Scholar.

27 Parliamentary Papers, Board of Trade, “Suez Canal (Trade from the East): Return …,” LXIV (1883), p. 4Google Scholar.

28 Sargent, A. J., Seaways of the Empire (London, A. & C. Black, Ltd., 1918), p. 52Google Scholar.

29 XXVII (1869), 1367.

30 Based on data compiled from the Supplement to Worms & Coy's Suez Canal Weekly Shipping List (London, 1911)Google Scholar.

31 See Parliamentary Papers, Trade of British India, 1874-75 to 1878-79, LXXI (1880), xiiiGoogle Scholar.

32 French shipping during the same year amounted to 5 per cent of the total, Dutch shipping 5 per cent, and Austro-Hungarian 4 per cent Based on data compiled from the Supplement to Worms & Coy's Suez Canal Weekly Shipping List (London, 1911)Google Scholar.

33 Fairlie, J. A., “The Economic Effects of Ship Canals,” Annals of the American Academy, XI (1898), 66Google Scholar.

34 Parliamentary Papers, Statistical Abstract for the United Kingdom.

35 Parliamentary Papers, Trade of British India, 1879-80 to 1883-84, LVIII (1884-1885), viGoogle Scholar.

36 Ibid. On a tonnage instead of a value basis, of course, the percentages in all cases would be somewhat lower.

37 Based on data compiled from Parliamentary Papers, Statistical Abstract for British India.

38 Sargent, A. J., Seaways of the Empire (London, A. & C. Black, Ltd., 1918), p. 64Google Scholar. If every ton of utilizable capacity had been fully employed the load-index would have been 1.0 or 100 per cent. Sargent assumed that a net register ton of shipping could carry two 40-cubic-tons of freight. If a 1,000-ton steamer had on board 2,000 measurement tons of freight, therefore, its load-index was 1.0.

39 Ibid., p. 67.

40 Ibid., pp. 92-93.

41 See Parliamentary Papers, Annual Statement of the Navigation and Shipping of the United Kingdom for the Year 1913, LXXXII (1914), 30 ffGoogle Scholar.

42 Mookerji, Radhakumud, Indian Shipping (London, Longmans, Green and Co., 1912), p. 255Google Scholar.

43 See ibid., p. 255, and Parliamentary Papers, Trade of British India, 1871-72 to 1875-76, LXXX (1877), lviii–lixGoogle Scholar.

44 Based on data compiled from Parliamentary Papers, Statistical Abstract for British India. During the same period Britain's share of total Indian imports fell only from 70 to 65 per cent. Ibid.

45 See Saul, S. B., “Britain and World Trade, 1870–1914,” Economic History Review, 2d ser., VII (1954-1955). 61Google Scholar.

46 lbid., p. 51.

47 Root, J. W., The Trade Relations of the British Empire (2d ed., Liverpool, J. W. Root, 1904), p. 148Google Scholar.

48 Based on data compiled from Parliamentary Papers, Statistical Abstract for British India.