pistribüted t0 the C0 u n ci1 C. 4 4 4 (a) M. 164 (a). 1 9 2 5 . VIII. and the Members of the League.] v ' —

G e n e v a , August 20th, 1 9 2 5 .

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

REPORT

ON NAVIGATION

SUBMITTED TO THE

ADVISORY AND TECHNICAL COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSIT OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

BY

WALKER D. HINES (with the aid of Major Brehon Somervell) TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Part 1. P ag e

I Introduction ...... 11

II, P a s t a n d P r e s e n t U t i l i s a t i o n o f t h e R i v e r ...... 11

Freight traffic ...... 11 Total for 1911, 1923, 1924. Increase expected in 1925. Exports, imports and internal traffic of riparian States. Traffic by flag, 1923 and 1924. Comparison with traffic on Passenger traffic ...... 14

III. T h e R i v e r F l e e t s , t h e i r N a t i o n a l i t y a n d C a p a c i t y ...... 15 Pre-war situation. Present situation. Changes brought about by the war. Present Danube Fleet by flag. Introduction of self-propelled barges. Greater division of shipping interests. Co-operation among navigation companies.

IV. S c h e m e o f A n a l y s i s ...... 16

V. T h e G e n e r a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f D a n u b e T r a f f i c ...... 17 Maritime Danube. Fluvial Danube.

VI. G e n e r a l E c o n o m i c C o n d i t i o n s g r o w i n g o u t o f P o s t - W a r P o l i c i e s ...... 1 8 General depression in Europe. Export and import prohibitions. Effect of the break-up of -. Protectionist policy of new States. Commercial Treaties. Competition of other trade routes. Sea routes. Railways.

VII. Roumanian Production of Cereals for Export ...... 19 Decrease in 1924 in Danube traffic originating in Roumania concurrently with increase in other Danube traffic. Importance of Roumania in total Danube traffic. Comparisons of Roumanian pre-war and post-war production and export of cereals. Reasons for decrease in exports : Increase in internal consumption. Division of large estates. Price control and export taxes. Crop prospects for 1925. Only important increase is in lumber. s' d- N. 250 (F.) + 200 (A.) 9/25 + 3000 (A.), 3000 (F.) 10/25. Imp. Réunies S. A., Lausanne. — 4 —

Page VIII. T h e T e r r i t o r i a l W a t e r s , e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e S .H .S . S t a t e ...... 21

The S a v e ...... 21 Volume of traffic.

The Bega River and the Canals ...... 22 (1) The King Peter Canal. (2) The Prince Alexander Canal. (3) The Bega River. Volume of traffic. Provisions of Peace Treaties regarding the international character of the Bega. The question of according, without prejudice to the principle, access to territorial waters in cases where the States’ interest wrould be promoted ...... 23 Claim of S.H.S. State that exclusive domestic enjoyment is necessary to develop domestic shipping. Claim of foreign navigation companies that S.H.S. domestic service is at times inadequate. The practical situation as to the Roumanian part of the Bega ...... 23 Traffic permits granted by Roumanian Government to foreign companies. In reaching Roumanian part, companies must use S.H.S. tugs through latter’s territory.

IX. The Right of a State to exclude absolutely all Foreign Interests from its C a b o t a g e o r s t r i c t l y I n t e r n a l T r a f f i c ...... 24

The question of principle ...... 24 The claim of Roumania and the S.H.S. State that they are permitted to forbid cabotage. Complaints of foreign shipping companies regarding their total exclusion from cabotage in Roumania and S.H.S. State. Interpretation of relevant clauses of Danube Statute lies with C.I.D.

The question of permitting, without prejudice to the principle, participation in cabotage if advantageous to the S tate ...... 25 (1) Injury to domestic shipping. (2) Promotion of public convenience. Infrequency of passenger services between Roumanian ports and between S.H.S. ports because of their cabotage policy. Advantages of permitting limited cabotage. Refusal to permit transportation of foreign companies’ own employees or supplies 27

X. The River’s Physical Problems ...... 27

Detailed development in Annex V. Usual draught of vessels on Danube. General situation compared with pre-war. Controlling depths at a few critical points. Ratisbon to ...... 27 Rhine-Danube Canal. -Hofkirchen. Hofkirchen-Ratisbon. Passau to Vienna hydro-electric possibilities. Vienna to ...... 27 Devin-Szap. Austrian-Czech frontier Hungarian-Czech frontier. Budapest to Moldava ...... ' Fajz. Mouth of . — 5 —

Page S ection ...... 29 Needs for improvement. Plans for improvement. Possibilities of execution of new projects. Administration of Services. S.H.S. Roumanian accord. Principles to be followed in forming service at Iron Gates. Dues complaint by S.H.S. Syndicate. “ Vaskapu. ”

Sulina Channel...... 32 Development of tributaries as feeders to traffic on river ...... 32 The General Principle of Dues on Danube Navigation ...... 32 Comprehensive plan for improvement...... 33 Responsibility of C.I.D. Technical department of C.I.D. not organised. Necessity for prompt action.

XI. Frontier Form alities ...... 33 Effect of the increase in the number of frontiers. Summary of formalities for a loaded barge proceeding from to Roumania. Ratisbon, Passau and Vienna. Czechoslovakia. Hungary — entrance and exit. S.H.S. State — entrance and exit. Roumanian frontier. Formalities for cargo moving upstream ...... 35 Germany gives option of paying duty at frontier ...... 35 Transit traffic ...... 36 Principles established by Danube Statute. Present practice regarding formalities. Time lost and resulting economic waste ...... 36 Approximate total delays. Possibility of improving the position. Engelhartszell complaint already remedied ...... 36 The stop of all tows in ...... 37 Possibility of substituting bonds or other alternative. The stop at Budapest ...... 37 Conflict in reports from Hungarian authorities and navigation companies. The double stop at the Hungarian-S.H.S. fr o n tie r...... 37 No objection in principle to combining the two frontier offices. Suggestion that Batina should be selected. Frontier delays increased by attitude of local functionaries ...... 38 Extra fees for services outside office hours...... 38 Disadvantage as compared with rail traffic. German duties on certain ships’ supplies ...... 38 The convoy system ...... 39 Considerable burden. Suggestion for substituting bonds and occasional inspections. Present system unsatisfactory No Roumanian Customs formalities at Tutrakan. Simplification of Documents...... 39 Suggestion for uniform manifest. Reasonable simplification is in the interest of all the States concerned. Delay in Customs examinations in ports ...... 39 Difficulties caused by insufficient number of Customs houses. Suggestions for ensuring prompter clearance. — 6 —

Passport Formalities ...... 4q Substitution of crew’s service books for passports. Alleged examination of crewr’s papers at Budapest. Advisability of general agreement. Sanitary Formalities ...... 40 Desirability of co-ordinating the existing regulations. Frontier Formalities would not be avoided by creating free p o rts...... 4 ^

XII. P o r t F a c i l i t i e s ...... 41 Principle of equality of all flags under the Danube Statute. Various complaints of unequal treatment. Situation in various countries : G erm a n y...... 42 Ratisbon. Passau. Austria ...... 42 . Vienna.

Czechoslovakia...... 43 Bratislava. H u n g a r y ...... 44 Budapest.

S.H.S. State ...... 45 Ports operated by the State. Inadequate development of facilities. Exclusion of foreign agents of navigation companies. The claim that is a territorial and not an international port. Pancsova. Roumania...... 48 Ports operated by the State. Limited facilities of foreign companies Brail a and Galatz. Bulgaria ...... 48 Port Dues 49

XIII. L i e n s o n V e s s e l s ... 49 No satisfactory legislation regarding liens. Advisability of a Convention to bring about uniform law.

XIV. S t a t i s t i c s ...... 50 Necessity of more complete and uniform statistics on physical conditions and on traffic. Advantages to States. Advantages to shipping companies. Statistics of C.I.D. and C.E.D.

XV. International (C.I.D.) 51 Peace Treaties and Danube Statute. Outline of Commission’s responsibility ...... 51 Obligations under the Danube Statute. Difficulties confronting the Commission, and its important accomplishments ...... 52 Difficulties encountered. Summary of important services rendered. Page Comments upon postponements of action ...... 53 Some questions not disposed of by Commission. Difficulty in arriving at decisions. Analysis of questions decided and postponed. Question of holding more frequent sessions. Necessity of preparing more complete information in advance of sessions.

XVI. European Danube Commission (C.E.D.) 5 5 Functions of Commission. Works of channel improvement ...... 5 5 Summary of conditions affecting the channel at Sulina. Question as to whether decline in traffic is due to shallow water or to other reasons. D u e s...... 56 Question whether decline in traffic caused by dues or other reasons. Criticism directed against the Commission ...... 5 7

XVII. Railway Co-operation ...... 58 Railways disposed to co-operate with each other but not with the Danube. Advantages of co-operation with Danube. Examples of special railway rates.

XVIII. Efficiency of Navigation on the Danube ...... 59 More efficient loading of barges and more complete tows for tugs...... 59 Analogy with railways. Incomplete utilisation represents waste. Elimination of delay for tugs and tows. Time lost by slow loading and unloading. Question as to efficient functioning of many of existing tu g s...... 61 Question of replacing old tugs. Special telegraphic communication for navigation ...... 61 Greater co-operation among navigation com p an ies...... 61 Common use of facilities in ports...... 62 Common use of tug-boats ...... 62 Common use of repair sh op s...... 62 Building up tourist passenger travel ...... 62

XIX. T h e G e n e r a l F i n a n c i a l C r e d i t o f t h e D a n u b e S t a t e s ...... 63 Danube a symbol of conditions in States. Ability to borrow impaired if disturbed Danube relations.

Part 2.

A n n e x I Map of D a n u b e...... (Plate) A n n e x II Traffic Statistics...... 6 9 A n n e x III River Fleets ...... 8 7 A n n e x IV Shipyards ...... 112 Part 3.

A n n e x V Waterway ...... 117 A n n e x VI Customs, Police, etc., Dues...... 163 A n n e x VII Delays at F ro n tiers...... 1 6 6 A n n e x VIII Delays in Operating Vessels...... 1 7 0 A n n e x IX International Danube Commission...... 1 7 4 A n n e x X Summary of Report...... 1 83 PART 1.

THE REPORT. I.

INTRODUCTION.

The Genoa Conference, held in May 1920, decided that enquiries should be undertaken from time to time into the state of communications and means of transport in Europe, and, by a resolution subsequently accepted by the Council and the Assembly of the League of Nations, entrusted to the competent organisations of the League the task of examining from time to time the progress achieved in carrying this work into effect. The League’s Advisory and Tech­ nical Committee for Communications and Transit therefore requested me to make an enquiry into the present position of inland navigation in Europe, with particular reference to the Rhine and the Danube, from the technical and, more particularly, from the commercial and admi­ nistrative point of view. In undertaking this work, I was fortunate enough to secure the assistance of Major Brehon Somervell, of the Corps of Engineers of the United States Army. He secured leave of absence from his duties in the Army, and has devoted five months continuously to the detailed study of the problems arising in this enquiry. As a matter of convenience, this report is confined to the Danube. A separate report is submitted as to the Rhine. In March, April, May and June, Major Somervell made visits to all of the Danube countries, inspected the Danube from Ratisbon to Sulina, and familiarised himself with the technical, commercial and administrative problems involved, conferring at length with representatives of the various Governments and shipping interests. In the latter part of June and in July I visited, in company with Major Somervell, all of the Danube countries, and made a trip on the Danube from Vienna to Sulina and return, con­ ferring with governmental, commercial and shipping interests. All these interests have made special efforts to submit the information called for and have expressed most cordial and sympathetic interest in the purposes of the enquiry. At the outset, I wish to say that the general conditions of Danube navigation, as well as of the Danube countries, appear to have made marked and favourable progress since 1920 and 1921, in both of which years I made extended trips on the Danube in connection with my work as Arbitrator of Questions of River Shipping under the Peace Treaties. There is attached hereto as Annex I a map of the Danube and the riparian States. For the convenience of those not having time to study the report in detail, a summary is attached, as Annex X, stating briefly the general effect of the report’s treatment of most of the important topics.

II.

PAST AND PRESENT UTILISATION OF THE RIVER.

Freight Traffic. No complete statistics of Danube traffic have ever been kept and comparison of post-war and pre-war traffic is extremely difficult. However, the principal navigation companies have submitted information showing the freight traffic carried by them for certain years within the period from 1911 to 1924. While — 12 —

the information thus obtained is not in all respects complete and discloses various discrepancies useful estimates are deducible for the years 1923 and 1924. The various Governments also furnished traffic information pursuant to such requests but the figures of the Governments, not being in agreement as to the traffic interchanged between their countries, could not be combined into a general statement. These divergencies were doubtless due partly to the employment of different theories in compilation, and partly to the absence of any plan for permanent and comprehensive Danube statistics in most of the countries. In the Arbitration under the Peace Treaties in respect of questions arising as to Danube shipping1, an agreed estimate was obtained of the normal annual pre-war freight traffic for use in determining the legitimate needs of the respective Danube countries for tugs and barges. In several of the pre-war years the traffic had been subjected to abnormal influences, parti­ cularly wars in Eastern Europe, so that it was agreed that the traffic for the year 1911 might be accepted as the normal basis of pre-war traffic, and the agreed estimate was for that year. The traffic for 1911 was stated with reference to the post-war boundaries of the present countries. The figures arrived at, as above stated, for 1911, 1923 and 1924 respectively are shown in detail in Table 1 of Annex II, the totals (which, however, are only approximations) being as follows : 1911 ...... 6,802,639 tons. 1923 ...... 3,923,919 » 1924 ...... 3,757,010 »

The freight traffic for the first half of 1925 has greatly increased and is about 150 percent of the traffic for the corresponding half of 1924. This is derived from information obtained from the principal navigation companies 2 indicating that their freight business for the first six months of 1925 was the following percentage of their business for the first six months of 1924 :

Per cent Bavarian Lloyd (on basis of ton-kilom eters)...... 118 -D. D.- - S. - G. ( ) 126 Czechoslovak Co. ( ) ...... 158 M. F. T. R. ( ) ...... 164 S. H. S. Syndicate ( ) ...... 230 N. F. R. (on basis of tons)...... 94

The principal explanation of this satisfactory situation is that there has been in the first half of 1925 a very large Danube movement of maize from the Kingdom of the , and Slovenes (which will hereinafter be referred to as the S. H. S. State) to Braila and Galatz for export overseas — largely to English and North Sea ports. Most of the shipping interests on the Danube appear to have participated in this movement, except the Greek interests, whose barges generally have a draught too great to carry traffic advantageously above the Iron Gates. Further analysis shows that according to Table I, Annex 11, the exports, imports and internal traffic of the respective riparian States were as follows :

1911 1923 1924 Germany : Tons Tons Tons E x p o r t ...... 128,233 330,854 223,450 I m p o r t ...... 246,415 175,184 119,993 Internal ...... 16,000 4,124 8,936 T o ta l...... 390,648 510,162 352,379

1 The writer was the Arbitrator. His determination of these questions bears date August 2nd, 1921. 2 The description of the navigation companies here referred to will be found in Annex III referred to below. — 13 —

1911 J923 1924 Austria : Tons Tons Tons E x p o r t...... 537,000 163,294 155,251 Import ...... 982,000 505,911 579,635 I n t e r n a l ...... 204,000 42,692 58,504

T o ta l...... 1,723,000 711,897 793,390

Hungary : E x p o r t ...... 945,000 254,855 325,152 I m p o r t...... 1,090,000 319,218 332,551 Internal ...... 377,000 225,618 147,718

T o ta l...... 2,413,000 799,691 805,421

Czechoslovakia : E x p o r t...... 91,000 117,341 117,815 I m p o r t...... 85,060 45,549 257,761 I n t e r n a l ...... 6,000 7,607 13,193

T o ta l...... 182,060 170,497 388,769

S. H. S. Stale : E x p o r t ...... 1,261,000 192,841 353,296 I m p o r t...... 528,164 225,663 220,360 Internal ...... 500,000 968,753 1,016,183

T o ta l...... 2,289,164 1,387,257 1,589,839

Bulgaria : E x p o r t...... 376,579 82,938 87,112 I m p o r t...... 242,000 126,833 164,946 Internal ...... 27,000 27,308 37,757

T o ta l ...... 645,579 237,079 289,815

Roumania : E x p o r t...... 384,827 360,098 565,036 Im p o r t...... 550,000 103,866 152,866 Internal ...... 1,948,000 1,145,593 647,607

T o ta l...... 2,882,827 1,609,557 1,365,509

Tables 2 and 3, Annex II, further analyse this information for 1923 and 1924 and show the traffic carried by vessels under the flags of the various interested countries. These tables show, among other things, the total tons carried under the various flags in 1923 and 1924, as follows : — 14

Traffic Carried under Various Flags. 1923 1924 Tons Tons G e r m a n ...... • 212,970 219,235 A u s tria n ...... 700,870 825,196 Czechoslovak ...... 106.092 109,412 H u n g a ria n ...... 416,319 469,876 S. H. S...... 1,156,773 1,283,557 Roumanian (N. F. R. and S. R. D . ) ...... 481,259 399,479 B u lg a r ia n ...... (No figures) (No figures) Flags not specified above carrying Roumanian internal traffic (Roumanian, French and Greek) 849,636 450,255 3,923,919 3,757,010 The Danube has never had a traffic development approaching that enjoyed by the Rhine. Although the navigable length of the Danube is 2,380 kins., and that of the Rhine only 828 kms., yet the normal pre-war traffic on the Rhine was approximately 57,500,000 tons, while the normal pre-war traffic on the Danube was approximately 6,800,000 tons. The information as to the Rhine, shown in Table 4 of Annex II hereto, is taken from Table I of Appendix I of the Arbitrator’s Determination, bearing date January 8th, 1921, in the matter of the cessions by Germany to France under Article 357 of the Treaty of Versailles. This Table shows the traffic for the year 1913 which the two Governments agreed, in the arbitration proceedings referred to, was a normal pre-war year. The very wide disparity between the traffic of the two rivers is largely accounted for by the enormous Rhine traffic in coal from the Ruhr and in ore to the Ruhr. There is, of course, no similar traffic of correspondingly relative importance on the Danube. It is also true that the territory served by the Danube does not in general have the intense industrial develop­ ment which is characteristic of the territory served by the Rhine.

Passenger Traffic. Data are not available to give an accurate comparison between the amount of passenger traffic before and after the war, but a comparison can be made showing the pre-war and post­ war services provided by the larger navigation companies. This information covers practically the entire service, except that maintained as a very local or ferry business, and is shown on the chart and in tables in Annex II. From these it appears there is not, and has not been, any passenger service on the German Danube ; in Austria, Czechoslovakia and Hungary the services are greater now than before the war ; in the S. H. S. State, the service is materially less than in pre-war times ; and in Roumania the service is very much less than before the war ; in Bulgaria there is one more service per week between and Rustchuk than there was before the war. It will be noted that from Mohacs to Giurgiu there are two services per week of the Austrian company which are not allowed to carry passengers between S. H. S. ports or between Roumanian ports ; and that between Vidin and Rustchuk there are eight services per week of the Austrian and Hungarian companies between Bulgarian ports, which are not allowed to carry passengers between Roumanian ports. In this section there is only one service weekly in each direction between Roumanian ports. Annex II contains also certain other tables giving information as to freight traffic and passenger traffic ; this information, although incomplete, nevertheless appears to be worth preserving. — 15 —

III.

THE RIV ER FLEETS. THEIR NATIONALITY AND CAPACITY.

Before the war Danube transportation was largely in the hands of the Austrian and Hun­ garian companies. At that time the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy extended from Passau for a distance of 1,272 kilometers along the Danube to a point below Orsova. Roumanian and Greek interests carried a very important trafiic below the Iron Gates. Serbian partici­ pation in navigation was comparatively small and Bulgaria has never had an important part in Danube navigation. The Bavarian Lloyd was organised just before the war and the Siid- Deutsche, although under the German flag, was owned by the Austrian Government. The changes brought about by the war have been far-reaching. The Austrian and Hun­ garian interests lost large amounts of shipping to Roumania and the S. H. S. State and also to France as a result of seizures, and to Czechoslovakia as a result of repartition under the Peace Treaties. The Roumanian shipping interests have greatly increased. Before the war had a very small tleet, but now the S. H. S. Syndicate owns the largest tonnage on the river. An important Czechoslovak navigation concern has come into existence ; there are also new’ French and Dutch companies, and the German company, the Bavarian Lloyd, has grown substantially since the war. Annex III hereto attached shows a list of what is understood to be approximately the status of shipping on the Danube, in point of ownership, nationality and capacity, and may be sum­ marised as to flags and capacity as follows :

Passenger Tugs, Capacity Flag steamers, H.P. oi Barges H.P. and Tanks. Tons G e r m a n ...... None 25,000 215,265 A u stria n ...... 18,040 25,170 265,725 Czechoslovak...... 738 5,987 82,544 H u n g a ria n ...... 11,574 18,159 169,163 S. H. S...... 9,760 34,243 475,679 Roumanian ...... 7,750 26,215 449,863 B u lg a r ia n ...... None 1,440 13,772 French ...... None 8,970 70,976 Ita lia n ...... None 650 13,950 D u tc h ...... None 700 7,624 E n g l is h ...... None 150 5,025 B e l g ia n ...... None 900 6,725 Greek ...... None 6,720 168,485 Annex III also shows in a series of tables detailed information in respect of the principal navigation concerns operating on the Danube, as to their corporate structure and proprietorship, as to the size and character of their respective fleets and as to their agencies and their landing facilities. Greek interests own and operate extensive tonnage on the Danube below the Iron Gates, but the holdings are scattered among many owners, generally individuals. Numerous Greek owners have only barges and employ the tugs of others (generally also Greek) to perform the towing service. An interesting and promising recent development has been the use of self-propelled barges, which maintain regular services and seem specially adapted for carrying less-than-cargo lots and also crude oil and its derivatives. The post-war distribution of shipping is such that the Danube traffic is now divided among a considerably greater number of important shipping interests than was the case before the war, each with its separate organisation, facilities in the important ports where it does business and agencies in these ports. In administration and operation there is consequently much duplication of effort. — 16

It is also true that the utilisation of the Danube has taken on a much more international aspect than formerly. Before the war, Austrian and Hungarian concerns were the principal factors, with Roumanian and Greek interests carrying important traffic below the Iron Gates. Now we have as important factors Austrian and Hungarian concerns (with substantialBritisli interests therein), German, Czechoslovak, S. H. S., Roumanian, Greek, French and Dutch and all of them except the Greek concerns seem to be active above, as well as below, the Iron Gates. Annex IV hereto attached shows the facilities along the Danube for construction and repair of boats. The total Danube fleet is about 25 per cent larger than in 1911 and the port facilities and shop facilities are either the same as or more than before the war (except perhaps as to pontons). But the Danube traffic has diminished in a very substantial proportion. These considerations emphasise the importance of availing of every opportunity to utilise the existing material to the best advantage and to avoid waste of capital and labour. There are now the following important evidences of co-operation : The companies in the S. H. S. State and in the countries further up the river have formed a “ cartel ”, which has adopted a set of uniform rates and have agreed to furnish mutual assis­ tance in a very limited field. The Bavarian Lloyd and the Czechoslovak Company, it is under­ stood, have a much more intimate connection. In addition to jointly operating self-propelled barges, their agreement includes a general reciprocal use of tug-boats and the joint use of certain port facilities. There is no agreement as to uniform rates that includes the navigation concerns whose boats are registered in Roumania. An attempt to form among them such a cartel has not yet met with success. It is understood, however, that a definite agreement has been reached among those concerns (but not including the Roumanian State concern) for the division of the downstream traffic in Roumania’s cereals which are destined for export overseas. Accord­ ing to this agreement, each company is supposed to participate in the traffic in the ratio of its total tonnage to the combined tonnage of all the companies.

IV. SCHEME OF ANALYSIS.

There are many causes contributing to the falling off in Danube traffic since the war. It is important to analyse these causes at least into general classes, so as to give due effect to each, and so as to avoid attributing to some particular cause an effect really attributable to some entirely distinct sort of cause. As a matter of convenience these causes may be classified for purposes of this discussion as follows : (1) A great deal of the diminution in traffic is due to the economic depression growing out of the post-war conditions. The influence of this economic depression would only gradually disappear, even if all other interferences with navigation were removed. One of its elements deserving special mention is that the post-war developments appear to have reduced very considerably the amount of cereals produced in Roumania and available for export — a matter of great importance to Danube traffic. (2) Separate attention should be given to the new post-war practices in Roumania and the S. H. S. State whereby each of these States excludes foreign shipping from certain “ territorial waters ” which are tributaries of the Danube, and also from engaging in “ cabotage ” or strictly internal traffic on the Danube. These practices operate to shift to Roumanian and S. H. S. navigation concerns important traffic which, before the war, was largely carried by the Austrian and Hunagarian interests. But it is also claimed that the new practices discourage Danube navigation as a whole and diminish the aggregate traffic on the river. — 17 —

(3) But aside from the above-mentioned factors, there are numerous conditions which, it is claimed, interfere with Danube navigation and discourage and diminish Danube traffic. Consideration of these claims involves : ( a) Examination of the physical condition of the river channel, and of what should be done for its improvement ; ( b) Consideration of the formalities imposed directly and indirectly upon oanube traffic at the numerous frontiers and elsewhere ; (c) Consideration of the facilities afforded and practices applied in the various ports ; (d) Reference to the railway policies of the various States from the standpoint of the effect upon Danube traffic ; (e) Consideration of the question whether the navigation companies can put themselves in a better position to retain and build up Danube traffic by finding addi­ tional ways of increasing their own efficiency or by co-operating more closely with each other to avoid waste of capital or labour, and to promote economy and to attract new sorts of traffic. In addition, a few other related topics will call for consideration. Before referring to general economic conditions, it is desirable to mention the general characteristics of Danube traffic.

V.

THE GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF DANUBE TRAFFIC.

Braila and Galatz, respectively 171 kms. and 150 kms. from Sulina, the mouth of the river, are the usual points of transfer between sea-going steamers and the Danube barges. At times, though not so much as before the war, river barges go down to Sulina for transhipment to or from ocean vessels. The portion of the Danube below Braila is known as the maritime Danube. The traffic carried is for import and export overseas. Outbound it consists largely of cereals and other agricultural products from Roumania, Bulgaria, and at times from the S. H. S. State, and of lumber and petroleum and its derivatives from Roumania. The inbound traffic consists largely of manufactured articles and miscellaneous merchandise brought by sea from western Europe and destined for Roumania and Bulgaria, and also to some extent of English coal and of petroleum from Russia. In addition to the transhipments to and from river-boats, the sea-going ships, at Braila and Galatz, receive from and deliver to the railways a substantial tonnage. The Danube above Braila and Galatz is known as the fluvial Danube. Much of the sur­ plus cereals and other agricultural products in Roumania and Bulgaria move down the Danube to Braila and Galatz for exportation, and the same is true at times of considerable traffic from the S. H. S. State, notably in the past few months as to maize. Ordinarily also the cereals and other agricultural products of Hungary and the S. H. S. State, as well as a portion of the same products of Roumania and Bulgaria, move upstream to supply the demand in Germany, Austria and Czechoslovakia. The downstream traffic nor­ mally consists largely of manufactured articles made in Germany, Austria and Czechoslovakia and, to some extent, in Hungary. Of course, there are many other sorts of traffic of substantial importance ; large quantities of wood are moving on certain parts of the river, and there is some coal coming from Upper Silesia and also from mines on the river. At present, as well as in the past, the principal Danube traffic consists of agricultural pro­ ducts. When there are good crops in the Danube countries, there is a good traffic on the Danube, both in handling these crops and in handling the general business, which is good when the crops are good. The reverse is the case when crops are poor. — 18 —

VI.

GENERAL ECONOMIC CONDITIONS GROWING OUT OF POST WAR POLICIES.

To a large extent the post-war diminution in Danube traffc is due to the post-war dimi­ nution in production and commerce which has characterised most, if not all, of Euorpe. The general impairment of purchasing power on the part of the populations of Europe, the scar­ city of capital for industry and commerce, the extraordinarily heavy expenditures which the States were compelled to incur, the extremely heavy taxation, the delay in getting State bud­ gets balanced, the grave business uncertainty due to pronounced fluctuations in the currencies of Europe, have operated in the Danube countries, as elsewhere, to discourage production and commerce. The same may be said of those kindred phenomena, the import and export prohibitions of some of the European States seeking to meet the domestic crises which grew out of the chaotic conditions following the war. Happily, these import and export prohibitions are being progressively removed. But, in addition to these influences which have been so widespread in Europe, the breaking up of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy has introduced economic problems especially acute for the Danube countries. Before the war all the different parts of the country along the Danube from Passau to a point below Orsova enjoyed with each other a condition of substantial free­ dom of trade. Industries developed in advantageous localities, relying upon the fact that over a wide extent of Central Europe raw materials could be obtained and finished products could be distributed without crossing any frontier. For example, this was true of the varied industries in what is now Czechoslovakia. It was true of the flour-mills at Budapest, which had became the second flour-mill city in the world, having an enormous extent of cereal acreage from which to draw and a wide range of customers to supply without crossing any frontiers. The cutting up of this single Customs tariff area so that it is now divided among seven different States, each politically independent of the other and desiring to be economically and industrially independent of all the world, has fundamentally changed the economic situation. Raw mate­ rials are separated from the former factories, which in turn are separated from their former customers. Of practically all of these States it may be said that each is trying to exclude other countries from its home market so as to preserve its existing industries and to build up new ones to supply its inhabitants to the extent that they have heretofore drawn their supplies from industries beyond the present boundaries. For example, Hungary is developing textile mills to supply its inhabitants, who formerly patronised the textile mills which are now in Czechoslovakia and Austria. The result is that a condition of very high protective tariffs (being somewrhat mitigated from time to time in special directions by commercial treaties) has developed in this vast area where free trade prevailed before the war. For the time being, this new condition is seriously affecting the volume of traffic. Of course, much traffic continues to move because the new policy of protectionism cannot instantly substitute local production for foreign production. What the future result of the policy will be it is impossible to tell. For the time being, however, and even in advance of complete effect being given to the policies of excluding foreign products, those policies appear to be one of the important causes operating against the reappearance on the Danube up to the present of the volume of traffic it enjoyed before the war. No doubt these highly protectionist policies will be affected substantially by the commercial treaties. Such treaties may in themselves effect a substantial diversion of transport traffic from one transportation route to another. For example, it is represented that commercial treaties which have been negotiated by Austria and Czechoslovakia with Italy and Spain have resulted in Italian and Spanish wines partly replacing Hungarian wines in Austria and Czecho­ slovakia, thus affecting adversely an item of Danube traffic. The effect of commercial treaties among the Danube States should have a favourable influence in increasing commercial intercourse among them and consequently in increasing Danube traffic. Although negotiation of numerous commercial treaties between Danube countries is in progress, comparatively few have been completed and put into effect. The — 19 — prompt conclusion and application of these commercial treaties on the part of the Danube c o u n tr ie s will, it is believed, greatly promote Danube navigation. There is another economic factor of most elusive character which has, and is likely to have, a continuing importance with respect to the Danube traffic. That factor is the competition of other trade routes. It is generally believed that one of the results of the war has been to give industries in western and northern Europe a better opportunity to compete with industries in central Europe for the trade of eastern Europe. To whatever extent this is the case, it is an influence adverse to the Danube, because traffic from eastern and northern Europe will move by sea, whereas traffic from central Europe could and did move, at least in substantial part, by the Danube. Again, the extremely low rates of ocean transportation seem to be having, and to be likely to continue to have, important influences on Danube traffic. For example, this condition may give cereals arriving through North Sea ports such advantages as to exclude grain coming by the Danube from portions of Germany hitherto supplied by such Danube grain. Again, the extremely low ocean rates from Braila and Galatz to North Sea ports appear to have the effect of bringing about a movement of cereals downstream to Braila and Galatz for ocean transport, whereas such cereals would normally move up the Danube. This has been particularly true during the last three or four months in the case of S. H. S. maize. When we consider th at the downstream movement of cereals on the Danube is less costly than the upstream movement, it may well be that there will be a pronounced tendency towards a greater downstream movement of Danube cereals in the future than there has been in the past. The movement downstream to Braila and Galatz for export has always been the normal movement for the great bulk of Roumanian cereals which have been exported. Again, rail competition, or rail-water competition, may have an increasing adverse effect upon Danube traffic. It is understood that Czechoslovakia and Italy, acting in conjunction with the other States interested in the railway from Czechoslovakia to Trieste, have put into effect extremely low rates calculated to encourage the movement of traffic via Trieste which would otherwise move via the Danube. It is understood that, prior to the war, in some of the States, notably in Hungary, the railway policy definitely sought to take away traffic from the Danube. What the policy of Hungary and other States will be in this direction in the future remains to be seen. It is evident, however, that Danube navigation may suffer substantial injury from railway competition. In any particular Danube State there is danger that the railways will receive more sympathetic consideration than will the transportation on the Danube, as the railways are State owned and operated. As will be pointed out more fully below, the establishment of rail-Danube through freight tariffs and provision for through rail-Danube bills of lading are very greatly in the interest of Danube navigation and, it is believed, in the interest of the various Danube countries.

VII.

ROUMANIAN PRODUCTION OF CEREALS FOR EXPORT.

The correct view' seems to be that the countries of Central Europe are gradually overcoming the handicaps growing out of the war. This view is sustained by the figures given in Annex II. These figures indicate that, except Roumania, the Danube traffic originating in the riparian States other than Roumania, and shipped either to another port in the country of origin or to another Danube country, wras, in the aggregate, about 10 per cent greater in 1924 than in 1923, and hence that much nearer the normal pre-w'ar traffic. On the other hand, Danube traffic originating in Roumania and either shipped to another port in that State or to some other riparian State was nearly 20 per cent less in 1924 than in 1923. This condition has converted into a loss, as compared with 1923, what would otherwise have been a substantial gain in Danube traffic as a whole. — 20 —

The situation of Roumania, in its effect upon Danube traffic, therefore justifies special comment. It appears from Table 1 of Annex II that in 1911 the traffic produced in Roumania and moving to other Roumanian ports, together with the traffic produced in Roumania and moving to ports in other Danube States, was over 34 per cent of the total Danube traffic. What­ ever impairs the productiveness of Roumania is calculated seriously to impair the volume of Danube traffic. The products of Roumania are principally cereals, petroleum and its derivatives, and lumber. By far the most important, from the standpoint of transportation, are the cereals • and it is as to cereals that the conditions still appear to be of a distinctly unfavourable character! It is true that in 1924 the great falling off in the production of cereals was intensified by unusually poor crops. But there is much to indicate that the trouble is of a more fundamental character. The Roumanian authorities furnished, for the purpose of this investigation, estimates of the production and exports of grain before the war for the Old Kingdom and estimates of produc­ tion and exports of grain in 1923 for the present and larger Kingdom. These estimates show : Before the war in the Old Kingdom :

Production of cereals 5.5 million tons E x p o r ts ...... 3.3 » » In 1923, for the present Kingdom : Production of cereals . . 9.1 million tons E x p o r ts ...... 1.7 » »

These estimates indicate that the home consumption of cereals has increased from 2.2 million tons before the war to 7.4 million tons since the war, or an increase of 236%, although the population has increased only 126 per cent. Perhaps this estimate of increased consumption in 1923 is too great. If so, it must be due to the estimate of production in 1923 being too great." The estimate of the small export of cereals in 1923, as compared with the pre-war period, is fully supported by the figures of pre-war and post-war exports supplied by the maritime ports of Braila and Galatz. As to increased home consumption of cereals, one explanation is that the population has come to rely upon the use of white bread to a far greater extent than in the past ; another reason assigned is that some of the new parts of the enlarged Kingdom do not produce as much of the cereal crops as they consume. As to diminished production of cereals, the view has been expressed that the rapid splitting up of large estates in Roumania is operating to bring about a substantially smaller yield of grain because the exertions of the small proprietors of the new estates are less effective than was the management of the large estates before the war. There is also much to indicate that the Roumanian policy as to price control and as to export taxes on cereals have constituted a distinct discouragement to the producer. For example, it appears that the present Rouma­ nian export taxes on cereals are approximately 2,000 lei per ton (about £2), while the present export tax in the S. H. S. State is only about 700 lei per ton. In competition in the world market for the opportunity to sell cereals, it would seem that the Roumanian producer must accept a correspondingly smaller price and that this would discourage his production. The combination of these with perhaps other adverse factors, which are the not unnatural results of the post-war readjustments, had the effect, when the country suffered the misfortune to have a very bad crop in 1924, of bringing about the prohibition of the exportation of wheat ; and it has been stated that Roumania, despite its extraordinary agricultural resources, was compelled to import wheat for its own use. The weather conditions so far have appeared favourable, at least in the western part of Roumania, for the grain crops in the present year, although in the eastern part, especially in Ressarabia, the outlook is not favourable. But it is by no means clear that the other and more fundamental factors operating to discourage production of cereals and to diminish the surplus available for export have been removed. So long as they continue, the effect is likely to be substantially unfavourable upon Danube traffic. It may be added that there appears to be a very important growth in the Roumanian — 21 — exportation of lumber. The principal port for the exportation of lumber overseas is Galatz. The following figures are of interest :

Export of cereals and lumber from Galatz. Cereals Lumber Tons Tons 1911 ...... 424,000 180,000 1923 ...... 245,000 269,000 1924 ...... 277,000 423,000

The greatly increased production and exportation of lumber do not have great significance from the standpoint of Danube traffic because most of the lumber moves by rail to Galatz and Braila and is thence exported overseas. However, a substantial amount of lumber^moves from Galatz up the Danube to Bulgarian ports.

VIII.

THE TERRITORIAL WATERS, ESPECIALLY LX THE S.H.S. STATE

It appears that before the war the general practice was to regard the navigable tributaries of the Danube as open to the boats of all countries. In fact, Austria and Hungary were the principal carriers of the traffic of those tributaries, especially traffic moving from them to points on the Danube or vice versa.

The Save. The Save, a tributary of great importance, flows for a long distance in an easterly direction through the S. H. S. State, emptying into the Danube at Belgrade. Since the Save provides only the S.H. S. State with access to the sea, it is clear that the Peace Treaties do not include the Save as an international part of the Danube river system 1, nor does the Danube Statute include the Save as part of the internationalised river system to which the Statute applies. The Save is thus a part of the territorial waters of the S.H. S. State, which now reserves to its own navigation interests the traffic to and from ports on the Save, even though such traffi moves between a Danube port in another count y and a port on the Save. This condition constitutes a substantial change in the navigation situation on the Danube. The importance of this Save traffic is suggested by the following figures supplied by the D .D .S.G . and the M.F.T.R.

Save Traffic handled in 1911.

To or from Danube Save local traffic Ton; Tons D. D. S. G...... 184,479 108,786 M. F. T. R ...... 42,098 19,494 T o t a l ...... 226,577 128,280 or a grand total of 354,857 tons of traffic.

1 Article 275 of the and corresponding Articles in the other Peace Treaties declare the Danube to be an international stream from to its mouth, “ together with all navigable parts of this river system which naturally provide more than one State with access to the sea ”. — 22 —

The Bega and the Canals. Other important waterways to be considered in this connection are the following : 1. The King Peter Canal, formerly the Francis Canal, extending from the Danube ports of Baja in Hungary1 and of Bezdan in the S. H. S. State in a south-westerly direction to Stari Becij, a point on the Tisza also in the .S.H. S. State. 2. The Prince Alexander Canal, formerly the Francis Joseph Canal, extending in a southerly direction from Nali Stapar, a point on the King Peter Canal to on the Danube. 3. The Bega River, extending from a point above Temesvar in Roumania to Tit el in the S. H. S. State, where il empties into the Tisza a few kilometers above the point at which the latter joins the Danube. The King Peter and the Prince Alexander Canals are owned and operated by a company which performs the towage service and which charges dues for the pa: sage of barges through the canals. At present the company is an S. H. S. corporation, but its stock is chiefly held in Great Britain. These three waterways run through an exceedingly fertile region wrhich produces large amounts of cereals. The S.H.S. authorities estimate that in 1923 there originated on these waterways the following traffic : Tons Bega R i v e r ...... 210,200 King Peter C anal...... 65,900 Prince Alexander C an al ...... 3,900 The D.D.S. G. and the M. F. T. R. advise that in 1911 they handled on these waterways the following traffic : Local traffic Traffic to or from Danube Tons Tons D. D. S. G. : Bega R iver...... 1,250 146,550 The two can als ...... 700 10,300 M. F. T. R. : Bega R i v e r ...... 140 52,575 The two can als ...... — 10,086 2,090 219,511 There seems to be no claim that the Danube Statute includes these three waterways or any of them in its definition of the internationalised river system. As to the Bega, however, it is suggested, on behalf of interests outside the S. H. S. State, that Article 275 of the Treaty of Trianon and the corresponding articles of the other Peace Treaties are still in force and that they declare that the Danube is an international stream from Ulm to its mouth “ together with all navigable parts of this river system which naturally provide more than one State with access to the sea with or without transhipment from one vessel to another ” ; that the Bega naturally provides more than one State with access to the sea ; and that the fact that the Bega is provided with a system of locks and does not affect the fact that, in the sense of the articles of the Peace Treaties, the Bega “ naturally ” provides both Roumania and the S. H. S. State with access to the sea and hence is an interna­ tional part of the Danube river system. The S. H. S. State and Roumania deny that these arguments supply any basis for treating as internationalised any waterway not included in the definition contained in the Danube Statute and they further deny that the Bega “ natu­ rally ” provides Roumania and the S.H.S. State with access to the sea. There thus arises a fundamental issue as to the right of the S.H.S. State and Roumania under the Peace Treaties and other conventions. This question of principle, unless now resolved by some new accord, can be disposed of only by resort to the methods of adjudication provided in the Peace Treaties or other conventions. Unless and until such a decision to the effect that the Bega is international shall be pro­ nounced by some tribunal, by whose decision the States involved have agreed to be bound, it

1 Part in Hungary only a “ feeder canal ” and now out of use. — 23 — seems clear that the present status as to the Bega will continue, except to the extent that either Roumania or the S. H. S. State shall agree to make other arrangements, general or special.

The Question of According, without Prejudice to the Principle, Access to Territorial Waters in cases where the States’ Interest would be Promoted. Aside from the question of principle, the S. H. S. representatives insist that there are, in fact, strong reasons of State policy why the traffic in the territorial waters should be reserved for the enjoyment of S. H. S. navigation interests and that the S. H. S. State does so reserve it. The S. H. S. representatives say that their State must not be dependent upon foreign naviga­ tion interests and that the only w^ay to avoid this condition of dependence is for the State to see that its own shipping interests are developed and strengthened ; that if the foreign shipping companies, many of which are much older, stronger and more experic need than the S. H. S. shipping interests, were to be permitted to share in this traffic, they would probably get such a large part of the traffic as to weaken seriously the home shipping interests. The foreign shipping interests insist, however, that the S. H. S. State really penalises its own subjects by denying to them the right to avail themselves of the shipping facilities of the other navigation companies on the Danube, and claim that, on account of the policy of the S. H. S. State, its subjects at times suffer from a seriously insufficient service because the S. H. S. shipping interests cannot always meet the demands for shipment in the busy seasons of the year. It has been stated that at times the producers of cereals along the Bega have suffered loss because of delay in moving their crops and that this would not have occurred if the foreign shipping companies had been permitted to participate in moving the traffic. Some of the foreign shipping representatives have also stated that in one year a considerable part of the prune crop on the Save was lost because of the inability of the domestic shipping interests to move the traffic promptly. The representatives of the S. H. S. State claim that the handling of all this traffic has been greatly improved but further say that, even if there be inconvenience of this character, it is still true that the broader and more important policy of the State, looking to the future, is to build up its own shipping interests. However, the practical question still remains whether, from time to time, the S. H. S. State may not find it to its own advantage, while maintaining in the fullest sense its stand on the question of principle, to make exceptions to its practice with respect to its territorial waters, if it becomes convinced that its people would derive advantage therefrom without weakening its own navigation interests. The S. H. S. State would have the matter in its own hands as to the times when and the conditions on which foreign companies might be permitted to parti­ cipate in emergencies in handling this traffic. The State could exact such compensations as would avoid any weakening of its shipping interests.

The Practical Situation as to Roumanian part of the Bega. Roumania is as positive as is the S. H. S. State on the principle involved as to the Bega, but has found it expedient, as a matter of temporary practice, to permit foreign companies to carry traffic to and from its portion of the Bega. Roumania requires that a special permit be obtained in respect of each trip but says that this permit is now issued very promptly upon application at Rucharest to the Director-General of Ports and Communications by Water. The S. H. S. State, while permitting the barges of other States to go to and from the Rou­ manian part of the Bega, requires that these barges shall be towed through the S. H. S. waters by tug boats of S. H. S. companies. The foreign shipping companies state that he S. H. S. State requires that permits shall be obtained from it for any such movement of barges, but the S. H. S. authorities advise that such permits are no longer required. In view of this declara­ tion of the S. H. S. authorities, it is suggested that if any local functionary should continue to insist upon permits, the matter can probably by cleared up by appeal to the authorities at Belgrade. Of course, in the matter of supplying domestic shipping to render the service on the Bega, Roumania and the S. H. S. State are not in the same situation. In order for the Roumanian boats to serve the Roumanian part of the Bega, they would have to operate almost wholly — 24 outside of Roumania and out of touch with the principal operations of the Roumanian fleets ; whereas S. H. S. boats can serve the S. H. S. part of the Bega and remain in direct touch with thé ordinary operations of the S. H. S. fleets. The Roumanian attitude, however, indicates that arrangements with foreign shipping are practicable, whenever desirable in the interest of the movement of the traffic, without any impairment of the principle.

IX.

THE {RIGHT OF A STATE TO «EXCLUDE ABSOLUTELY ALL FOREIGN INTERESTS FROM ITS CABOTAGE OB STBICTLY INTEBNAL TBAFFIC.

Prior to the war, this question seems to have had no practical bearing. The active com­ panies, principally of Austria and Hungary, appear to have handled without question internal traffic in each of the States along the Danube. As a result of the Peace Treaties and the Danube Statute, and the practical construction placed thereon by the S. H. S. State and Roumania. a fundamental change ha; come about. Each of these two S ates claims and exercises the right to exclude navigation interest of all other States from any participation whatever in any form of its cabotage or interna' traffic on the Danube.

The Question of Principle.

The specific provisions of the Danube Statute on this subject are the following :

Article 22.

On the international waterway of the Danube, the transport of goods and passen­ gers between the ports of separate riparian States as well as between the ports of the same State is unrestricted and open to all flags on a footing of perfect equality. Nevertheless, a regular service for passengers or for national or nationalised goods between the ports of one and the same State may only be carried out by a vessel under a foreign flag in accordance with the national laws and in agreement with the autho­ rities of the Riparian States concerned.

|Ad Article 22 (Final Protocol). (a) By the traffic referred to in the second paragraph of Article 22 shall be under­ stood any public service for the transport of p tssengers and goods organised under a foreign flag between the ports of one and the same State, when that service is carried on sufficiently regularly, uninterruptedly and in volume sufficient to influence unfavour­ ably, to the same extent as regular lines properly so called, the^ national interests .of the State within which it is carried on. The effect of the position of Roumania and the S. H. S. State seems to be : (1) That the provision of the first paragraph of Article 22 of the Danube Statute that the transport of goods and passengers between ports of the same State is unre­ stricted and open to all flags on a footing of perfect equality is entirely nullified, in the case of regular service for passengers or goods, by the second paragraph of that article, so that Article 22 as a whole merely means that any riparian State has an absolute right to prohibit all regular service for passengers or good ; between its own ports to all foreign interests ; — 25 —

(2) That in view of the Final Protocol’s addendum (a) to Article 22, any sort of service is to be treated as a regular service. One of the Roumanian officials suggests, moreover, that internal traffic on the Danube in any one State is strictly analogous to coastwise maritime traffic, and that Roumania has as much right to exclude absolutely all foreign shipping interests from any participation in its internal traffic on the Danube as it has to effect a similar exclusion of foreign interests in respect of maritime coasting traffic. Formerly Roumania gave permission from time to time to certain foreign interests, particularly French and Greek, to handle internal traffic on a particular trip. French and Greek interests both claim that Roumania no longer gives even these occasional permissions. Germany, Austria and Hungary, and also France and Greece, complain of the total exclu­ sion of their shipping interests from cabotage in the S. H. S. State and Roumania. Suggestions have been made to the effect th at : 1. The true principles of treaty interpretation require the first and second para­ graphs of Article 22 to be so interpreted, in respect of transport between ports of the same State, as to give both these paragraphs substantial and consistent effect, in accord­ ance with the general spirit of the Danube Statute ; and 2. In any event a refusal to permit foreign shipping interests to participate in any service between ports of the same State, although the service is not regular or the equivalent of a regular service, is inconsistent with the second paragraph of Article 22 and the addendum above quoted. Article 38 of the Danube Statute provides that all questions relating to the interpretation of the Danube Statute shall be submitted to the International Commission of the Danube, and provides for appeal from the decisions of that Commission. It does not appear that the method of decision thus pointed out in the Danube Statute has been resorted to. Unless and until that method shall be resorted to and shall result in a decision adverse to Roumania and the S. H. S. State, it is reasonable to assume that those two States will maintain, firmly, in prin ciple, their present position.

The Question of Permitting, without Prejudice to the Principle, Participation in Cabotage if Advantageous to the State. S. H. S. officials insist that it is the Government’s duty to maintain its present practice in order to avoid dependence upon foreign shipping interests and to build up its own shipping interests. These representatives frankly admit th at this policy may result in their nationals along the Danube receiving less frequent and convenient service in respect of local shipments than they would enjoy if they were free to employ for such traffic the boats of all navigation companies operating on the Danube. But these representatives say, nevertheless, that the greater and more important interest for the S. H. S. State is to build up the S. H. S. shipping interests on the Danube, not for the benefit of their stockholders, but for the benefit of the larger and more permanent interests of the State itself. Germany, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Bulgaria now make it a practice to allow, on a basis of reciprocity, participation in their cabotage to shipping interests of other States. However, the interests of these countries are substantially different from those of Roumania and the S. H. S. State. Bulgaria has no important navigation interest, and so has a natural desire to encourage foreign services between her ports. Neither Austria, Czechoslovakia, Germany nor Hungary has anything like as much internal traffic along the Danube as is possessed by either Roumania or the S. H. S. State. It is to be assumed that from time to time questions will arise as to the extent to which either Roumania or the S. H. S. State may find it in its interest to give permission for specified foreign participation in its cabotage to the extent that such permission may promote the State’s own interest. Any such question will probably present two aspects : 1. Will it injure domestic shipping ? 2. Will it promote the public convenience ? — 26 —

As to injuring domestic shipping, some of the foreign shipping interests have indicated willingness to divide any revenues derived by them from cabotage with the domestic shipping concerns. In this manner it would seem that a way would be open to secure protection against injury to the domestic shipping interests. As to promotion of the public convenience, the question of improvement in the service for the benefit of nationals of the particular State calls for comment. Chart 10, Annex II, hereto brings out the much greater passenger service enjoyed by the nationals of Bulgaria, which permits foreign companies to engage in cabotage, than is enjoyed by the nationals of Roumania, which does not permit such participation. For example, between Vidin and Rustchuk in Bulgaria there are eight passenger services in each direction per week, because foreign companies are permitted to engage in this local traffic, while for the correspond­ ing part of the opposite Roumanian shore there is only one passenger service in each direction per week. It would seem that the convenience of Roumanian nationals along the Danube would be greatly promoted by additional boat services. The map indicates that the railways are so located that important places on the Danube in Roumania do not enjoy direct railway commu­ nication. For example, while it takes only two hours to go from Corabia to Turnu Magurele by boat, it would seem to require sixteen hours to go by train. In the S. H. S. State, the Chart 10, Annex II, indicates that in general there is a substantial amount of passenger boat service afforded by the S. H. S. shipping interests. However, between Bezdan and the mouth of the Drave there appears to be only one passenger boat service by S. H. S. interests ; between the mouth of the Drave and Bukova only three services per week in each direction ; between Novi Sad and Danube points as far as only three services per week in each direction. It is quite generally believedTthat frequency and convenience of passenger service are calculated to stimulate the amount of passenger travel, and it might well be that carefully safeguarded additions to the passenger boat service in the S. H. S. State and Roumania would so increase the passenger revenues as to afford a greater total revenue for the domestic shipping concerns, especially if the arrangements involved payment to them of a substantial proportion of the profits received by the foreign shipping concerns. Somewhat similar observations are applicable to the frequency of service by the self-pro­ pelled barges which engage in carrying package freight. These barges, which ply up and down the river for foreign companies, might very readily supply valuable additional facilities to the communities along the Danube in S. H. S. State and Roumania, under arrangements which would safeguard the interests which those States naturally feel they must protect to the limit of their treaty rights. It is probably also true at times that communities upon the Danube in the S. H. S. State and Roumania cannot obtain barges for the carriage of cereals and other bulk freight between two points in the same State because of the great strain put upon the domestic concerns at the time. In such circumstances these communities would derive distinct benefit from the ability to obtain, under carefully safeguarded arrangements sanctioned by the State, the use of barges belonging to foreign shipping companies. As to all these sorts of river traffic, it is clear that very little additional cost would be involved if the foreign shipping companies could give internal traffic the benefit of their boats which are already in those waters, and which otherwise would be moving either emp y or only partially loaded in the direction in which such local traffic would move. With such opportu­ nities for economy it would seem there could be many occasions where arrangements could be made which would protect the State’s national policy and greatly promote the convenience of its nationals. The volume of the transportation facilities available and the frequency with which either passenger trips or freight shipment can be made are qui Le generally considered both as aids to progress and as evidences of progress. It teems reasonable to anticipate that, from time to time and under special conditions, Roumania and the S. H. S. State may each find ways in which to utilise in its internal traffic, not only its own companies, but also foreign companies whose boats are at hand immediately available, on terms which will fully safeguard national policy and yet permit agricultural and industrial development, and afford to the world greater evidence that ample transportation facilities are available and are being utilised. — 27 —

Refusal to permit Transportation of Foreign Companies’ Own Employees or Supplies. Some of the foreign navigation companies have stated that the S. H. S. State has carried its policy as to cabotage to the extent of refusing to permit a foreign navigation company to trans­ port its own employees on its owTn boats between two of its own stations in the S. H. S. State, and that Roumania had carried its policy as to cabotage to the extent of refusing 1o permit such a foreign navigation company to transport its own supplies in its own boats between two of its own stations in Roumania. The S. H. S. authorities and the Roumanian authorities indicate that no such policies or practices on their part exist at the present time. If any such policy should be insisted upon by local functionaries in either of these States, it would seem that the matter could be readily cleared up by application to the governmental authorities.

X.

TIIE RIVER’S PHYSICAL PROBLEMS.

There is attached hereto as Annex V a description of the physical aspects of the Danube channel with some histoi ical data theneon, together with some comments upon projects for improvement and also upon what appears to be immediately desirable work. The usual type of barge employed throughout the navigable length of the Danube is a barge of 650 tons capacity. When fully loaded its draught is about i.9 meters. The largest passenger steamers draw from 1.6 to 1.7 meters. The general concept ion has long been th at for satisfactory navigation the river channel should have a minimum depth of two meters at low water. On most parts of the river the depth of the channel does not differ at present from the pre-war depth, but at some critical places is less favourable than before the wrar due to inability to perform currently the ordinary maintenance upon the regulation works. At certain critical points on the river there are many days in a navigation season when the depth is likely to be reduced to considerably less than two meters so as to prevent satis­ factory loading of barges, interfere at some places with the movement of large passenger steamers, and at times the conditions have involved a virtual suspension of navigation in some localities for periods of several days in the midst of the navigation season. These physical obstructions to navigation are particularly serious because the condition of low water is generally experienced in the very midst of the season for moving the crops, which constitute the most important traffic on the Danube. Details concerning these obstructions and the resulting small depth of water are showm in the Annex. The outstanding features may be summarised as follows : The most frequent and extensive lack of the desired depth of two meters appears in the upper part of the river. Between Ratisbon and Vienna. The difficulties here promise to be corrected in part by the Rhine-Main-Danube Canal project. The section between Passau and Hofkirchen will be fully taken care of by the canalised section just above Passau nowr upon the point of completion by the German Government with the approval of the International Danube Commission. The section above Hofkirchen is to be improved by low-water regulation. Experimental sections have already been completed here and it is expected that work will be commenced throughout wrhen the results of the experi­ ments are known and the at Passau is completed. The Annex describes this plan, which is part of the ultimate canal project, whose realisation appears to be quite far in the future. The conditions which prevent the desired realisation of the two-meters depth between Passau and Vienna are of such a nature that they cannot be removed without the — 28 — expenditure of substantial amounts of capital at Branstatt, Aschach and Struden. Apparently the only probability of effecting the desired improvement of the channel at these places is to combine the necessary improvement for navigation purposes with projects for hydro-electric development, as has already been done at Passau. Such a solution appears to deserve serious consideration, promising as it does general economic benefits for Austria in addition to rendering river transport much more regular and efficient. Meanwhile it appears that navigation of this stretch of the river will be subjected from time to time to interferences similar to those which have been experienced in the past. The volume of traffic here is not nearly so great as it is further down the river. In 1923, the last year for which complete figures are available, traffic at and above Linz amounted to 589,752 tons, whereas, on the other side of Vienna, the total traffic below Bratislava amounted to 1,058,056 tons.

Between Vienna and Budapest. Between Vienna and Gonyii the lack of depth has been due to unfavourable conditions in the 71 kilometers extending from Devin to Szap. In 1908, the Hungarian Government began the progressive regulation of the 90 kilometers from Devin to Gonyii. At the beginning of the war 30 kilometers of this had been completed. Of these 30 kilometers, the first 8 are on the frontier between Austria and Czechoslovakia, then 11 y2 kilometers are entirely within Czechoslovakia and then the remaining 10 y2 kilometers are on the frontier between Hungary and Czechoslovakia. The section on which the low-water regulation was not commented, i.e. below those mentioned, is entirely on the frontier between Hungary and Czechoslovakia. Already Austria and Czechoslovakia have co-operated in beginning the removal of the difficulties which have developed on the 8 kilometers of their frontier. The work is nearing completion and will very materially improve navigation. By arrangement between the two States the future dredging, until a new agreement shall be made, will be performed by Czecho­ slovakia. The portion of the river wholly in Czechoslovak territory is not likely to become a limiting factor in the use of the 71 kilometers because the Czechoslovak Government appears to give the matter satisfactory attention. The remaining 51 % kilometers of this stretch which is part of the frontier between Czechoslovakia and Hungary has not yet received the necessary attention, because the two States have so far not been able to put into effect any plan for doing the work. In October 1923, a Protocol was signed agreeing upon the physical difficulties which needed attention and providing for the elaboration within a reasonable time of a project for the execution of the necessary regulation works. It is understood that surveys have now been undertaken to admit of the formulation of the project. It is to be earnestly hoped that the Governments of these two States will press forward this undertaking to completion, because at present it is the obstacle here which constitutes the limiting factor upon navigation between Budapest, Bratislava and Vienna. The volume of traffic in this part of the river is extremely important. The obstructions referred to not only seriously interfere with the economical carriage of frçight traffic but at times prevent, even in the midst of the navigation season, the passage of the large passenger steamers carrying on through service between Vienna and Giurgiu.

Between Budapest, Belgrade and Moldova. The portion of the Danube extending from Budapest to Belgrade and thence to Moldova is one of the busiest portions of the entire river from the standpoint of traffic. While depth conditions are, generally speaking, reasonably favourable, there is a serious limiting factor at Fajz where both banks are in Hungary, and there is a further condition almost as unfavour­ able at the mouth of the Tisza where both banks are in the S. H. S. State. At present the low depth at Fajz is the controlling factor between Moldova or Belgrade and Budapest. As soon as the difficulty at Fajz is removed by Hungary, the difficulty at the mouth of the Tisza will become the limiting factor unless removed by the S. H. S. State. It is understood that each of the two problems is now receiving the attention of the Govern­ ment having jurisdiction. It is to be hoped that the necessary work at each place will be entered upon and brought to a conclusion in the early future. — 29 —

The Iron Gates Section.

The next obstacles of outstanding importance are found in the sector between Moldova and Turnu Severin, or the Iron Gates sector. The difficulties in this sector are and always have been of the most serious character. In the last four years the number of days in the navigation season when barges could not be loaded to 1.6 meters was as follows :

1920 ...... 50 192 1 ...... 131 1922 ...... (not reported) 1923 ...... 49 1924 ...... 23

The Annex points out that the effect of the increased régularisation work further up the river will be to facilitate the rapid running-off of flood waters, so that in unfavourable years the tendency will be to accentuate the lowness of the depth in the Iron Gates section. The burdens of navigation in this stretch are very pronounced. Not only must navigation encounter periods of low water when it is impossible to carry barges loaded to such an extent as to make their movement reasonably profitable, but at practically all times the navigation companies are confronted with the necessity of breaking up and remaking their tows so as to adjust themselves to the varying currents of the river. A tow of normal size can be taken from Turnu Severin to a point just below the Iron Gates. It must then be broken up and an exceedingly powerful tug must be utilised to take one loaded barge of 800 tons cargo, or two of 500 tons cargo, through the Iron Gates. Then the tow may again be reformed in part and taken further up the river, where it must again be broken up to be taken piecemeal through the swift current at Greben. Any project which could provide both a reliable state of water and an approximately uniform and moderate current would very greatly facilitate the efficiency of shipping operations.

Plans for Improvement.

But the problem of improvement is admittedly difficult. The Annex points out the various plans which have been and are being considered. The plans for immense hydro-electric development both at the Iron Gates and at Greben appear to give promise of wonderful results not only to navigation for the benefit of all the Danube States but to the general economic strengthening of Boumania and the S. H. S. State, (a) provided a satisfactory market can be assured for the electricity which would be produced, and ( b) provided capital can be obtained upon reasonable terms, this depending upon the commercial and technical soundness of the project and upon the necessary assurance of international tranquility. The only comment which can be added here to the detailed discussion in the Annex is that pending an opportunity for the realisation of the unusually large sources of power which now go to waste every day through this part of the river not being harnessed to produce electri­ city, the present administration of this section of the river should be strengthened and supported so as to enable it to obtain the fullest co-operation of all the riparian States, give the best possible service and make, at least by degrees, the improvements which are obviously feasible at the present time in the way of removing specific obstructions in the channels. Even these improvements will require substantial sums of capital which will be too great to be raised directly by dues on navigation and which it is not likely that Boumania and the S. H. S. State will feel justified in the near future in raising by themselves. It will therefore probably be desirable for the various riparian States to participate in raising the necessary funds, perhaps in pro­ portion to their respective tonnages on the river. It is believed they would be well justified in doing this, if they continued to be assured of the impartiality, efficiency and economy of the Iron Gates service. — 30 —

Administration of Iron Gates Service. Before the war (and when nearly all the shipping on the river above the Iron Gates was Austro-Hungarian), Hungary constructed and administered the present works in this section of the river. The Treaty of Trianon (Article 288) placed the equipment, buildings and instal­ lations of such works provisionally under the control of the International Commission provided for in the Treaty, and that Commission took charge and organised and administered the Iron Gates service accordingly for the purpose of maintaining the works and applying the naviga­ tion rules prescribed by the Commission. By virtue of Articles 32 and 33 of the Danube Statute, special technical and administrative services are to be set up. The International Commission, on the basis of the proposals made by these services, is to decide on the measures in respect of upkeep and improvement administra­ tion, and dues to meet the expenditure involved. The Commission is to place at the disposal of these services the equipment, buildings and fixtures referred to in Article 288 of the Treaty of Trianon. Article 32 of the Danube Statute also provides that these services shall be set up by agree­ ment between Boumania, the S. H. S. State and the International Commission. The services had, in fact, been set up prior to the Danube Statute by the International Commission, as that Commission was established under Article 286 of the Treaty of Trianon. These services have continued to function since the coming into effect of the Danube Statute, although the agree­ ment referred to has not yet been made.1 Article 32 also provides that, with the exception of pilots, who may be selected from the subjects of any country, the personnel of these services shall be provided and maintained by the two riparian States and that this personnel shall be placed under the direction of heads of services selected by the same States and approved by the International Commission. In dealing with the policies and practices of this part of the Danube, there are two inevit­ ably conflicting elements, both of which deserve consideration, and concerning which it seems there ought to be a reasonable and practical compromise. (1) This portion of the Danube is the frontier between Boumania and the S. H. S. State ; they are the two States possessing riparian jurisdiction and it is only natural that they should have a strong solicitude for the manner in which these services shall be developed and conducted and that they should insist upon having an important part in the selection of the personnel. (2) This part of the Danube may be said to be international, in fact, in a far more com­ plete sense than ever before. Before the war the navigation was almost entirely monopolised by Austro-Hungarian interests (the Boumanian and Greek navigation confined itself mostly to the portion of the river below the Iron Gates). Now we have German, Austrian, Czecho­ slovak, Hungarian, S. H. S., Boumanian, French and Dutch companies actively plying on the Danube above the Iron Gates. The navigation interests of Boumania and the S. H. S. State will, of course, continue to develop, because they have a strategic relationship to the great sources of Danube traffic, and they will continue to be dependent to an ever-increasing degree upon the use of this extremely difficult portion of the river. In the present year, to an extent not before known, the S. H. S. Syndicate has transported great quantities of maize from S. H. S. ports through the Iron Gates to Braila and Galatz for export by sea. The Boumanian ship­ ping companies have participated in this same traffic. Therefore both of these sets of shipping interests have themselves utilised the Iron Gates section of the river more than ever before. They have an interest in common with all the other shipping interests on the river to ensure the fullest possible development of this section and to remove therefrom those obstacles to navigation which so greatly impair the economy of shipping operations and threaten fr o m time to time to suspend the navigation altogether. It is clear that the adequate development ot this section will call for the co-operation and in all probability the financial assistance of the other Danube countries.

1 Roumania and the S. H. S. State in June 1925 prepared and submitted to the International Commission a pro^e of an agreement with the Commission. The Commission postponed consideration of the project until its next sessi , which will begin on November 30th next. — 31 —

In such circumstances, it is believed that in working out the compromise between these two sets of influences, the general public interest, including that of the two riparian States and their shipping concerns and their nationals dependent on Danube traffic, will be promoted by avoiding an unduly local aspect in the formation and working of the Iron Gates services, and by giving full effect to the part which the Statute indicates the International Commission should play as the representative of international interests. It is the international shipping using the river and not the two i iparian States which will supply the funds for administering the Iron Gates services and for improving that section of the river, unless new arrangements shall be made for supplying funds through some other sort of international co-operation.

Complaint that Dues at Iron Gates are excessive.

The International Commission, according to the provisions of the Danube Statute, im­ poses dues only on ship tonnage to cover the cost of its Iron Gates services. Before the war dues were imposed by the Hungarian Government on goods and also on ship tonnage. There has been some complaint on the part of the S. H. S. Syndicate that the present dues are more burdensome than the pre-war dues in the case of coal transported from the S. H. S. coal mines below the Iron Gates to points above the Iron Gates. The contrary, however, appears to be the fact. Before the war these dues were levied both on the coal cargo and on the capacity of the boat. For a 650-ton barge, the usual type on the upper river, the average cargoes in pre-war times were 420 tons and barges in the coal service were returned empty to the point of loading. The dues collected pre-war were as follows : 420 (cargo) x 0 .6 0 ...... = 252 crowns 650 (boat capacity) x 0.20 ...... = 130 » 650 (boat capacity on return) x 0.20...... = 130 » 512 crowns At present, the dues upon the same barge loaded and empty are : 650 x 0.28 X 2 = 364 francs (gold) or 350 crowns (gold). If the return of the empty boat is not included, the proportion is still more in favour of the present rates, because on that basis the pre-war dues were 382 crowns and the present dues are only 182 francs or 175 crowns. The S. H. S. Syndicate representatives indicate that at present the burden of these dues causes this coal to move by rail. If the coal moves by rail the question may well arise as to whether this is not due to what are understood to be the extremely low railway rates in the S. H. S. State. It has been stated that the railway rates in the S. H. S. State are, in general, on a gold basis, only about 50 per cent of the pre-war rates. If the present rail rates from these mines to points of destination are on a correspondingly low basis, this fact might account for this coal now moving by rail (the railway from the mines did not exist before the war). This aspect of the matter would deserve consideration if the view should still be entertained that it is the dues at the Iron Gates which operate to prevent movements of this coal by water. As far as an estimate can be made, the general indication is that on a gold basis the present dues at the Iron Gates are only about one-third of the pre-war dues. The question arises whether they should not be increased, provided such increase would give promise of removing obstacles in the channel which now retard navigation and render it more costly and dangerous.

“ Vaskapu Attention is called to the comments in the Annex upon the tug-boat Vaskapu. This appears to constitute a substantial burden upon the Iron Gates service and renders compara­ tively little benefit in return. It would seem that some such alternative as is suggested in the Annex is worthy of the serious consideration of the Commission and the riparian States. — 32

The Channel at Sulina. Another feature of outstanding importance is the channel at Sulina. The Annex gives an outline of the development of the channel and the present conditions. The water depth began to diminish before the war and corrective measures were not effectively applied until after the European Danube Commission was able to resume functioning after the war. There has been much complaint on the part of Roumania that the European Commission has moved far too slowly in this matter. But for practical purposes, as far as the present physical aspects of the river are concerned, the important thing now is that on the 25th of the month just closed, July 1925, the European Commission was able to announce the opening of the channel at Sulina through the newly extended jetties with a depth of twenty feet. The Commission now indicates the purpose to continue its work until a depth of 24 feet is obtained. The Commis­ sion reports, July 31st, depth already 22 feet.

The Development of Tributaries as Feeders. The principal need of any transportation system not fully developed is adequate traffic so as to admit of economical and efficient operation. An important factor in the provision of this adequate traffic is the possession of feeders which will contribute a volume of traffic to the main artery of the system. This is a highly important need of railway systems. It is also a need of the Danube and can be partly supplied by reciprocal arrangements with the railways (a matter discussed below), and partly supplied by the development of the Danube’s tributaries. Annex V shows that important tributaries, the Drave, Tisza and , which are parts of the international system, are still not fully developed. If and when they shall be improved so as to admit of navigation by the Danube tugs and barges, important additional sources of Danube traffic will become available. An even more immediate inducement to such improvement of these tributaries is that it will give to the communities along them the great advantage of being able to transport by water what they produce and what they consume, and will greatly widen the range of their markets. The same considerations apply equally to the further improvement of those Danube tri­ butaries which are territorial waters. Such improvement will greatly enlarge the markets of those living on such waters, and will increase the Danube traffic, principally for the domestic navigation concerns.

The General Principle oj Dues upon Danube Navigation. The Danube, so far as has been developed in this investigation, is the only river in Europe with important traffic where dues are imposed upon navigation to pay for the river improve­ ments. On the Danube dues are at present imposed only for the improvement at Sulina and at the Iron Gates. The Danube Statute provides that the International Commission may authorise a State which carries out works of improvement to impose moderate dues to cover the cost thereof. It is a grave question whether it would be in the interest of the riparian States to extend the principle of imposing dues for improvement work beyond the present application of that prin­ ciple at Sulina and the Iron Gates. Any extension of the principle would likely serve as a new precedent, and the result might be that navigation on the Danube would become subject to a constantly increasing series of dues on different parts of the river, and in the aggregate these might constitute a very heavy burden upon the use of the river. At the same time, the Danube vessels, while paying these heavy dues, would be competing with State-owned railways, which always have the financial support of the State. It is to be hoped that all improvement work outside that covered by the already established practice at Sulina and the Iron Gates will be financed by the States interested therein, so as to leave navigation free from any such addi­ tional burdens. As to Sulina and the Iron Gates also, it would be in the interests of navigation if the scheme of dues would be supplanted by some other plan so as to make navigation entirely free, but it is appreciated that at the present time, when questions of State finances are still extremely difficult, it may be found impracticable to provide an adequate substitute for the practice already established as to those two parts of the river.

Comprehensive Plan for Improvement. There should be established some general comprehensive programme for the future improvement of the Danube according to some definite and consistent scheme. This view is recognised by Article 11 of the Danube Statute, which provides : “ On the basis of proposals and plans submitted by the riparian State, the International Commission draws up the general programme of important works and improvements which should be carried out in the interests of the navigability of the international river system and of which the execution may be spread over a period of several years. ” Up to the present time, the Commission has not found it practicable to take definite action looking to the drawing up of such plans. Indeed, the Commission has not yet found it prac­ ticable or expedient to establish the technical department which it is authorised to establish by Article 27 of the Statute. To make such a plan it is necessary to consider the probable volume of Danube traffic, and to determine whether the cost of a given project would be justified in the light of the amount of traffic which would be carried. For example, if a minimum depth of 2.5 meters at low water should be the objective, the questions would arise : How much would that project cost ? What traffic would probably be carried ? Would that volume of traffic justify that cost ? Such a study would require much time and would have to be conducted by competent engineers of recognised ability. In view of the time required and the complexity of the sub­ ject, it seems highly desirable to organise for the study and initiate it promptly. A few years from now the riparian States and the International Commission may be confronted with the necessity of taking prompt decisions as to specific extensive projects. If in the meantime such a comprehensive study has not been made and a general programme developed, all interests will be largely in the dark as to how to reach a decision on the specific proposals. Furthermore, it may be only a few years until there will be a very compelling necessity for actually adopting and executing a general programme of improvements. To be ready to meet that need, it is important that the preliminary work should begin promptly.

XI.

FRONTIER FORMALITIES.

Before the war, a vessel could proceed from Passau to Orsova, a distance of 1,272 kms., without passing a frontier. Consequently, delays from frontier formalities were negligible. To-day, a vessel making such a voyage encounters formalities in Austria, in Czechoslovakia, in Hungary (both upon entering and leaving), in the S. H. S. State (both upon entering and leaving), and in addition it must go through the Boumanian Customs and police formalities at Orsova. In the aggregate, these delays, to the extent that they are avoidable, constitute a serious economic waste of shipping, diminish the utilisation of the Danube, and operate prejudicially upon the navigation companies and upon their clients. In discussing these problems, no fundamental issue of principle arises. All of the States indicate a desire to reduce these delays and no State can have anything to gain by continuing methods which cause unnecessary delays. The navigation companies of each State have an — 34 — increasing business in the other States and all the companies have a common interest to encour­ age the elimination of frontier delays all along the Danube. It is believed the burdens arising from these formalities have been steadily diminished though very slowly. Perhaps the principal reason they have not diminished more rapidly is that since the war the responsible authorities of all the Danube States have been overwhelmed with novel and unforeseen governmental problems of the greatest variety and complexity. It has therefore been exceedingly difficult for them to take their attention from other pressing and perplexing demands for the purpose of giving special attention to the simplification of frontier formalities. There is also considerable expense for fees and taxes of various kinds which constitute a distinct additional financial burden from which the Danube’s competitors — the railways — are free. So far as these items have been officially reported, they are shown in Annex VI.

Ratisbon, Passau and Vienna. A suggestive outline of the general character of these frontier formalities will be afforded by the following summary with reference to a loaded barge moving from Ratisbon in Germany to a port in Roumania : The usual clearance papers must be obtained at Ratisbon. A stop must be made at Passau for Customs formalities for the exit from Germany, and also for the entrance to Austria (Austria having established a Customs office at Passau as a matter of convenience to shipping, which is, however, paid for by the principal navigation companies). For the German authorities a statistical notice must be supplied, and, if the goods are on the prohibited list, an export licence must be shown. If the goods are in transit, however, from another country, say Belgium or France, a certificate to that effect from the other frontier must be furnished. On behalf of Austria, in addition to the usual production of papers, the goods are placed under seal. Germany, Austria and Hungary have an agreement whereby they mutually recognise each other’s seals. Upon arrival at Vienna a stop must be made, and the frontier examinations are there made for the purpose of exit from Austria. It is represented that these are comparatively brief and simple.

Czechoslovakia. A stop must be made at Bratislava and a declaration of the cargo, together with certain statistical information, must be given. To make the required stop it is necessary for the tug with its tow of barges to head upstream, and therefore there must be a troublesome and rather dangerous turn in the very swift current and rather narrow channel. After the formalities are concluded, the tug-boat with its tow must again turn under the difficult circumstances mentioned and proceed downstream.

Hungary, entrance and exit. Upon arriving at the Hungarian frontier at Szob a stop must be made for the Hungarian frontier formalities of entrance. The tow of barges cannot, of course, go alongside the ponton, so the barges must be anchored in the river. Hence delay is necessarily involved in effecting communication between any given barge and the shore. The barge papers and a list of its supplies must be presented. Police inspection must also be made, including examination of the papers of the crew. A Customs agent and a police agent must accompany the barge throughout Hungarian waters, the barge-owner paying their compensation, furnishing their lodging and subsistence and paying their return fare to the point of departure. But those “ convoys” may be avoided if all the goods are below hatches and the hatches have been sealed, and if the shipping company has given satisfactory bond. It is understood that the D. D. S. G., the M. F. T. B., the Sud-Deutscher and the Bavarian Lloyd have given such bonds. The foreign shipping companies claim that when the barge reaches Budapest another Customs examination must be made. The Hungarian authorities deny this. The point will be discussed below. — 35 —

When the barge reaches Mohacs, 17 kms. above the Hungarian-S. H. S. frontier, another stop must be made for the Hungarian frontier formalities of exit. The necessary communi­ cation between the anchored barge and the shore must be effected. The stamped papers which have been delivered to the barge-master on entering Hungary are taken up. The seals are removed. A bill of health must be issued by the Sanitary Office of the Hungarian River Police.

S. H. S. State, entrance and exit. The barges then proceed 22 kilometers to Bezdan (left bank) and Batina (right bank), 5 kilometers below the Hungarian-S. H. S. frontier, and must there stop for the S. H. S. fron­ tier formalities of entrance. Again the barges must be anchored and communication effected with the shore, and in this instance with both shores, because the Customs agents are at Bez­ dan and the police agents are at Batina. A report must be made to the Port Captain at Bez­ dan, and a declaration of transit goods must be drawn up in Serbian. A Customs officer visits the barges, examines the goods, and places seals on the hatches. The police inspection is supposed to be, but is not always, made at the same time. The police inspection involves examining and checking the papers of the members of the crew. There m ust also be a visit from the sanitary officer, and the sanitary certificate obtained in Hungary must be produced. In all cases the S. H. S. Customs agents and police agents must accompany barges, at the ex­ pense of the barge-owners for wages, lodging and subsistence, and also for return fare to the point of departure. The barge then proceeds through S. H. S. waters to Gradiste, where the stop must be made for the S. H. S. frontier formalities of exit. Again the barges must be anchored and communi­ cation must be effected with the Customs, police and sanitary officers on the shore ; there are visits of these agents to the barges and the production of papers.

Roumanian Port of Destination : No Frontier Formalities even where both banks of Danube are in Roumania. WThen the barge reaches its Boumanian port of destination, the usual Customs and police formalities in such port m ust be undergone. The Roumanian destination may be a port below Tutrakan, the point where the eastern Bulgarian frontier touches the river. Below that point both banks of the Danube are in Roumanian territory. Nevertheless, Roumania does not require entrance frontier formalities such as have been described above in the case of other Danube States whose frontiers are crossed by the barge. Boumania contents itself with the Customs and police formalities in the port of destination.

Upstream Movement. In the event of a cargo moving upstream from a point in Roumania to a point in Germany, the Customs examinations and other formalities take place in reverse order, but substantially as above described. A sanitary certificate must be obtained downstream and produced in the S. H. S. State and Hungary. The stop at Bratislava for upstream movement is, of course, less difficult than for the downstream movement. A difference in procedure to be noted is that when boats leave Austria to enter Germany a stop has been required at Engelhartszell in Austria, on the German frontier, for the purpose of the Austrian Customs inspection. This has been objected to by the navigation companies, which claimed that such inspection could be more conveniently made by the Austrian Customs officials at Passau.

Germany gives Incoming Navigator Option of paying Duty at Frontier or at Port of Destination. With respect to all goods destined to a point in Germany, that State gives the barge- owner the choice of paying duty at Passau or at the port of destination. If the duty is not 36 —

paid at Passau, the cargo must be sealed, or if the cargo does not admit of being sealed, con­ voys must accompany the two at the cost of the shipping company for wages, lodging,’ sub­ sistence and return fare to the point of departure.

Transit Traffic. As to traffic passing through a country in transit, the Danube Statute, as interpreted in the general directives announced by the International Commission at its session in November 1924, provides that the only declaration which can be exacted from the boat’s master relative to the cargo transported is one showing whether the goods carried are prohibited by sanitary or veterinary laws of the State or by international convention ; and such declaration and verification are to be without expense to the master. Again, the Statute, as it is interpreted permits only a summary inspection of the boat, and prohibits in ordinary circumstances any inspection or examination of goods in transit. Likewise, the Danube Statute, as thus interpreted, does not sanction, in the event a Customs agent is sent as convoy with the boat, any expense being imposed upon the boat’s master beyond that of. lodging and subsistence, nor does the Statute appear to sanction the imposition of any expense for any police agent accompanying the boat. In practice, it seems that a tow of barges very generally includes barges containing transit traffic and barges con­ taining traffic destined to or going from the country in which the formalities take place. For this reason it seems that, in general, little if any distinction is made between the formalities imposed on the transit traffic and the formalities imposed on other traffic, either in the time or character of the examination, or the imposition of expenses for convoys or other reasons. The practical effect appears to be that these burdens are imposed on most if not all of the traffic moving up and down the river.

,7Yze Serious Loss of Time for Tugs and Barges and the resulting Economic Waste. The economic waste involved in unnecessary formalities or unnecessary delays in connec­ tion therewith deserves to be emphasised. These delays put Danube navigation under an additional handicap as compared with transportation by its competitor, the railways. During these delays tugs must be kept under steam, the crews of tugs and barges must be paid and the entire material remains unproductive. The D. D. S. G. estimates that, by reason of the frontier examination at Bezdan and Gradiste in the year 1924, its steamers and barges lost 109 steamer days and 777 barge days at Bezdan, and 41 steamer days and 189 barge days at Gradiste. On the basis of the total traffic on the river for 1924 and allowing three hours at each frontier, a calculation seems to indicate that there was a loss at the frontiers alone of not less than 60,000 barge hours, or 5,000 barge days on account of formalities, with corresponding loss of tug hours and tug days, to say nothing of the financial burdens for fees, taxes, cost of Customs and police convoys and so forth. All of these matters represent a handicap upon Danube navigation which was largely if not wholly non-existing before the war. These losses put navigation at a disadvantage with railway transportation, both in point of time and in point of cost. They therefore deserve the most serious consideration. It is believed the opportunity for favourable consideration of these matters is much better than in the past, because the State governments should now have a better opportunity to direct their attention to these problems than they have heretofore had at any time since the war. It is believed also that all the States will be justified in approaching this matter in a common spirit and with a common object, because there is no divergence on the principle involved, because none of the States have any substantial motive for preserving unnecessary formalities or unnecessarily costly methods, and the navigation companies of all the States have the strongest motives to co-operate in minimising these difficulties.

Engelhartszell Complaint already remedied by Austria. It is a pleasure to report in the first instance that the Austrian authorities have already signified their willingness to permit navigation companies to have the Customs examination for upstream traffic at Passau instead of Engelhartszell, in cases where the companies so prefer, — 3 7 — and have already notified the shipping companies that they have this option. This is a grati­ fying illustration of a willingness to co-operate through setting aside a customs-house routine which is burdensome to navigation and is not essential for the interests of the State.

The Stop oI all Tows at Bratislava. It is believed the Czechoslovak Government would be justified in giving serious conside­ ration to the question whether some plan, fully protective of its interests, cannot be adopted for maintaining the necessary supervision of transit traffic and obtaining the necessary statistics in regard to shipping without burdening navigation companies with the present system, which involves all downstream traffic in the necessity of making the difficult and dangerous double turn in the extremely swift current at Bratislava. Aside from the time and difficulty for downstream traffic 01 making the stop at Bratislava and îesuming the journey, very little time is required, because the formalities are comparatively brief. If so, cannot some other method be devised which would be as efficacious, if not more so, and which would avoid such substantial delay to shipping ? Could not the responsible navigation companies be permitted to give bond, whereby they would ensure the submission of the desired information by telegraph or telephone from Vienna for downstream tralfic, and from the Hungarian frontier or Gônyü for upstream traffic ? It would seem that such bonds, together with a reasonable amount of inspection by means of a police boat, would be at least as efficacious as the present system. If some alternative solution of this problem could be found, it would not only save time and cost to navigation, but it would constitute an encouraging and stimulating example of co-operation on the part of the States in changing existing routine for the purpose of lessening the burdens of navigation.

Hungary asserts there is no Customs Examination at Budapest for Traffic passing through. Since the Hungarian authorities positively deny that any customs examination is required at Budapest in the case of traffic not originating at or destined to that port, the navigation companies should take note of these positive assurances. If hereafter the masters of vessels report that such examination has been required, it would seem that the matter could be promptly cleared up by conference with the responsible Hungarian authorities. Possibly representations on the part of those in charge of boat crews to the effect that they are compelled to remain some time at Budapest may at times be exaggerated because the boat crews may be glad to find opportunities to spend a few hours in that port.

The Double Stop and the Double Delay at Hungarian-S.H .S. Frontier. As to the double stop and the double delay on account of Hungary maintaining its frontier office at Mohacs, and the S.H.S. maintaining its frontier offices at Bezdan and Batina, assu­ rances have been given by the representatives of both Governments that there is no objection in principle to having these offices established at a single place at 01 near the frontier. Such an arrangement is eminently desirable from the standpoint of Danube traffic. The navigation concerns of every country are interested in avoiding this double delay, which may involve, and frequently does involve, a delay of an entire day to a single tow of barges. In the course of a year this represents a very heavy loss to practically all the navigation companies. Since the rights of each State can be adequately protected by having inspections for both countries made at a single station (for which there are numerous precedents elsewhere), it is earnestly recommended that the two countries promptly effect a reasonable arrangement for this purpose. While no insuperable obstacle appears to establishing a station immediately at the frontier, yet the conditions are not favourable ; the shores are low and subject to overflow ; the anchorage is not particularly favourable ; and there is no village at that precise point. Therefore, there is much to support the view that the most practical arrangement would be to establish a station at Batina, which is only 5 kilometers below the frontier, whereas Mohacs is 17 kilometers above the frontier. Batina is a community of considerable size immediately on the river bank, while on the opposite bank Bezdan is a mere landing place, the community of Bezdan being — 3 8 -

some kilometers from the river. The S.H.S. representatives advise that they already have in prospect a plan which will admit of their own customs authorities and police authorities being on the same side of the river and at the same place.

The Frontier Delays are increased by Attitude of the Local Functionaries. Under favourable circumstances, when a tow-boat reaches a frontier at such an hour that without any delay, the customs agents and police agents can transact the necessary formalities in the regular office hours, i.e. from 8 or 8.30 a.m. to 12 or 12.30, and from 2 or 2.30 p.m. to 6 p.m., the formalities at a particular frontier should not exceed from two to four hours. But these favourable conditions are by no means always realised. If a tow-boat arrives at the frontier about the luncheon hour, it is likely to have to wait until business is resumed in the afternoon before the formalities can begin. If the customs and police agents do not make their exami­ nations concurrently, the delay will be increased. If the tow-boat arrives towards the close of business hours, after business hours, or on a holiday or a Sunday, the theory is that the customs and police agents are nevertheless under obligation to transact the requisite formalities upon the payment of additional fees by the boat owners. But apparently this is not always true in practice, because the matter appears to depend to a substantial extent upon both the convenience and the goodwill of the olficials. There are attached hereto as Annex VII some extracts from documents which have been submitted in the course of this investigation, pur­ porting to give actual instances of delays at frontiers. These are illustrative of what may, and apparently does, happen, regardless of the best intentions on the part of the responsible State authorities. It is, oi course, no sufficient disposition of this matter for the Government authorities to say these delays are not due to its policy, but are due to shortcomings on the part of its agents. Is it not a part of the responsibility of the State to impress upon its agents that they must expedite traffic, and to supervise them sufficiently to make it unpleasant for them if they fail to do so ?

Requiring Boat-maslers to pay Fees for Services outside Office Hours puls Danube Navigation at a Disadvantage compared with the Railways. It would seem that traffic transported by rail is not subjected to any such possibilities of delay on account of convenience or inclination of customs agents, nor is railway traffic subjected to the special fees which appear to be imposed upon Danube traffic in connection with these formalities. Indeed, the very fact that the boat owners are requiied to pay the Government functionaries additional fees if work is done outside of regular office hours would seem to operate as a temptation to those functionaries to find excuses for not doing the work in regular office hours, thus again involving an element of additional delay as well as an element of additional cost. The question arises whether it would not be in the interest of Danube navigation, placing it more nearly on a footing where it could compete satisfactorily with rail transportation, if the States should co-operate in establishing a system whereby officials who transact the frontier formalities would be more certainly accessible at all hours and on holidays and Sundays at the cost of the State, instead of at the cost of the navigation companies. This would seem to give the navigation companies substantially the same benefits that are enjoyed by the railways. \ 1 Germany's Imposition of Customs Duties on Certain Ships' Supplies. The German requirement imposing customs duties on ships’ supplies, especially fuel oil, if in excess of two days’ supply appears to deserve re-examination. It is certainly a most unfortunate precedent. If every State on the Danube should attempt to impose customs duties upon ships’ supplies in excess of some very restricted amount, the Danube navigation would be subjected to new and serious burdens. It would seem that the prevailing requirement in Germany must have been devised solely from the standpoint of the convenience of the fiscal agencies of the Government, and without adequate regard to the fair interests of navigation. — 39 —

The Convoy Syslem deserves Re-examination. The burden of the system of requiring customs agents as convoys, the entire expenses for wages, lodging and subsistence to be paid by the navigation companies, is substantial and it is a burden which apparently finds no counterpart in the case of railway traffic. It is worthy of serious consideration whether the States would not find at least as great a protection and probably more, in allowing the navigation companies the option of giving bonds ensuring against contraband and them placing the cargoes whenever possible under seal. Many deck loads not susceptible of being sealed consist of large articles, such as agricultural machines, which could not be successfully smuggled in any event. Inspections from time to time wrould soon disclose any substantial infractions of these bonds, and the bonds could provide for the imposition of heavy penalties for any such infractions. It is believed that companies giving such bonds would have such a direct interest in complying with the law and the terms of the bonds that the States would have an even greater assurance against contraband than exists under present condi­ tions. In fact, it is a serious question whether the protection derived from the customs agents travelling as convoys is not largely illusory. For 810 kilometers the Danube is the frontier between different States. Along all this distance no convoys are permissible. Yet the States find means of protecting their interests, not only without convoys on the boats, but without seals and without bonds. It should again be emphasised that Roumania is satisfied to dispense with all customs formalities where the Danube crosses its frontier, i.e. at Tutrakan, the eastern frontier of Bulgaria. The fact that Roumania finds that its interests can be substantially protected by making its customs and police inspections in the port of destination is suggestive of the view that the elaborate and costly system of convoys does not justify itself.

Simplification of Documents. It would apparently be advantageous to Governmental authorities and also to the naviga­ tion companies if documents required at frontiers were unified and simplified. A uniform manifest would appear to promote the convenience of all. The uniformity of the manifest ought to facilitate its translation into different languages to the extent that that may continue to be insisted upon. A printed form could be drawn up so that little, if anything, would require to be translated except the specification of the articles in the cargo. In general, the routine of frontier formalities deserves re-examination in order to see whether there are not unnecessary documents or those which are needlessly long or needlessly different from forms in general use. Every State is interested in reducing these formalities to the minimum which will secure reasonable protection within practicable limits. Beyond this point formalities become not only a needless burden upon navigation, but a needless expense to the State. To require unnecessary documents, or documents in unnecessary detail, is to increase the cost to the State directly and indirectly ; in the immediate work of the local func­ tionaries and also in the supervision of their work by the Central Government. In making an inquiry into the possibility of improving and simplifying routine frontier practices, it will probably be found that objections to making changes will be urged by functionaries who have become accustomed to present methods. This is the usual reaction of human nature to efforts to improve and simplify administrative methods. Even though the reasons for certain compli­ cated methods may have disappeared, nevertheless there may be insistence on continuing the methods. If improvement is to be brought about, it must be accomplished in spite of these routine objections and by re-examining the problem to ascertain just w'hat it is desirable and practicable to seek to accomplish and by limiting the requirements to that standard.

Delay in Customs Examination in Ports. In addition to the frontier formalities, it is necessary to go through the real customs examination at the port where the dues are paid, this being in general the port of destination or the port where the goods are placed in a customs warehouse. It is likewise necessary in some countries to have a customs examination before the departure of the vessel in the port of origin. 40 —

While the delays resulting from these examinations are not usually very great in the larger cities, there is sometimes difficulty in some places where the staff is very much reduced °in getting a prompt customs revision. This difficulty is made the more objectionable if there are a number of tows arriving at or near the same time. It is likewise reported that in the S.H.S State customs-houses are not very numerous. This requires the transportation company to send to an adjoining town where there is a customs official before it can discharge its cargo or clear. This condition is understood to be particularly bad on the Tisza, where it is reported there is but one customs station, at Kratur. It would seem that this difficulty might be avoided by allowing the vessel to pay duty at the frontier stations on goods for ports where there is no customs-house, or else require the frontier station upon notification to take the necessary measures to have a customs official at the station on the arrival of the boat. On clearing, it would seem that there should be no difficulty in carrying out these formalities at the frontier. If the vessel arrives at the port after office hours or on Sundays or holidays, difficulty is likely to be encountered in arranging to get the necessary attention from the customs offices. Germany at Passau gives vessels the option of paying duty there or at the port of destination. Passport Formalities. As is the case with the customs formalities, there has been a considerable improvement in the requirements of the different Danube countries as to passports and other police forma­ lities. It is understood that at present the severe restrictions which were at first in vogue as to passports and visas for the crews of vessels have been entirely abolished and that these men may now move freely in connection with their business, using only their service books authenticated by officials of their companies as papers of identification. In connection with the claim of foreign companies that a customs examination is made in Budapest, it has also been stated that the papers of the crews must be examined by the police authorities in that port before the men can go ashore. No useful purpose can be seen in this practice, if in force, as all of the papers of the crews have already been passed by the Hungarian frontier police. If, for any reason, it is necessary for the police to have a list of the foreigners in the city, it would seem that the situation could be met by the master furnish­ ing to some designated person a simple list of his crew. Another method would be to keep registers at the various police stations in the port where members of the crew desiring to go ashore might have their names inscribed upon landing. Although the service books are considered as sufficient as papers of identification for mem­ bers of the crews of vessels, it is understood that it is still necessary for the shore employees, i.e. those on the staff and in the agencies of the companies, to be provided with a regular pass­ port and visas to move from the headquarters of the company to points in other countries. This statement is subject to this qualification : an agreement exists between Germany, Austria and Hungary whereby a proper travel order issued by a navigation company is accepted as sufficient identification for members of agencies of companies flying flags of any one of those States. Czechoslovakia is believed to be included in this arrangement, although there is some doubt on this point. It would be in the common interest and convenience if all the riparian States would enter into an agreement to this effect. Such an arrangement would promote the convenience of the navigation concerns of the down-river countries on all parts of the river, and it would promote the convenience of the up-river navigation concerns on the lower river.

Sanitary Formalities. There appears to be a great variety of sanitary regulations in the different Danube countries. The methods of inspection and the methods of disinfection differ greatly. Article 40 of the Danube Statute provides that the States shall endeavour by separate conventions to establish uniform sanitary and veterinary regulations concerning navigation. It seems eminently desirable that steps should be initiated in the direction of bringing about such a convention. In all probability the discussion of these problems, with a view to establishing such a convention, would bring about an approximation to a uniform system, with the result of ensuring even greater protection than the systems now observed, and at the same time would represent a substantially lighter burden upon navigation. At times some of the existing sanitary regulations have effects upon Danube navigation which were doubtless never contemplated, and which could be remedied by making such a study as would permit of considering the legitimate interests of Danube navigation. For example, it is understood that, as a sanitary measure, the import into, or transport through, Hungary of Bulgarian straw is forbidden. One of the large items of Bulgarian exports is eggs. These are generally packed in straw. Bulgarian eggs find a large market in Germany, but, being packed in straw, they cannot be transported there by the Danube, so that this commerce becomes impracticable unless the transportation is made by sea or more costly containers are provided.

Frontier Formalities would not be avoided by creating Free Ports.

There is more or less discussion of establishing free ports where goods may be rehandled or manufactured and re-exported without payment of customs duties in the country where the free port is located. Already an important free port has been projected and has been largely completed at Budapest. Naturally, arrangements of this kind are a highly desirable facility for commerce. But it is important to point out that the establishment of free ports will not relieve navi­ gation of the burden of the frontier formalities. At present, when Danube traffic crosses the frontier into a country, these frontier formalities are, generally speaking and as a practical matter, imposed by that country even when the traffic is merely transit traffic. Such formalities would be equally imposed by that country if the traffic were destined to a free port within its boundaries.

XII.

PORT FACILITIES.

In this case also there is no dispute as to questions of principle. All the States indicate an unhesitating desire and purpose to carry out the provisions of the Danube Statute, which declares that :

“ in respect of access to and the use of ports and their equipment the subjects, goods and flags of all Powers are treated on a footing of complete equality ” (Art. 10). Article 20 declares that : “ ports and their machinery and equipment shall be accessible to navigation and utilisable without distinction in respect of flag, country of origin or of destination, and without preferential treatment.”

It is not unnatural that various questions in the actual utilisation of ports should remain undisposed of. The changes in sovereignty and the increase in the number and nationalities of navigation companies have created the necessity for various new arrangements as to the use of space in the principal ports. — 42

The S. H. S. State presents a general statement of its position as follows : “ The S. H. S. Navigation Company finds itself in a precarious situation, not having its own warehouses in foreign countries and having to use private warehouses where it is not always possible to obtain the necessary space. It often finds itself in a position of being unable to unload its barges, which must move away in order to obtain the necessary facilities. It is useless to say how much damage this situa­ tion has caused. Our navigation company complains constantly of the situation which is created on account of this fact in the Upper Danube ports above Bezdan ” (last S. H. S. port), “ all the more so as foreign navigation is treated in our ports from this point oi view on a footing of perfect equality. As an example, in our principal port of debarkation — the port of Belgrade — barges are discharged according to the order of their arrival without regard to their nationality. It is therelore indis­ pensable for the S. H. S. Navigation to be able to obtain suitable ground in the ports of Budapest, Vienna, Passau, Ratisbon and Bratislava, to be able to construct its own warehouses. ” Czechoslovakia urges that its navigation company “ must also have its own harbour equipment in the other Danube ports, because as it is now it finds itself at great disadvantage when competing with the other companies who have their own equipment everywhere, and are thus more able to get and hold trade Austria and Hungary are concerned about their present and future status in the Czecho­ slovak ports and about their present status in the S. H. S. and Boumanian ports. It is desirable to discuss separately the situation in the various countries.

Germany. Ratisbon. — The water front along the river and the water front and structures around the basin are owned by the State, which leases sections thereof to the shipping companies. The D. D. S. G. owns its own ground and buildings along the river bank. One of the ware­ houses on the basin is leased by the State to the City and is operated by the latter ; it is capable of supplying services to companies who do not own or have not taken leases of facilities. The S. H. S. Syndicate now uses the City Warehouse, which seems to be large enough to handle all of the Syndicate’s business, and this is confirmed by the latter’s President. This warehouse is well equipped in all respects. Passau. — Here the shipping companies actually own the water front and warehouses on the basin, while the State owns the water front and quay along the river bank, and has leased parts thereof to the D. D. S. G., Siid-Deutsche and M. F. T. R., which companies have erected their own warehouses. The S. H. S. Syndicate applied for space, and the German Government required the M. F. T. B. to allow the warehouses owned by it on the river bank to be used by the S. H. S. Syndicate. The Czechoslovak Company has an arrangement with the Bavarian Lloyd, but in the last few days has indicated a desire to be permitted in addition to rent the quay now used for the town coal-yard, and also a boat-length of ground for the erection of a store-house. It does not appear that requests for such space have been presented to the German Government, nor has there been any opportunity to obtain the views of the latter in regard to the suggestion. Austria. Linz. — In Linz the water front belongs directly to the Government or to some subsidiary branch thereof. The D. D. S. G., the Siid-Deutsche and M. F. T R. warehouses are on land belonging to the Government and to the railway administration. Czechoslovakia in the last few days has suggested that its navigation company should be allowed to make use of the plat­ form and the building now occupied by the railway management. It does not appear that such request has been presented to the Austrian authorities, nor has there been any opportunity to obtain their views. Vienna. — The total quay in Vienna is 14,017 meters long, 12,337 meters thereof belonging to the Danube Regulation Commission and 674 meters belonging to the railway administration. 506 meteis appear to be in private hands, and are probably used for industrial and not shipping pm poses. The water front around the Freudenau basin is 6,200 meters, and is owned entirely by the Danube Regulation Commission. This Commission is now controlled one-half by Vienna, one-third by the Central Government and one-sixth by Lower Austria. This Commission makes leases of the water front to navigation companies, which erect the necessary structures upon the leased premises. Leases to foreign companies are understood to be ordin­ arily subject to termination on one year’s notice. In addition, landing places and ware­ houses are maintained by public authority for general public use. The S. H. S. Syndicate now has under lease a part of the quay, which was rented before the war to the. Royal Serbian S. S. Co. This part of the quay is 105 meters long and 70 meters wide. The rental is understood to be 75,000 crowns (gold) per annum. It is understood that in addition the S. H. S. Syndicate tents a part of a Siid-Deutsche warehouse, and also has an arrangement with the Czechoslovak Company for the use from time to time of a part of the quay space now used by the latter company. The S. H. S. Syndicate appears to regard its present quay space as unsatisfactory, both as to size and location. It claims that it has a s k e d the Austrian Government for a lease ot the adjoining land now used lot the military swim­ ming school, and states that ii this could be obtained it would be satisfied with its facilities. The Austrian representatives, however, claim that they have given to the S. H. S. interests all that the latter have asked for. If the S.H.S. Syndicate is still desirous of obtaining other facilities, it would seem that it or the S.H.S. Government should now make formal application to the Austrian Government and pursue the matter to a conclusion. The Czechoslovak Company now has the use of 2,172 square meters of one of the public warehouses, and also the use of quay space tor three barge-lengths in front of one of the public warehouses. It claims th at this ai rangement is unsatisfactory, because the labour cost in the public warehouse is very high. This Company also has an arrangement for using space in one of the Süd-Deutsche warehouses for about 600 tons of cargo. The Company and its Government have been for a long time in negotiation with the Austrian authorities for other facilities. The situation now appears to be that, after the making and rejection ot various olfers and counter-offers, the Austrian Government has indicated a willingness to cause a lease terminable on one year’s notice to be made to the Czechoslovak Company for a part of the public landing space near Florisdorf Bridge, this being a section of the quay 210 meters in length and 50 to 60 meters in width, that company undertaking : (a) to pay an annual rental of 45 gold hellers per square meter ; (b) to build its own warehouse according to certain specifications and within a specified time ; (c) to pay the cost cf equipping a corresponding landing-place for the Danube Regulation Commission to be used as a public landing-place, and the cost of building a road thereto, such last-mentioned costs amounting to 20,000 gold crowns. The controlling point of disagreement now appears to be that the Czechoslovak interests are not willing to incur such heavy costs on the faith of a lease which will be terminable at one year’s notice. But Czechoslovakia also suggests that it would much prefer to negotiate an arrangement which, instead of requiring it to build new facilities, would give it the use of some of the existing facilities on reasonable terms. There is much in favour of this suggestion. The port facilities at Vienna are greatly in excess of the present business. It seems a serious waste of capital to add still further facilities. The Austrian shipping interests are not enjoying an adequate return from their shipping business. It would therefore seem to be to their advant­ age to make an at rangement whereby, in return for the use of a portion of their facilities which they do not need, they would receive an additional rental through making a lease to the Czecho­ slovak Company. It is evident, as will be mentioned below in discussing port facilities in Czechoslovakia, that the Czechoslovak Company’s demands in Austria cannot be brought to a conclusion except in connection with consideration of the Austrian company’s demands for facilities in Bratislava.

Czechoslovakia.

The general principle is that the Czechoslovak Government owns or will acquire the entire quay and water front. — 44 —

At Bratislava, the Government has made modern and valuable improvements in the wav of warehouses, port installations, etc., and has intelligently and energetically tried to provide convenient facilities for the rapidly growing river traffic. The Government deserves great praise for what it has accomplished. While a t times statements are made indicating th at it is the policy of the Government itself to operate these facilities and to afford therein equal treatment to all, the fact is that the Government allocates these facilities to a greater or less extent to specific interests. For example, three of the warehouses built for the Government (very modern and commodious and apparently in the best permanent location) have been allocated to the Czechoslovak Com­ pany, and that company operates these warehouses with its own employees. The M.F.T.R. had some arrangement equivalent to a lease from the Hungarian railways expiring in 1933. The Czechoslovak Government has acquired the land and the Czechoslovak railway administration claims to succeed to the lessee rights of the Hungarian railways. The M.F.T.R. claims ownership of the buildings. The entire matter is in litigation. Meanwhile by temporary agreement, the M.F.T.B. uses part of the plant (a small administrative build­ ing and one warehouse) and the Czechoslovak railway administration uses the other part (a somewhat larger warehouse). The D.D.S.G. facilities are upon land leased to it by the city. The State, in order to carry out its policy of owning the entire quay and water front, has started condemnation proceedings, by virtue of which the land will pass into the ownership of the State this year, and the final extension of the D.D.S.G. lease will expire this year. The Government is anxious that the D.D.S.G. Company shall move to another location, because the existing location (imme­ diately in front of the Ministry) is inconvenient to the Ministry, and besides it is the desire of the city to establish a satisfactory passenger terminal at that point. It would seem that the Czechoslovak attitude towards the D.D.S.G. facilities in Brati­ slava, and the Austrian attitude towards the Czechoslovak Company in Vienna, m ust neces­ sarily be considered together. This now seems to be understood by the two Governments. Their exchanges of views, however, have been rather infrequent. The thing to be done is to make a reasonable compromise. Each side has an ample consideration to offer to the other. The negotiations have been exceedingly slow and there does not seem to have been a clear definition of what the Czechoslovak Government is willing to assure the Austrian Company in Bratislava. It would seem highly desirable for the representatives of the two Governments and of the two shipping interests to confer promptly and completely, and it is believed the result will be a reasonable compromise. The Czechoslovak authorities indicate that the ultimate desire is to bring about the allo­ cation of space to the D.D.S.G., and apparently also to the M.F.T.R., on the winter har­ bour. These locations would be satisfactory for railway interchange traffic, but not for local traffic, because not accessible to ordinary roads. If the D.D.S.G. and M.F.T.R. had no facilities except in the winter harbour, they would have to do their local business through the public warehouse, while the Czechoslovak Company would handle its local business through warehouses specially allocated to it and operated by its own employees, and directly accessible to the city streets.

Hungary. At Budapest, the quays are partly the property of the State Government and partly the property of the State railways. The part belonging to the State Government has in general been turned over to the city, which makes leases to shipping companies. It is understood that these leases are made for a sufficiently long time to enable the companies to build their own warehouses. The only controversy at Budapest appears to be that when the Bavarian Lloyd, which is situated on the river bank below the Czechoslovak Company, applied for more space, the muni- pality directed the Czechoslovak Company to move to a considerably less desirable location further upstream. Below the Bavarian Lloyd space is the property of the Siid-Deutsche. This concern now belongs to the D.D.S.G. and the M.F.T.R. The Süd-Deutsche boats were practically all taken away after the war, and its business in Budapest appears to be small — 45 —

The Czechoslovak Company therefore suggested that the Bavarian Lloyd be given a part of the Siid-Deutsche facilities. This suggestion was refused, and the Czechoslovak Company was summarily ordered to move to the less desirable location further upstream. Subsequently this order was rescinded, and the latest advices are th at the Czechoslovak Company will not be required to move. This is certainly to be desired, because it would appear that the Czecho­ slovak Company would be subjected to substantial prejudice by being required to make such a move. Furthermore, it seems in the general interest of economy of space to utilise to the greatest extent existing facilities at Budapest, where the facilities appear to be in excess of the needs of the traffic, rather than to force companies to construct additional facilities.

The S.H.S. State.

While the S.H.S. State has shown remarkable energy and resourcefulness in re-establish­ ing and improving its systems of communication since the war, it appears that it has been compelled to concentrate its efforts upon its railways, because when the new Kingdom came into existence its railway communications were very poorly adapted to the needs of the country. Its policy appears to have been wise and praiseworthy, but the result has been that the Govern­ ment has been able to do practically nothing for the proper equipment of its ports. Since the Government has also proceeded on the general theory that it will eventually own and operate all the port facilities throughout the Kingdom, there has been great reluctance to make even provisional arrangements whereby navigation companies could provide their own port facilities. While some exceptions have been made (e.g., a warehouse at Novi Sad has been leased to the Czechoslovak Company), the general result has been to prevent the use of private facilities, although the State was not in a position at once to afford public facilities. There is a very inadequate number of pontons in use, because the State does not own enough pontons to satisfy all the requirements, and yet it is reluctant to perm it navigation companies to provide even temporarily their own pontons. The D. D. S. G. and the M. F. T. B. have pontons which they would be glad to use if permitted. At Zemun, a place of much im­ portance, there is need for more pontons, but the D. D. S. G. is permitted to use only one of its own, being required to use the extremely busy S. H. S. pontons for all its other business. Prior to the war the M. F. T. R. claims to have maintained in the territory now under S. H. S. sovereignty 35 stations with pontons, but at present it is permitted to m aintain only four stations, and has pontons at its separate disposal at only three of them. The Government indicates a definite purpose to enter upon a plan of adequate port development, and to provide facilities which will be ample for all shipping, both domestic and foreign. But, of course, the realisation of this plan is far in the future. In the meantime the S. H. S. State is growing so rapidly in business and commerce that it seriously needs much more ample port facilities. In the circumstances the most practical way to promote the com­ merce of the State would seem to be for the State to make provisional arrangements with navi­ gation companies, permitting them to use their own pontons and obtain the use of warehouses, subject to termination when the State itself shall have provided ample State facilities. Another disadvantage of the present temporary situation is that to a large extent the port facilities now supplied by the State are not operated by it but are turned over by it to be operated by the S. H. S. Syndicate, which is a privately managed concern, although the State has a large interest in the profits. For example, all the State’s pontons are operated by the S. H. S. Syndicate. In the numerous ports where there is no port captain, the use of the pontons is regulated by the S. H. S. Syndicate agent. Thus, important interests of all other shipping companies are committed to their competitor, the S. H. S. Syndicate. This investigation has not disclosed the slightest purpose or desire on the part of the S. H. S. State to subject foreign navigation companies to any inequality in the use of port facilities (except at Belgrade for reasons discussed below). The present situation arises simply because facilities are inadequate and the State’s resources have had to be devoted first to other even more pressing demands — the outgrowth of the extraordinary need for reconstruction after the war. — 46 —

Present conditions therefore are intended to be only temporary. But the State has already as a part of this temporary policy, permitted certain navigation companies to establish provisionally their own port facilities in a few ports. It is earnestly recommended that this procedure be extended much further in the interest of the enlargement of port facilities, until the State shall itself be able to construct and itself directly operate facilities of its own, suffi- ciently ample to provide for the great commerce which the State’s great resources and great energy are going to create in increasing measure. This would also promote the interests of the S. H. S. Syndicate, because it would then be able to get a much larger proportionate use out of existing facilities. At present it has to divide these facilities with all other shipping inte­ rests, and in consequence is greatly hampered in conducting satisfactorily and economically its rapidly growing business.

5. II. S. State exclusion of foreign agents of navigation companies. In a number of instances foreign shipping companies have been required to dismiss their representatives or employees in S. H. S. State who are not S. H. S. nationals. The Czechoslo­ vak and the Süd-Deutsche Companies received about the middle of May 1925 orders that their agents and such of their assistants as were not of S. H. S. nationality must leave the country within six months, and orders to similar effect were given to the D. D. S. G. in respect of certain Austrian cranesmen. It is explained by the S. H. S. representatives th at these orders have been given in pursuance of a law of February 28th, 1925, which was not directed primarily at navigation, but for the general protection of workmen. Art. 103 of this law says : “ No contractor may bring in foreign workmen without having obtained the authorisation of the Minister of Social Welfare, who may give his consent after having requested the advice of the Labour Exchange and the proper Labour Unions. ” It has not been made clear that this law applies to business representatives of all com­ panies, including their confidential agents, or that it applies to persons who were in the State prior-to the time the law took effect. But in any event it is clear that the law was not directed against navigation, and that it contains provision for making exceptions to it. It is therefore to be hoped th at the State, without embarrassment to its general policy of workmen’s protection, will find a way to relieve the agents and employees of the foreign shipping companies of these provisions. Foreign shipping companies will be subjected to serious hindrance if their agents and employees cannot be men who have been trained in the company’s own administration, and that means that ordinarily they must be of the same nationality as the company. It seems almost a contradiction in terms to say that navigation of the Danube and access to its ports are free to the companies of all nations, and yet to say that nobody but nationals of a particular State can act for those companies in the ports of that State. It would be a most unfortunate incident in the administration of the International Danube if such a precedent should be estab­ lished. If established, it would be likely to lead to retaliation, which would react upon the S. H. S. Syndicate itself. That Syndicate has a rapidly growing business, and is meeting with deserved success in establishing itself in other parts of the river, and would feel with increasing embarrassment the application to it of such a limitation by other States. By Article 20 of the Danube Statute, each riparian State assumes the obligation that it will not hinder navigation companies from establishing on its territory the agencies necessary for the exercise of their business, subject to the observance of the laws and regulations of the country.

The claim that Belgrade is a territorial and not an international port. The principal Danube port in the S. H. S. State is Belgrade. This city has had a remark­ able development since the war. Its aspect has been greatly changed and improved by the numerous and important buildings which have been constructed in the last three or four years The enterprise shown in this matter is a great credit to the energy and resourcefulness of the people in the face of exceptional difficulties. The city is bonnd to make great additional pro­ gress on account of the extensive resources — agricultural and mineral — of the country. The port facilities are inadequate in the extreme for the rapidly growing business. This inadequacy must be a great burden upon the industry and commerce of the State, entailing labour costs and delays which would not be incurred if there were adequate facilities. Expla­ nation has been made above of the reasons which have prevented the adequate development of port facilities at Belgrade as well as at other S. H. S. stations, but the situation at Belgrade gives special emphasis to the fact that, until adequate port facilities can be constructed by the State, it would be to the clear interest of the business of the city and indeed of the entire country to make provisional arrangements with individual shipping companies whereby the latter could use their own pontons, provide additional warehouse space and in general diminish the present handicap upon the economical conduct of the business of the port. A special question arises in this connection. Although Belgrade is on the Danube and is so regarded for all economic and financial purposes, it is also on the Save. It happens that the present landing facilities are principally on the Save about 400 meters from the junction of the Save and the Danube. The Save being a territorial and not an international river, the port authorities at Belgrade take the position that foreign shipping has not the right to use the landing places or the other facilities of the port except when specially permitted and upon the payment of double taxes. After the war it appears that for a while the port authorities did not allow foreign passenger boats to discharge or to take on any international passengers. Now it appears that the D. D. S. G. through service between Vienna and Giurgiu is permitted to discharge and take on international passengers at Belgrade. The M. F. T. R. has sought also to make arrangements for its passenger boats to take on and discharge international passengers at Belgrade, but this has not yet been arranged. For a time after the war the port authorities did not permit foreign companies either to discharge or to load freight traffic at Belgrade. Now it is understood that foreign companies are permitted, on special application, to discharge cargo coming from other countries, but are not permitted to take on cargo. But whenever any use is made of the Belgrade port facilities by foreign companies, the authorities impose double the port taxes which are imposed upon domestic shipping. Discussion with the S. H. S. representatives did not indicate that in practice the State attaches great importance to the exclusion of foreign shipping from Belgrade or to the subjection of foreign shipping to double taxation. It was explained that there is extremely little outbound freight traffic from Belgrade, since Smederevo and Zemun are the principal ports for export traffic and that access for inbound traffic is not denied in practice. The taxes do not appear to produce an important revenue. The State of course can at all times make clear its stand on the principle that the Save is territorial and not international, and at the same time, in practice, can make such arrangements as are in the interests of the port of Belgrade. Viewing the matter from the standpoint of the present and future interests of Belgrade, it is assumed that the conclusion will soon be reached by the S. H. S. authorities that a port of such importance and of such great potentialities for the future cannot afford to have itself advertised as not being as completely on the Danube as is Budapest or Vienna. i*N There are also some port facilities on the Danube side of the city. It is represented that these are less satisfactory because of high winds at certain times from the north and east. It is believed, however, that the city of Belgrade w ould not be willing, on account of this condition, to deprive itself of being a Danube port in the fullest sense of the term, when a few meters away from the Danube it is practicable to afford shipping facilities as good and as free from discrimina­ tion as those afforded in the Danube ports of other countries. A somewhat similar question arises as to Pancsova. It is on the Temes, a territorial river and is about 3 km. from the Danube. At present Pancsova is treated exclusively as a territorial port. It is an important place but it is not permitted to have the benefit of foreign shipping on the Danube, although in the past its success as a port must have been due largely to its access to the Danube and to its having the benefit of Danube shipping in general. Apparently there has been an effort on the part of the business interests of Pancsova to overcome this handicap by building a landing-place on the Danube. But this is subject to overflow at high water and even at other times subjects the business interests of Pancsova to an expansive movement of the traffic to the Danube landing-place. — 48 —

Roumania. Roumania has displayed the most creditable enterprise in the construction of ample quavs at all its principal ports and, indeed, has shown judgment and foresight in its handling of river improvement in general. It is understood that, as a general rule, Roumania retains the control and operation of its ports as a strictly State business, conducting the same primarily through the N. F. R ., the State shipping concern. In this way Roumania reserves exclusive control of the harbour'installations and then places the same at the disposal of shipping without giving particular companies any private landing places or warehouses. The D. D. S. G. has a section of the quay in Giurgiu and a very small warehouse in that place, but has no ponton. While the D. D. S. G. owns its own installations in Orsova and Temesvar, it is notallowed to place pontons in front of them, soit is prevented from using them for its business. The M. F. T. R. has a ponton of its own only at Giurgiu. The Roumanian authorities have explained that there is a great shortage of pontons. They have indicated that, while formerly some objection was offered in at least one specific instance to a shipping company placing its own ponton, at present there is no objection in point of principle to making arrangements of this sort with shipping companies. The State, however, imposes a condition that, after the lapse of a specified number of years, the ponton will become the property of the State. It is hoped therefore that foreign shipping companies which have pontons which will be available for such use, will be able to negotiate reasonable arrangements so as to increase the ponton facilities in Roumania. As to Braila and Galatz, the situation appears to be unreasonable from the standpoint of foreign river shipping companies. The available facilities for river shipping are now almost entirely devoted to the use of the Roumanian State shipping concern and the Roumanian shipping companies. The Roumanian representative explained that this is necessary because the expansion of the Roumanian shipping interests is such as to take up all the available space, and besides there is a shortage of pontons. This results in forcing the foreign companies, notably the D. D. S. G. and the M. F. T. R., to use ocean docks for their river boats. They repre­ sent that this is decidedly disavantageous because the docks were designed for the use of ocean-going steamers, and that in using the ocean docks it is necessary to keep a tug under steam for the purpose of promptly shifting the barges. The Roumanian authorities state that they are trying to remedy this condition, and have in mind making an effort to arrange for each two of the foreign companies to use j ointly a single ponton. The Roumanian representatives do not assert any claim of right to discriminate against the foreign shipping companies in the use of facilities at Braila and Galatz. It is obviously a difficult situation but it is believed the only solution will be for the Roumanian authorities to find some way to give the foreign companies equal treatment with the State shipping concern and their State shipping companies. It appears that at Giurgiu there is a contract between the stevedores and the harbour authorities which provides that the stevedores shall work for the N. F. R. at 20 per cent less than for companies under foreign flags. The explanation given of this arrangement is th at the N. F. R. is able to assure more steady employment for the stevedores than is the case with reference to foreign shipping. It seems evident that an arrangement of this cha­ racter involves the danger of substantial discrimination against foreign shipping, and it cer­ tainly is an undesirable precedent. Although there is no reason to believe that this particular arrangement was prompted by any considerations other than those of economic differences, nevertheless, if such arrangements should become general, it would be impossible to prevent their becoming the cloak for various forms of unjust discrimination in favour of domestic companies.

Bulgaria. In this country all companies are allowed to have their own pontons and landing facilities. It is reported that Bulgaria makes a reduction of 50 per cent on the harbour dues in favour of boats flying the Bulgarian flag and registered in some Bulgarian Danube port. The Bulgarian officials claim that the tonnage under their flag is very small and that this has not operated particularly to the disadvantage of the foreign shipping companies. It is, however, not in conformity with the Danube Statute, which requires that such dues are to be levied in accordance with the same schedule for all flags. The D. D. S. G. claim that the companies themselves cannot handle goods from ship to rail direct but that, in accordance with special regulations in Bulgaria, this type of work can be carried out only by a customs forwarding agent duly licensed by the State authorities. This company states that the rates charged by these forwarding agents are in excess of what they would be able to do the work for themselves. This is emphatically denied by the Bul­ garian authorities who state that the necessity for employing such an agent could not arise, except for a vessel entering Bulgarian waters for the first time and employing such an agent because the master was not familiar with the port regulations. The D. D. S. G. has also stated that the Bulgarian authorities have recently required them to remove their ponton at Somovit and to substitute one not in excess of 25 meters in length. The D. D. S. G. claims that it would be dangerous for large boats to land against such a small ponton. The Bulgarian authorities, however, state that the D. D. S. G. ponton will be left in its present position and that the question has been decided in a manner that can but give full satisfaction to the D. D. S. G. Port Dues. So far as these have been officially reported, they appear in Annex VI.

XIII. LIENS ON VESSELS. It appears that at present no completely satisfactory scheme of laws exists along the Danube to ensure giving effect to liens placed upon tugs, barges and other floating material for the purpose of securing loans. In the existing state of law, it is by no means clear that a lien created upon a vessel for the purpose of securing a loan (even if the law of the State in which the vessel is registered provides for the creation of such a lien), will be respected in other riparian States in whose territory the vessel may find itself from time to time and in which claims may be asserted against it. In such circumstances it would seem to be clearly in the common interests of all the ripa­ rian States to join in a convention which would bring about the necessary legal provisions to ensure the validity, in all the riparian States, of a lien duly created upon a vessel in the State in which that vessel is registered. It is frequently the case that navigation companies need additional working capital which they could borrow on much better terms if they could give satisfactory security therefor. Again, it will no doubt be found essential, in the development of navigation, for the various navigation companies to acquire modern equipment, especially the most modern tugs and self-propelled barges. All such operations will be distinctly facilitated if the navigation companies are in a position to give liens upon their vessels which will be recognised everywhere as valid. The Danube Statute provides in Article 40 that the signatory States shall endeavour by separate conventions to establish uniform civil and commercial regulations relative to the exercise of navigation and to shipping contracts. It is understood that already efforts are being made to promote this highly desirable con­ dition of uniformity. In practically all these matters uniformity will be an additional pro­ tection to each State because the more uniform are the regulations, the more certain and easy will be their enforcement. "Without implying any lack of appreciation of the extreme desirability of achieving this uniformity in all the matters referred to in the article cited, the specific suggestion of uniform provisions on liens on vessels is urged as worthy of the co-operation of the States. — 50 —

XIV. STATISTICS.

The absence of statistics for Danube navigation has already been mentioned. From the outset the present study has been handicapped by a lack of accurate data on the subjects covered by it. Statistics in no two countries seem to be made on the same basis, and those that are kept are frequently fragmentary. It is believed th at the interest of all will be directly pro­ moted by creating a system of statistics on a uniform basis pertaining to the various items of interest to shipping on the river, such as physical data and data on the volume and character of freight and passenger traffic transported. With full recognition of the fact that each State has its own special interests to promote in the matter of Danube navigation, it is also true that all the States have a common interest in seeing that navigation is not impaired either by physical obstacles or by other burdens placed upon navigation or by excessive competition of other routes of travel. The only way for the States to have reliable information to enable them to estimate satisfactorily the actual state of navigation and to explore the causes of impairments thereof is to have reliable statistics, available with reasonable promptness after the conclusion of each calendar year, showing the facts as to the traffic, freight and passengei, carried on the river. It would seem that no comprehensive project for the improvement of the river could be intelligently established without the full knowledge of the actual physical conditions of the river and without adequate general statistics showing the volume, origin and destination of traffic and the means and method by which it is carried. The only approximate general statistics which have been obtainable for the present report have been statistics of tons carried. It would be far more satisfactory if, in addition to tons carried, there could also be figures of the ton kilometers. Statistics of passengers carried and of passenger kilometers are likewise desirable. It would probably be feasible and, if so, desirable to show, along the lines of a broad classification, the character of the tonnage carried, and from what country and to what country the various classes are carried. The suggestion has been offered that in view of the variety of languages and the variety of alphabets in the ripa­ rian States, it would be feasible and desirable to develop a system for the collection of statis­ tics which could be expressed wholly or almost wholly in the form of charts which, on their face and without translation, would be equally understandable in all the riparian countries. Of course, no more can be done here than to bring up the possibilities for consideration in respect of the desirability of certain sorts of statistics. It will be for the representatives of the States, with full knowledge of the situation, to decide what is desirable and feasible. It is understood that in the past some objection has been offered to the creation of such statistics because it has been said that to call for these would involve some infringement of the sovereignty of the respective States. It is difficult to see how this argument can be sound, since the States, by arranging through their representatives for the compilation of the statis­ tics, would thereby give the support of their sovereignty to the work in question. A State undertakes to do many things in co-operation with other States, and the exercise of its sove­ reignty for such a purpose should not be regarded as an infringement upon that sovereignty. It is believed that reasonable and highly useful statistics could be assembled and published in such a manner as not to involve any invasion of the reasonable privacy of the business of the various shipping companies. Indeed, those statistics would be of immense value to those companies. Certainly in other parts of the world transportation statistics are currently obtained from transportation interests which are in continual and intense competition a n d yet the reason­ able rights of privacy of the particular transportation interests are not regarded as injuriously invaded thereby. In the United States, for example, statistics have long been obtained from the various railway companies which are always aggressively competing with each other. Not only are these statistics accepted as entirely compatible with the rights of the particular com­ panies, but they are regarded by all the companies as having very great value to them. In this connection attention is invited to the precedent already set by the Central Commis­ sion for Rhine Navigation. This Commission publishes yearly a book of extremely useful •— 51 — statistics, which are considered valuable by all concerned. There has been no question here that the sovereignty of the riparian States has been impaired, or that the rights of particular naviga­ tion companies have been injured. For the Danube, at present, the only statistics available are those of the International Commission and of the European Commission. Tables are included in Annex II to illustrate the character of the statistics compiled by the two Danube Commissions. It will be seen from them that the statistics for the Iron Gates show the tonnage of the vessels upstream and down­ stream, and give an analysis of the cargo, showing the number of tons and the character. The European Commission publishes yearly, in booklet form and as annexes to its book of proto­ cols, tables showing a great variety of interesting information as to vessels using the maritime Danube and as to the volume and character of goods exported. Up to the end of 1924, no statistics have been published by the European Commission on imports, except fragmentary data on coal. It is understood that the Commission is now collecting information on imports, and that it will be able in the future to give such information. It would also seem to be desirable for the Commission to indicate the origin and destination of the merchandise imported and exported.

XV.

INTERNATIONAL DANUBE COMMISSION. (C. I. D.)

This Commission was created first under Article 286 of the Treaty of Trianon and the corresponding articles of the other Peace Treaties. The Commission has continued under the Danube Statute (which became effective on October 1st, 1922) for the purpose of seeing to the carrying out of its provisions. The following States were parties to the Convention instituting that Statute : Austria, Great Britain, Belgium, Greece, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Italy France, Roumania, Germany. Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. By this Convention, these States obligated themselves to adopt and carry out the provi­ sions set forth in the Danube Statute. The members of the International Commission are the representatives of the signatory States to ensure the carrying into practical effect of the obligations which those States thus assumed. The Commission is composed of two repre­ sentatives of the German riparian States ( and Wurtemberg), and one representative each of the other riparian States, and one representative each of the non-riparian States repre­ sented on the European Danube Commission, that is, at present, France, Great Britain and Italy.

General Outline of the Commission’s Responsibility. To obtain a general idea of the responsibilities which the signatory States have undertaken to discharge and of the functions which they have conferred upon the International Commission for the purpose of promoting the full discharge of those obligations, a brief summary (which is intended to be merely suggestive rattier than exhaustive) of the provisions of the Danube Statute, with particular reference to the duties of the International Commission, will be helpful. The Commission is created to see to the carrying out of the provisions of the Statute in respect to the internationalised Danube river system, as defined in the Statute, for the whole of the navigable part of that system above Braila. The Commission is to assure freedom of navigation and equality of treatm ent of all flags ; is responsible that no obstacle shall be placed — 52 — by any State on unrestricted navigation ; that access to the ports is equal to all and that the international character of the river system suffers no prejudice. The Commission is required to draw up a general plan of improvement works for the river system, and also to decide whether each riparian State’s annual programme of current main­ tenance and improvement conforms to the requirements of navigation, and, if necessary, to modify the same. The Commission is to see that the programmes are carried out and* if necessary, may do such work itself. If current maintenance by a State substantially exceeds what its own traffic requires, the Commission may distribute the expense and ensure settle­ ment. As to improvement works, the Commission, to cover costs, may authorise moderate navigation dues based on shipping tonnage (but not on the goods carried) and may itself impose such dues if it carries out such works itself. Where the States fail to agree on the execution of the necessary works and the apportionment of the expenditure, the Commission shall decide. The Statute makes numerous provisions requiring the equal imposition of Customs and taxes of all kinds, equal treatment in ports as to access, loading and discharging ; declares : (a) that port taxes for public loading and discharging must correspond to the expense of construction, maintenance and operation ; (6) that navigation companies shall not be hindered in establishing necessary agencies, subject to the State’s laws and regulations ; (c) that transport shall be open to all (subject to qualifications as to internal transport) ; (d) that transport traffic shall be free (subject to the right to enforce certain precautionary measures when both shores belong to the same country). The Commission’s general obligation to ensure freedom of navigation and absence of obstacles, of course, imposes upon it grave responsibilities as to all these matters. The Commission is also to draw up shipping and police regulations for the waterway. The Statute requires the Commission to establish a permanent Secretariat, a Technical Department, a Navigation Service, and an Accounting and Tax Controlling Department. In the Iron Gates Section, Roumania and the S. H. S. State, with the Commission, are required to set up a special technical and administrative service. The Commission is to decide the measures for upkeep and improvement of this section, and the dues to meet the expenditure, and as to regulating the working of the services. The Commission determines its procedure, must have a quorum of two-thirds, and decisions must be taken by a majority vote of two-thirds of the members present. Questions of inter­ pretation and application of the Statute must be submitted to the Commission, the respective States having certain powers of submitting the Commission’s decisions to the special jurisdiction set up for that purpose by the League of Nations. The foregoing summary, while incomplete, suffices to suggest the gravity and the complexity of the duties which rest upon the members of the Commission and which the States they repre­ sent are under obligation to cause to be performed, to the end that the treaty obligations of those States shall be carried out.

Difficulties confronting the Commission and its Important Accomplishments. In commenting upon the extent to which the Commission has been able up to the present time to perform the functions imposed upon it, it is im portant not to overlook the extraordin­ ary difficulties which have confronted the Commission in the early years of its existence. At the close of the war each of the Danube countries was wholly preoccupied with different and overwhelming problems. Measures which seemed indispensable for self-preservation and for adaptation to fundamental changes which had suddenly come about inevitably found expression in an intensely nationalistic attitude, which was greatly accentuated by the passions aroused by the war and the subsequent reconstruction of national boundaries. In such circumstances it was extremely difficult for any of the Danube States at the outset to consider the special problems of the Danube in an atmosphere where dSe regard could be given to the mutual interests of the States in protecting and promoting Danube navigation. Little by little it is believed that in these respects conditions have immensely improved and that favourable pro­ gress is being made. But, on account of the extremely difficult situation in which each of the States found itself, the questions arising in the administration of the Danube Statute have called for a very large amount of debate and this has made it almost impossible, in the limited period of the Commission’s sessions, to reach definite conclusions on many of the matters presented to it and calling for its decisions, and upon many other matters calling for the exercise of initiative by it. Despite the difficulties with which the Commission has thus been confronted, it is never­ theless true that, even in the extremely troublesome formative period through which it has had to go, it has already been able to render important services. Although the Commission has not drawn up the general plan required by the Statute for improvement works for the river system, it adopted, in June 1922, a set of principles to govern the various States in sub­ mitting projects to the Commission for approval. It has adopted a uniform system of kilo­ métrage for the entire river. It has likewise established an Information Section for furnishing the navigators with data as to the depths to be expected between stations, and as to whether the river is rising or falling. It has dealt with such programmes as the States have submitted for annual maintenance work. In one instance where a shoal developed below Devin, the Commisson took the initiative in getting the State of Czechoslovakia to start dredging promptly, so as to open a new channel. The Commission has in its resolutions pronounced certain 11 directives ” on the subject of freedom of transit. The Commission has drawn up a uniform set of shipping and police regulations which, while not entirely complete, cover a large number of important subjects. The Commission has administered the service at the Iron Gates, and fixed the dues to be imposed on ship tonnage in respect thereto. The Commission has also established principles governing a uniform system for th e establishment of aids to navigation. The accomplishments indicated have called for an immense amount of effort, much more than is indicated by a mere recital of the things done. When it is remembered that the points of view of ten different Powers must be obtained, that much time must elapse in doing this, that the Commission has only two regular sessions per year, each for only a period of about two weeks, and that decisions must be reached by two-thirds of the votes, the accomplishments listed, as well as others which have not been mentioned, represent substantial achievements.

Comments upon Postponements of Action. On the other hand, it is only fair to say, and it is believed that the fact is recognised by the members of the Commission, that many things contemplated by the Statute, and in the interests of the various signatories of the Convention, have not yet been accomplished. For example, the Commission has not drawn up the contemplated general plan of improvement works. It has not succeeded in bringing about agreement between frontier States as to distri­ bution of expense of works, nor has the Commission itself undertaken to perform such works. It has not established as separate departments a technical service or a navigation service, although it has established technical and navigation bureaux in the general Secretariat, but it has not provided the necessary facilities nor given the necessary orders to enable either of these bureaux to render the important aid which could be rendered in the general interest by the technical and navigation services contemplated by the Statute, if such services were established and were adequately supported. Doubtless an important influence in this regard is that all the States have felt compelled to economise in their expenditure and hence have discouraged their representatives on the Commission from enlarging the budget of the Com­ mission, which must be paid either by contributions from the States or by navigation dues, which the Commission hesitates to impose. In addition, it is apparent that the Commission has found extreme difficulty in reaching decisions upon numerous extremely important ques­ tions which have arisen, and which the Danube Statute makes it the duty of the Commission to decide. There is attached hereto, as Annex IX, a brief summary of the various decisions taken and matters postponed at the Commission’s sessions, from and including its first session in June 1920. These references are necessarily extremely brief and may not give a complete and accurate idea as to the scope of each item. Nevertheless, it is believed the summary is extremely useful in suggesting the variety of problems which have confronted the Commission and the extent to which the Commission has found itself unable to deal with them. It might be roughly said that matters postponed have substantially exceeded matters decided and that of#the matters decided perhaps two-thirds relate primarily to questions of the Commission’s own 54 — administration, matters connected with its personnel, etc., while perhaps two-thirds of the questions not disposed of represent important problems having a direct relation to the broad principles and purposes of the Danube Statute, i.e., to the matters of promoting freedom of transit, full and equal access to ports, non-preferential treatment, facilitating the due main­ tenance and improvement of the river, etc. It goes without saying that the accomplishment of the purposes of the Danube Statute and h: nee the realisation of the most expeditious and economical navigation of the river to the advantage of all the Danube countries, will be immensely promoted by the Commission reaching the point where it will be able to deal promptly and decisively with the numerous important matters which in the past it has felt compelled to postpone, and on which action was again deferred at its session just closed on July 15th, 1925. This effort to analyse the character and extent of the Commission’s responsibilities, the history of its work and the present status of that work, raises the question whether the Commis­ sion will not find itself compelled by the importance and urgency of its obligations to provide much more frequent sessions, and sessions of a sufficiently long duration, to enable it to discuss to a conclusion the numerous matters which so far it has not been able to decide and which appear to continue to be accumulating upon its hands. So far it does not appear that anything in the nature of a closure upon debate has been attempted, and perhaps nothing of the sort is feasible in dealing with subjects which present so many different aspects, each of which is entitled to the fullest exposition. Nevertheless, should not due consideration be given to the thought that greater accomplishment could be achieved by inaugurating a policy whereby, at the end of discussion, a decision will be insisted upon rather than a postponement ? When the representatives present consent to a postpone­ ment, they assume thereby a joint responsibility for non-action, which after a time becomes equivalent to a refusal to act. Would not the efficacy of the Commission be increased if the policy of acquiescence in postponement should give place to the policy of insistence upon decisions ? Is it unreasonable to assume that, in most instances, at least two-thirds of the representatives present would prefer to identify themselves with a policy of action rather than with a policy of non-action ? Is it not true that many of the problems of real importance now arising do not involve any such fundamental difference of principle on matters of broad public policy as to preclude an agreement on such questions of principle on the part of at least two-thirds of the repre­ sentatives ? Many of the questions calling for decision appear to be of a practical and even technical character rather than of a political character. Virtually every Danube country now has an enormous direct interest in international navigation of the Danube, each having strong and growing navigation companies, all of which would have their interests promoted by removing all delays and obstructions, whether physical or administrative, which may stand in the way of the promptest and most economical navigation of the river. In the light of all these considerations, is it not apparent th a t more and more it will be found th at a t least two-thirds of the delegates will find no necessity for disagreement upon the principles involved in any particular question and will be increasingly able to agree upon the practical details of a solu­ tion ? Any reasonable settlement of matters of detail should be more agreeable to at least two-thirds of the representatives than a repeated postponement of action which, if continued, would amount in practice to a negation of the Statute in highly salutary particulars. Of course, if these premises are correct, the realisation of the desired result will be facilitated by the repre­ sentatives insisting upon a vote and a decision, rather than consenting to a postponement. A further question arises as to whether the Commission could not be aided in dealing promptly with the questions in its plenary sessions by more complete assemblage of information in advance of the sessions. From time to time, the Minutes of the Commission indicate that postponements are sought to obtain information, when it would seem that the information might have been obtained in advance of the session. It is not without a sense of hesitation and embarrassment that the foregoing observations are made. The Commission is composed of gentlemen of long experience and recognised stand­ ing in dealing with the delicate problems which are entrusted to them. Nevertheless, since this report is expected to cover this aspect an well as others of Danube navigation, it has seemed appropriate to submit the foregoing analysis and state the foregoing queries, in the hope that — 55 —

they may be found worthy of examination, or rather re-examination, since they doubtless have already been seriously considered. Even if these queries should not point to a solution, perhaps they may suggest alternatives which will aid in bringing about a much prompter reaching of decisions than appears to have been practicable up to the present moment.

XVI.

EUROPEAN DANUBE COMMISSION. (C. E. D.) This Commission exercises jurisdiction over the river from Braila to the sea. The reasons for the creation of the Commission, as given in Articles 15 and 16 ol the Treaty of of 1856, were to guarantee the freedom of navigation and to design and carry out various works of channel improvement in the section of the river over which the Commission was given juris­ diction. It would seem that the Commission has fully carried out the mandate given it to guarantee the freedom of navigation and the equality of treatm ent to all flags. It terminated piracy, which was practised at the mouths of the river when it originally took office, and has stopped the abuses of the pilots and other river men of that time. Criticism, however, has been directed against the Commission in connection with the improvement of the river and in connection with the dues levied to pay therefor. Such facts as have been made available for this study may be summarised as follows :

Work of Channel Improvement. Up to 1904, the works installed by the Commission had progressively increased the facilities available for shipping, and had been the subject of repeated praise on the part of the Roumanian officials. In that year the sandbank to the south of the jetties began to force northwardly the alignment of the channel over the bar, and in 1907 the Commission was informed by its engineer that dredging could not be expected to produce more than temporary benefits. The Commission’s only action, however, was to engage more actively in dredging, and it purchased another dredge. N )t until 1911 (when it purchased still another dredge) did it begin to accumulate in a small way a fund for the prolongation of the jetties. In 1914 the depth of 24 feet, which had been maintained almost continuously up to that time, was lost. The war broke out and the reserve fund which had been started in 1911 was evidently used up during the war to carry on such dredging and absolutely necessary work as was possible. After the war, as soon as the Commission began to function, it began to give consideration to the improvement of conditions as they then existed. In 1921, aboard of consulting engineers was summoned, which laid down a project for the extension of the jetties. As soon as the necessary personnel and material could be assembled, work was begun on the new project, and this has been carried on ever since. In the summer of 1924, the depth suddenly diminished to 13% feet. A new alignment still further to the north was selected for a temporary entrance channel across the bar, and communication was again resumed and maintained, with depths varying from 18 to 21 feet, until July 25th, 1925. On this date the new channel through the extended jetties was opened for traffic with an available depth of 20 feet. On July 31st this had been increased to 22 feet and work is continuing with a view to regaining the depth of 24 feet. It would seem from examination of these facts that the Commission erred in not beginning the creation of a fund to prolong the jetties in 1904 or in any event in 1907. But notwith­ standing this mistake, to which no one at the time took exception, it would probably have succeeded in preventing such bad conditions as have obtained since 1914 had the war not broken out in that year. Since 1921, the Commission has done all that anyone reasonably could have expected it to do. It is, however, easy to criticise a decision after the îesults of it have become known, and it seems somewhat unfair to begin now a criticism of conditions which are fundamentally based on a course of action taken from 1904 to 1911. — 56 —

Roumanian interests have insisted that the import and export traffic of Braila and Galatz were seriously injured in 1924 by the shallowness of the channel at Sulina. The Chamber of Commerce at Galatz submitted a list of 32 or more vessels which in 1924 had to abandon their trip to Braila and Galatz, take a partial cargo in port or complete their lading in th e roads outside the bar. On one of the visits to Sulina in the course of this investigation, it appeared that three or four vessels had to delay their departure for two or three days on account of a drop of about one foot in the depth in the entrance channel. However, the effect appears to have been exaggerated. Constanza is a Roumanian port which was not affected at all by conditions on the Danube. The figures for Constanza in Table 5, Annex II, show that conditions there have been the same as, if not worse than, those at Galatz and Brail?. This suggests that the falling off in the commerce of Roumanian maritime ports must be due principally to some other cause than the conditions at Sulina. According to the reports of one ot the consuls in Constanza, exports of cereals have dropped to about one-half and petrol products to about one-quarter of the pre-war figures. The reason for this drop is attributed by him to the agrarian reform in Roumania, and to the necessity of supplying a larger population in territories acquired since the war which are not self-supporting agriculturally or as to mineral oil products. The very heavy export tax on all cereals and the prohibition upon the exportation of wheat must have been very injurious to the com­ merce of Roumania’s maritime ports, and besides must have discouraged the production of cereals. The ships appear to have been able to carry all the traffic from Braila and Galatz which has been brought there for export. At the time of a visit to Braila and Galatz about the middle of May 1925, there was practically no grain in the elevators of Braila and Galatz. One of the consuls in Braila reports : “ The lack of organisation in the railway systems has occasioned complaints during 1924 both from importers and exporters. The railway authorities have been unable to furnish a sufficient number of cars to deal adequately with the merchandise passing through Braila, and in consequence there have been considerable delays. ” These considerations indicate that the principal damage to commerce was not due to restriction on the draught of vessels at Sulina, but was due to other conditions prevailing in Roumania, although the shallowness of the Sulina channel must have caused some losses on account of delays and the cost of lighteiing.

Dues.

In order to pay for the new works, it was necessary for the Commission to meet the expense from current dues. To this end the dues were raised in 1922 and again on January 1st, 1925, the present rates being at the time of their coming into effect 250 per cent of the pre-war and 140 per cent of the 1922 rate. This is shown in the following table, the dues being stated in French francs per ton of registered tonnage :

Oct. 1st, 1922 2 Present 1 Pre-war1 Dec. 31st, 1924 [effective Jan. 1, 1925 Tonnage of Boats. Braila or Braila or Braila or Sulina Galatz Sulina Galatz Sulina Galatz 201- 600 0.30 0.55 1.90 3.55 0.75 1.37 601-1,000 0.60 1.10 3.85 7.05 1.50 2.75 1,001-1,500 0.90 1.40 5.80 9.00 2.25 3.50 More than 1,500 tons 1.10 1.70 7.05 10.90 2.75 4.25

1 Gold. 1 Paper — 57 —

The question naturally arises as to the effect of these dues on the movement of Roumanian products from the mouths Oi the Danube and on the shipping companies handling these pro­ ducts, and on the imports into Roumania. The ocean carrier pays these dues and takes them into consideration in fixing the shipping rates. Therefore the first effect that might have been expected would have been an increase in the shipping rates. On the contrary, the ocean rates since January 1925 have been regarded as substantially below the normal ocean rates. In 1924, the ocean rates had fallen to the abnormally low figure of 11 shillings per ton, due to the small amount of cargo offered, and in the first half of 1925 were from 11 to 15 shillings per ton, the increase being said to be due to the increased demand loi shipping on account of the large move­ ment of S. H. S. maize. This suggests that any falling off in Roumanian export and import traffic has not been occasioned by the increase in these dues, but is caused by other conditions. In this connection an examination of the total sums figured out for various purposes on an actual movement from Braila to Antwerp is useful :

5200 tons full cargo of corn from Braila to Antwerp. 1. Roumanian export tax on cargo 520 trucks at £ 2 3 ...... £11,960 2. Total ocean freight earned at 15s. per ton (average)...... £3,900 This includes : Port charges Braila (maximum Lei 10,000) European Commission dues ...... I 604 Port dues at port of destination (Antwerp) £ 70 Note : The Roumanian Government further collects 1 per cent on total freight — half paid by owner and half by shipper. It will be seen from this that the total freight paid to the shipping company was only £3,900, whereas the export tax was £11,960. The European Commission dues of £604 are included in the £3,900 and absorbed in the freight rate. The Commission is, of course, forced to pay for the work now being completed with current receipts, as it has been unable to obtain long-term loans to cove* these expenditures. While the dues are very high, they do not appeal to be injuring commerce, at least under existing conditions of ocean freight rates. There was in the spring ol 1925 a very large movement of maize from the S. H. S. State through Sulina, and also a very large movement of Roumanian lumber. The reason there has been a very small movement of Roumanian cereals is that internal conditions appear to discourage production and to render exportation extremely difticult. Criticism directed against the Commission. In connection with the criticism directed against the Commission, there has been an impli- cation on the part of the Roumanians that the Commission has been extravagant. It is some­ what difficult to be precise on this point. An examination of the 1925 Budget ol the Commission, however, shows that the overhead of the Commission amounts to approximately 25 per cent of the total disbursements. In 1925, of the 13,444,900 French francs (paper) at which the total expenses of the Commission were originally estimated, 3,679,300 French francs are overhead. This figure seems rather large, particularly so as the construction work now being carried on by the Commission is greatly in excess of what it would be in normal jjpars. A consideration of this would seem to indicate that some reorganisation of the worl and personnel might effect substantial economies. The necessity for the maintenance of the Commission’s headquarters building in Galatz is likewise open to question, as a large part of this establishment is maintained for the use of the delegates themselves, who rarely spend more than a few days per year in the building. If such a suggestion is practicable, a consolidation of all of the Commission’s services in Sulina, except a small establishment at the wharf in Galati,, would reduce the present expen­ diture by about 4 per cent, or 500,000 French francs per year. In a normal year, this sum would oe a much larger percentage of the disbursements. In addition, the sale ot the headquarters building would bring in an appreciable amount, which could be applied to the amortisation — 58 -

ot the floating plant which has not yet been paid for, or else used in the improvement work Since the Commission’s work is chiefly connected with engineering, it would seem worth while to give consideration to the advisability oî having the Commission’s membership made up of technical experts, who could also serve as a board of consulting engineers. This, too, might lead to appreciable economies. The only apparent alternative, and it is the solution contemplated by the Roumanian critics of the Commission, is to abolish the Commission and to have all the affairs of administra­ tion and improvement handled by the Roumanian Government. The wisdom of such a pro­ cedure is questionable, as that Government has as a heritage of the war many grave and unsolved problems. Among these questions somewhat analogous to the situation at the m ouths of the Danube may be found the lehabilitation and extension of the Roumanian railway, road telegraph and telephone services, all of which are admittedly still imperfect. It would not seem to be the part ot wisdom to attempt to impose upon that Government additional respon­ sibilities until it has been able to recover more tullj from the effects of the war and to dispose more satisfactorily of such new burdens as already rest upon it.

XVII. GREATER CO OPERATION RETWEEN RAILWAYS AND DANUBE NAVIGATION.

It is believed that this is a subject of great importance to Darube navigation. Such a great river can never play a satisfactory rôle as a transportation agency unless it can be articulated with the railways, so as to receive traffic from them and supply traffic to them more completely than is now the case. The difficulty appears to be that the State railway administration in each of the Danube States is much more disposed to co-operate with other railways than it is with Danube navi­ gation. Through bills of lading are issued for through rail transportation to points in other countries, but not for rail and river transportation. Through rates are established with other railways, but not with the river. Yet in many instances the State in which the traffic origi­ nates would really have its interests better promoted if traffic by its own railway and the Danube could be encouraged rather than by its own railway and the railways of other countries. When the traffic moves by the railway of the State in which the traffic originates, and beyond its frontier by the other railways, the only revenue received by the State of origin is the revenue to the frontier. But if the traffic moves by railway to the Danube and thence by the Danube, the strong probability is that the traffic will move on the Danube in the vessels of the domestic navigation company, and in this way the State and its nationals will get the entire revenue on the traffic from the point of origin to destination ; first a substantial rail revenue to the river, and then also the revenue for the river transport. Up to the present time, not only has there not been a satisfactory co-operation of the rail­ ways with the Danube, but, on the contrary, the railways have established extremely low special rates for the benefit of trade routes competitive with the Danube, the result being to take traffic away from the Danube altogether. The German railways appear to have encouraged the rail movement of traffic away from the Danube instead of to it. The Czechoslovak, Austrian and S. H. S. railways aie understood to have co-operated in making very low rates to Trieste, which have taken the traffic away from the Danube, causing it to move instead by sea and rail. It is believed the navigation companies are justified in the efforts which they are making to secure much greatei consideration in the adjustment of railway rates ard policies so as to be favourable to the Danube rather than unfavourable to it, and it is believed that the respective Danube States would be justified in giving sympathetic consideration t o th e s e efforts of the Danube navigation companies. Czechoslovakia has already made some efforts to co-operate. It has established special rates on its railways in favour of its Danube ports, but through rail-Danube rates or through bills of lading have not yet been provided. — 59 —

XVIII.

EFFICIENCY OF NAVIGATION ON THE DANUBE.

This report has been devoted largely to a discussion of burdens which may rest upon navi- oation by reason of unnecessary requirements and delays imposed by State laws or other public regulations, or resulting in practice from the attitude of State or local functionaries. Relief from unnecessary burdens is, of course, important to the end that navigation may increase in volume and importance, despite the serious and varied competition to which it is subjected by the activities of other trade routes and by the conditions prevailing in the world markets in which Danube products must to a large extent be sold. It is important also to raise the question whether Danube navigation cannot be improved and strengthened by the navigation companies themselves increasing the efficiency of their operations. It has been impossible in the time allotted to this investigation to make a searching study of these intricate problems, so that all that can be done is to suggest various questions which have arisen. It is believed th at the vigilant representatives of the navigation companies will be quick to pursue to satisfactory conclusion any such enquiry which may appear to be worthy of further attention.

More efficient Loading of Barges ; more Complete Tows for Tugs; Elimination of Delay for Barges and Tugs.

This matter is approached from the standpoint of a iheory which has proved of immense value in increasing the efficiency of railway transportation in the United States. That theory is that perhaps the greatest losses in efficiency are due first to the railway wagons being loaded to less than their capacity, and, second, to the railway locomotives being sent out on the railway with train-loads below the capacity of the locomotives. The theory was concisely expressed by one of the greatest practical exponents of railway economy in the United States, the late James J. Hill, by the statement," First load your cars and then load your locomotives ” , meaning, in each case, to load to the capacity of the instrumentality. Another factor of very great importance in railway transportation is the avoidance of undue delays to railway wagons or to locomotives in terminals or other stations. In these respects, railway transport and river transport have, of course, certain analogies. It means serious waste of capital and loss of the amount expended for maintenance if three barges are employed to transport what could be loaded in two ; or if two tugs are employed to tow barges which could be towed by one tug ; or if barges and tugs are wasted through idleness or delay. As to inadequate loading of barges, the figures shown in Annex II for movement through the Iron Gates in 1911 and 1924 indicate great differences between the degree of utilisation on the part of different companies. While the matter is largely determined by commercial and other factors beyond the control of the companies, there appears basis for the inquiry whether there is not room for the securing of greater loads, more nearly approaching the capacity of the barges. If a barge has only one-third of a full load in both directions the barge expenses per ton are double what they are when two-thirds of a full load in both directions are carried. These expenses represent not only the return on the investment and maintenance cost of the barge, but also the wages of the members of the crew of the barge. Further than that, the increased expense is also reflected in the tug-boat expense. If a tug-boat has to tow four barges where two could carry the cargo, the empty weight of the two additional barges is a wasteful burden upon the tractive power of the tug, and deprives it to that extent of ability to be employed in profitable work. It is, of course, a serious practical question as to what can be accomplished in the way of obtaining fuller loading of barges. It is not overlooked that low water is sometimes a limiting 60 — factor. But cannot increased effort secure loading more nearly to what the state of the water will permit ? Perhaps there may be opportunity for more careful supervision to pre­ vent the cross hauling of empty barges, i.e., some barges moving empty upstream, while other similar barges are moving empty downstream at approximately the same time. Anything that diminishes the empty movement will increase the average utilisation of barges. Again careful attention on the part of agents to the manner in which forwarders load the barges may secure better loading. No information is at hand as to the extent to which, if at all, the com­ panies seek to encourage heavy loading by giving lower rates per ton in case of a complete load than in case of a partial load. It would seem that the companies could well afford to consider favourably the offering of inducements of this character. Do the navigation companies get a high degree of performance out of their tug-boats by giving them full tows to pull, or is the capacity of the tug-boats wasted to a considerable extent by their pulling tows much below their capacity ? Voyages on the river have left the impres­ sion that in many instances the tows are much below the capacity of the tug-boats. The practice of moving tows which are below the capacity of the tug-boat instead of giving it a tow equal to its capacity involves a direct waste of a part of the capital invested in the tug-boats and also of the operating costs of the tug-boat. If three loaded barges are towed, the towing cost per ton of freight handled (including return on the capital investment) is twice what it would be if six loaded barges were towed (assuming the tug-boat has capacity to tow six loaded barges). While the loading of barges is largely in the hands of the buyer and the seller of the cargo, the loading of the tug with a full tow is much more largely in the hands of the navigation com­ pany. While appreciating that many obstacles are in the way of realising the ideal, it is believed that intensive effort will likely show that efficiency can be greatly increased, at least as to a good many of the companies, through substantially increasing the average size of tows. One way, referred to below, of getting greater tug-boat efficiency is for different companies to consolidate their incomplete tows and have the consolidated tow pulled by a single tug-boat. As to time lost by barges and tug-boats, it is of course clear th at such loss represents a loss of capital and a loss of what is spent for operation. Time lost by barges is largely due to slowness of loading and unloading, but perhaps is also due in some cases to insufficient planning. Cannot the loading and unloading be expedited ? It means, in busy seasons, an important difference in earnirgs. Time lost by tug-boats would seem to be more in the control of the companies, and depen­ dent on careful planning. It is assumed that at least some of the companies make careful current studies of their problems and show, for example, the kilometers per year and the average kilometers per day made by each tug-boat ; the average hours of running time per day of each tug-boat, and the average kilometers per hour of running time made by it. Such imperfect studies in this direc­ tion as have been possible in this investigation suggest that complete studies along these lines would be well worth while and would probably emphasise a low performance for the tug-boats. There are included in Annex VIII some extracts of notes upon particular voyages of tug­ boats. These cases are probably not average cases, but they seem suggestive of methods which may tend to produce serious wastes of capital and operating cost unless very rigidly super­ vised (see also Annex VII). Anyone who has had contact with transportation problems, either on railways o r water­ ways, fully appreciates that the ideal cannot be realised in these matters ; that the seasonal character of the business, the emergency demands for movement of certain business, the im­ possibility of getting cargoes which exactly correspond to the capacity of the barges, the restrictions of low water on barge loading, the necessity for moving empty barges or partly loaded barges in one direction when the preponderance of traffic is moving in the other direc­ tion, the unavoidable necessity of moving tugs with incomplete tows, and many other insu­ perable obstacles, exist to getting the theoretical maximum. However, with full appreciation of the business necessities of the situation, the question still arises whether there cannot be put into effect on the Danube a more rigorous application than heretofore of principles analo­ gous to those which have meant so much in railway operation. Question as to Efficient Functioning of Many of the Existing Tugs.

Arother important question arises as to whether the tugs now employed on the river are of a character to give the maximum performance for the amount of fuel and labour required in their operation. It is fully appreciated that the long period of the war and the difficult readjustments foil owing the period of the war have had the tendency to compel the Danube navigation companies to do their work with tugs which in many instances were p rob ably rather old and inefficient at the beginning of the war in 1914. Naturally, the companies cannot discard these tugs and buy new ones simply for the pleasure of having new equipment. The question arises, however, whether on full analysis of the performance of particular tugs it may be found that the fuel and labour required for their operation are so much greater than would be required in the case of a modern tug that the savings resulting from the change would more than pay the additional interest which would be called for on account of making the new investment. It is appreciated, however, that the existing high interest rates may make uneconomical the substitution of new tugs for old ones in many cases where such substitution would be obviously uneconomical if moderate interest rates were obtainable. But nevertheless the question seems to be worthy of examination.

Special Telegraphic Communication for Navigation.

In connection with the most efficient utilisation of tugs and barges, it would seem that more speedy and reliable telegraphic communication along the river for the use of navigation companies would be of very great value. Practically all of the navigation representatives of whom the enquiry was made expressed this opinion. It is understood that a telegraph con­ vention among the riparian States has been drafted but has not yet been ratified. It is hoped that the necessary ratifications can be obtained and the necessary work done to the end that this telegraph service may be put upon the most expeditious and reliable basis. It would seem that such an improvement in communications would be of distinct value to forwarders and consignees in the prompt transportation of their consignments, as well as of great value in cutting down unnecessary losses of time in the handling of tugs and barges, and perhaps in many instances would avoid the necessity for a tug having to move with a tow less than its capacity.

Greater Co-operation among Navigation Companies.

There would seem to be opportunities for improving efficiency7 by means of a greater co-operation among the navigation companies in the use of their properties. The navigation com­ panies above the Iron Gates have already shown their ability to co-operate through forming a cartel for the regulation of their freight and passenger rates. The Bavarian Lloyd and the Czechoslovak Company have in addition set an excellent example by arranging for the common use of tugs, joint operation of self-propelled barges and for the common use in some instances of port facilities. A much greater degree of co-operation is certainly to be desired among the Danube navi­ gation companies. In an important respect, their operations are at a great disadvantage in comparison with those of their competitors, the railways. Within the limits of each State the railway operations are directed by a single administration and are unified or capable of being unified. It is possible to employ personnel, station facilities, shop facilities, locomotives, car­ riages and wagons so as to avoid wasteful duplication of investment or effort. But on every part of the Danube there is great multiplication of facilities and energy in all these respects. This condition gives the railways an opportunity for economy, which the navigation companies will not enjoy until they find methods to get rid of wasteful duplications or facilities and services which they might profitably use in common. 62 —

Common Use of Facilities in Ports.

At present there seems to be, at least in some of the important ports, a great multiplication of facilities and personnel. The question arises whether it would be found feasible and advan­ tageous in many cases for two or more of the navigation companies to join in using ware­ houses and other port facilities, so as to reduce rental charges and the charges for personnel Perhaps in some of the States it is impracticable under existing laws to diminish the existing personnel in any radical manner, but by degrees the existing personnel will retire, and if in the meantime co-operative methods have been developed which can be operated with smaller per­ sonnel, the way will thereby be open to important economies. In this respect also analogies may be drawn from the railway operations in the United States. In a great many instances several railways serving the same terminal, although they are intensely competitive, have found that it was greatly to their advantage to join in main­ taining a single terminal organisation and property for the common service of all the railways.

Common Use of Tug-boats.

The further question arises whether there could not be a great extension of the practice of the common use of tug-boats. When two companies must move barges and each has only half a tow the cost might be reduced by half if it could be arranged for one tug-boat to make the trip. Of course, numerous reasons may be given why such arrangements would not realise all the the economies theoretically in prospect, but it is believed that sufficiently comprehensive planning and sufficiently attentive administration would probably make them productive of large economy. A somewhat analogous railway situation is this : Railway A frequently gives the right to Railway B to run the latter’s trains over the tracks of Railway A for considerable distances, varying from a few miles to 100 miles or more. In this way a waste of capital is avoided, and a single maintenance cost is divided between two companies, so that each company has to pay only half the maintenance cost it would otherwise have to pay. This co-operative practice has been found practicable and highly desirable between railways which were intensely competitive. Common Use of Repair Shops.

The question arises also whether similar co-operation may not be practicable in respect of repair shops belonging to the navigation companies. Some of these companies have repair shops much in excess of their present needs. Other companies have far less repair facilities than are needed for their existing floating material. Why could not arrangements be made in the common interest of both classes of companies to bring about a utilisation of these shops by the companies which need such utihsation ? It would seem the way would be open for both companies to profit substantially by such a practice, and in this way the State to which each company belongs would likewise profit through the strengthening of its own company to a greater extent than if it had not availed itself of such opportunity for co-operation and economy.

Building up Tourist Passenger Travel.

Another question arises as to whether it is not practicable to develop a much larger tourist passenger business than now exists on the Danube. The Danube is not oidy a river possessing an extraordinary interest for the tourist from the scenic and historical standpoints, b u t it is a river which appears to have an exceptionally romantic appeal. It is certainly true in the United States that practically everyone who visits Europe expresses the desire, more or less vague, to make a trip on the Danube. Yet the river seems remote from the parts of Europe usually visited by such tourists. There is a lack of information as to the facilities available for the trip, or as to the time required, and the result is that an extremely small proportion of American tourists ever undertake the trip. The question arises whether by the careful — 6 3 — development of an effective service, perhaps with the co-operation of several of the navigation companies, and with an adequate advertising of this service, a very substantial increase could not be realised in the passenger traffic on the Danube. It would seem, too, that such a programme should involve an effort to encourage the passengers to travel upstream as well as downstream, because in many of the scenic aspects the upstream trip is even more attractive than the down­ stream trip. It would seem also that such a programme should involve arrangements for comfortable stops of several days at the principal Danube cities. It would not only tend to increase the volume of such passenger travel on the Danube, but it would be beneficial to the Danube coun­ tries as a whole, increasing the understanding of their problems by travellers from other parts of the world, and also giving a certain measure of additional business to those cities. These suggestions are offered for the scrutiny of those who are competent to appraise the possibilities in this direction, and the probable income and the probable cost to be expected on account of efforts of this character, and are offered with a very sincere desire to see a continued increase in the prosperity of the Danube navigation companies, and in the prosperity of the Danube States, as well as an increased understanding of their problems in other parts of the world.

XIX.

THE GENERAL FINANCIAL CREDIT OF THE DANUBE STATES.

It is believed that one of the greatest needs in all of the Danube States is to obtain capital for both public and private purposes on more favourable terms than capital is at present obtain­ able. The tremendous problems of readjustment, not only on the part of the Governments but on the part of private business, call for substantial amounts of capital ; and the accomplish- ment of readjustment has been retarded by the extremely high interest rates which have prevailed. The undersigned has been a most sympathetic observer of the needs of the Danube States for additional capital and of the difficulties which have confronted them in obtaining that capital. He believes that a distinct element of those difficulties is that financiers in other parts of the world have entertained a serious feeling of uncertainty as to the future stability of the Danube States on account of what frequently appears to be the marked degree of misunder­ standing and friction among them. Whatever can be done to remove the evidences of that friction will tend to allay the misgivings of those who have capital to lend. These considerations are mentioned for the purpose of emphasising that the state of rela­ tions among the Danube countries in respect of Danube navigation may in itself constitute an extremely significant index, in the minds of those having capital to lend, as to the degree of stability existing and in prospect in respect of the Danube countries. There is probably no other river in the world that possesses in public psychology a more definite individuality and sigidficance than the Danube. It is thought of as a symbol of the countries through which it flows. If the Danube’s problems are dealt with by the riparian States and their navigation companies in a business-like and co-operative manner, that fact will be taken as an index of increasing stability in the inter-relationships of the Danube countries. If friction should become intensified as to the Danube problems, that fact would be taken by the outside world, including the financial world, as an index of a discouraging condition of unstable relations among the Danube countries. Therefore, in addition to all the other advantages of co-operation as to the Danube, is it not obviously to the interest of every one of the Danube countries to make the status of Danube navigation a favourable rather than un unfavourable factor in its bearing upon financial credit ? It is believed that there is steady, though slow, progress in co-operation and understand­ ing- Each year some difficulties are being smoothed away. The object of these comments is to emphasise the great desirability of making even greater and more rapid progress, and to — 64 —

point out that doing so has an important relation to the broad question of the ability to borrow money on favourable terms for both State and private enterprises.

In conclusion, I wish to say that it has been a very great privilege to be given the oppor­ tunity to make this investigation. It has been most gratifying to see the progress the Danube countries have already made in solving their baffling post-war problems and in establishing encouraging beginnings of co-operative relationships with each other as to Danube navigation. I would like also, on behalf of Major Somervell and myself, to express our appreciation of the patience and courtesy with which the governmental and business representatives of the riparian States, as well as the representatives of the European Commission and the Inter­ national Commission, have responded to requests for information ; and also our deep appre­ ciation of the helpfulness of the Secretariat of the League of Nations in furnishing us such extensive facilities to do our work.

( Signed) W alker D. HINES.

Geneva, August 1st, 1925. PART 2.

An n e x I. MAP OF DANUBE. A n nex II. TBAFFIC STATISTICS. A nnex III. RIVER FLEETS. A nnex IV. SHIPYABDS. — 68

Suddeutsch Donaudampfschiffahrt Gesellschaft (S. D.) : Fleet ...... Port Facilities ...... Continentale Motorschiffahrts A. G. Amsterdam : Fleet ...... A g e n c ie s...... Port Facilities ...... Czechoslovak Danube Navigation Company : Fleet ...... A g e n c ie s ...... Port F a c i lit ie s ...... Royal Hungarian River and Sea Navigation Co. (M. F. T. R.) : Fleet ...... A g e n c ie s ...... Other Stations ...... Port Facilities...... Landing F a cilities...... Hungarian Inland Navigation Co. (M. B .R .) : F le e t...... S. H. S. Syndicate : Fleet ...... A g e n c ie s...... Port Facilities ...... Roumanian Fluvial Navigation : Fleet ...... Port F a c i lit ie s ...... Roumanian Society oj Navigation on the Danube. (S. R. D.) : Fleet ...... A g e n c ie s...... Port F a c ilit ie s ...... Also tables showing unloading fadlities of certain maritime companies, viz. : Société Fra iss inet...... Société Lloyd Triestino...... Société Sitmar ......

Annex IV. SHIPYARDS. ° Campu/ong

Manamu nesu/u/ Erfurt

auen ©-P-RAGUE //lures

S u Una Tnenci n Sereda Cicolui

Korneubur§<. 'oi. urem losternçu bu, C50/052/0 -4t r>tffidaî^3S tsaH^y* *e.3 o m a r no •WO»' •Szo/ncA f'Sia varKor ■—/fudsfoK Nagyteteny ^ & tr a u b m g Fermefr, ° A6ens'be■ ?Uma tn g o /sia d t Jà/o. Du nàrolova r • Ostrov Qonauwonth CAREST S i Usin a .0 H o cb \ta d t QO ifenilza 'ruck r Turtirca/a (r utrakan)

Souboiiiza if+Ruhove ecA* 1 Sentà V . ^ (Jiurgiu Varna Sloboii'. punaszekcn JVOTRE forov

E.G/RARD, Géographe , /tf°” FOREST Annex II. TRAFFIC STATISTICS.

This annex, consisting of 19 tables, presents some information on the freight and passenger business on the Danube. It likewise furnishes some light on the extent and character of the statistics compiled by the European and the International Danube Commissions. Table 1 gives the freight traffic by origin and destination for the years 1911, 1923 and 1924. Tables 2 and 3 further classify this traffic according to flag for the years 1923 and 1924. Table 4 gives freight traffic on the Rhine for 1913. Table 5 indicates the traffic at some of the principal Danube ports for 1911 and 1923. Table 6 gives the tonnage of vessels leaving the Sulina entrance for a number of years before and after the war. Tables 7 and 8 show the fluctuations in the total traffic at the Iron Gates and the loading of barges at that point, and also indicate the flags carrying this traffic. Table 9 gives a list of the passenger services maintained before and after the war. Table 10 shows graphically the number and geographical extent of these same services. As illustrations of the information which is collected by the International Commission, Tables 11 and 12 are furnished showing the up- and down-stream movement at the Iron Gates, divided according to flag. Table 13 is illustrative of how this traffic is divided between the various categories of freight. Table 14 gives a list of the various statistics compiled by the European Danube Commission. Tables 15, 16 and 17 show the class of goods exported from the mouth of the Danube and are likewise based on information furnished by the European Danube Commission. Tables 18 and 19 show in an incomplete fashion a comparison of the ton kilometers and passenger kilometers of some of the larger Danube navigation companies before and after the Tableau 1. — Trafic (en tonnes) par pays d’origine et de destination. Table 1. — Traffic (in tons) by Origin and Destination.

A destination de ALLEMAGNE AUTRICHE HONGRIE TCHÉCOSLOVAQU IE To GERMANY AUSTRIA HUNGARY CZECHOSLOVAKIA

En provenance de 1924 From 1911 1923 1924 1911 1923 1924 1911 1923 1924 1911 1923

A llemagne ...... Germany ...... 16,000 4,124 8,936 49.000 90,841 51,438 40.000 153,787 128,251 1,233 1,698 1,792 A utriche...... A u s t r ia ...... 30.000 19,645 19,697 204.000 42,692 58,504 300.000 75,782 61,711 19.000 1,640 3,159 H ongrie...... H u n g a r y ...... 42.000 64,126 34,715 580.000 150,211 193,002 378.000 225,618 147,718 37.000 21,144 65,997 T chécoslovaquie Czechoslovakia . . . 11.000 45,440 22,330 30.000 22,181 7,185 19.000 4,063 11,797 6,000 7,607 13,193 R oyaume S. H. S.. . . S. H. S. K ingdom . . . 111,000 22,957 16,624 280.000 85,646 71,637 657.000 54,546 75,150 19.000 12,897 114,231 B ulgarie...... B ulga ria...... 1,415 1,309 659 6,000 33,072 23,761 17.000 1,813 2,729 1,000 1,858 19,679 R o u m a n ie ...... R o u m a n ia ...... 51,000 21,707 25,968 37.000 123,960 232,612 57.000 29,227 52,913 7,827 6,312 52,903

T otal ...... 262,415 179,308 128,929 1,186,000 548,603 638,139 1,468,000 544,836 480,269 91,060 53,156 270,954

A destination de royaume s. h . s, BULGARIE ROUMANIE ■'j To S. H. S. KINGDOM BULGARIA ROUMANIA TOTAL o

En provenance de From 1911 1923 1924 1911 1923 1924 1911 1923 1924 1911 1923 1924

Allem ag ne...... Germany ...... 15.000 65,896 13,708 3.000 4,030 17,251 20,000 14,602 11,010 144,233 334,978 232,386 A utrich e...... A u s t r ia ...... 143.000 32,650 40,809 20,000 11,505 15,496 25.000 22,075 14,379 741,000 205,989 213,755 H o n g r ie ...... H u n g a r y ...... 266.000 7,570 20,574 5.000 8,343 3,669 15.000 3,461 7,195 1.323.000 480,473 472,870 T chécoslovaquie . . Czechoslovakia . . . 29.000 37,243 59,134 1.000 4,546 11,592 1,000 3,868 6,777 97,000 124,948 131,008 R oyaume S. H. S.... S. H. S. K ingdom. .. 500,000 968,753 1,016,183 50.000 1,777 2,411 144.000 15,018 73,243 1.761.000 1,161,594 1,369,479 B ulga rie...... B ulga ria...... 6,164 44 22 27.000 27,308 37,757 345.000 44,842 40,262 403,579 110,246 124,869 R o u m a n ie ...... R o u m a n ia ...... 69.000 82,260 86,113 163,000 96,632 114,527 1,948,000 1,145,593 647,607 2,332,827 1,505,691 1,212,643

T otal ...... 1,028,164 1,194,416 1,236,543 269,000 154,141 202,703 2,498,000 1,249,459 800,473 6,802,639 3,923,919 3,757,010

Chiffres de 1911, extraits du tableau A de 1*Annexe XX. Décision de l’arbitre, en date du 2 août 1921, relative à des questions qui se posent au sujet de la navigation sur le Danube. . . Figures for 1911 from Table A of Annex XX. Determination of Arbitrator bearing date of August 2nd, 1921, in the matter of questions arising as to Danube shipping. Chiffres de 1923 et 1924 fournis par les compagnies de navigation sur le Danube, ù l'exception des chiffres relatifs au trafic intérieur de Ja Roumanie ; ces derniers ont {■té fournis par le Gouvernement roumain lui-même. .. , . . . Figures lor 1 9 2 3 mul 1 9 2 4 from intormation furnished by Dnnui^^ “iiinping companies, except «s to internal traffic in Honiimnin, which information was supplied Dy me RoHmaivVnn Government. — 71 —

Tableau 2. — Trafic (en tonnes) par pavillon en 1923. Table 2. — Traffic (in tons) by Flag in 1923. En provenance de — From Royaumi des Tchéco­ To T otal Roumanie Bulgarie Serbes, Croates Hongrie Autriche Alle­ A destination de slovaquie magne Roumania Bulgaria et Slovènes Czecho­ Hungary Austria S. H. S. slovakia Germany German 37,090 12,200 500 400 300 17,000 5,000 1,690 Allemand Austrian 72,726 3,275 809 11,011 19,739 27,293 8,873 1,726 Autrichien > Hungarian rt," 32,591 2,997 1,713 6,277 15,147 5,749 708 Hongrois Czechoslovak g 28,452 3,235 1,384 19,124 4,686 23 Tchécoslovaque 3 S. H . S. 8,449 8,449 S. H . S. w Bulgarian s Bulgare 3 Roumanian Roumain » Total 179,308 21,707 1,309 22,957 45,440 64,126 19,645 4,124 Total German 64,270 20,520 — 500 500 14,000 1,750 27,000 Allemand Austrian 284,233 49,261 28,153 34,814 5,123 82,214 36,734 47,934 Autrichien Hungarian > 96,931 9,522 4,517 2,080 6,840 53,994 4,203 15,775 Hongrois > Czechoslovak e 24,574 13,314 402 1,000 9,718 3 132 Tchécoslovaque r* S. H . S. % 47,252 — 47,252 ———— S. H. S. £" Bulgarian Bulgare 3* Roumanian 31,343 31,343 —————— Roumain Total 548,603 123,960 33,072 85,646 22,181 150,211 42,692 90,841 Total German 60,850 3,700 — 18,900 50 100 9,000 30,000 Allemand Austrian 217,658 16,430 1,329 17,020 1,588 74,823 53,452 53,016 Autrichien Hungarian tiJ 239,023 7,865 170 10,874 2,059 150,695 13,301 54,059 Hongrois Czechoslovak 19,063 1,232 314 410 366 29 16,712 Tchécoslovaque S. H . S. TO 8,242 8,242 S. H. S. CR Bulgarian Bulgare Roumanian Roumain Total 544,836 29,227 1,813 54,546 4,063 225,618 75,782 153,787 Total German n 5,350 1,200 — 1,000 — 2,000 150 1,000 Allemand Austrian 20,551 4,313 1,097 4,548 304 8,996 1,069 224 Autrichien Hungarian er 12,794 475 400 700 534 9,834 391 460 Hongrois Czechoslovak o 9,080 324 361 1,268 6,769 314 30 14 Tchécoslovaque S. H . S. 5,381 5,381 S. H. S. Bulgarian Bulgare Roumanian ** Roumain Total 53 53,156 6,312 1,858 12,897 7,607 21,144 1,640 1,698 Total German 10,465 2,690 25 500 250 7,000 Allemand Austrian 36,897 396 40 904 5,068 4,252 20,630 5,607 Autrichien Hungarian CZD 8,334 350 1,459 2,331 1,860 2,334 Hongrois S ~c5 Czechoslovak 6,318 3 4 5,214 25 661 411 Tchécoslovaque 5 3 S. H. S. a 1,079,533 25,952 967,849 25,477 462 9,249 50,544 S. H. S. Other Companies 18,974 18,974 —————— Autres comp. un w Bulgarian Bulgare Roumanian 33,895 33,895 — — — — — —Roumain Total 1,194,416 82,260 44 968,753 37,243 7,570 32,650 65,896 Total German 23,600 4,000 18,600 1,000 Allemand Austrian 31,262 4,713 8,091 1,321 1,540 4,858 8,299 2,440 Autrichien Hungarian m 6,668 36 238 1 389 3,454 2,037 513 Hongrois w Czechoslovak c 8,852 4,616 340 2 2,617 31 1,169 77 Tchécoslovaque S. H. S. cn S. H. S. Other Companies 9,642 9,642 ———— Autres comp. Bulgarian p Bulgare Roumanian 74,117 73,625 39 453 ———— Roumain Total 154,141 96,632 27,308 1,777 4,546 8,343 11,505 4,030 Total German 11,345 3,640 30 25 400 850 6,400 Allemand Austrian *71 37,543 8,206 6,065 2,079 1,591 13,879 5,716 Autrichien Hungarian O 19,978 1,323 11,354 486 1,468 3,897 1,450 Hongrois Czechoslovak 9,753 273 4,950 1,278 2 2,214 1,036 Tchécoslovaque c S. H. S. 7,916 7,916 S. H. S. Other Companies b 821,020 805,422 9,138 6,460 — — — Autres comp. s Roumanian » 341,904 326,729 13,335 605 —— 1,235 — Roumain Total 1,249,459 1,145,593 44,842 15,018 3,868 3,461 22,075 14,602 Total German 212,970 47,950 19,100 19,930 900 34,000 17,000 74,090 Allemand Austrian 700,870 86,594 45,584 69,625 35,441 204,027 142,936 116,663 Autrichien Hungarian 416,319 22,568 16,679 15,368 18,044 236,923 31,438 75,299 Hongrois Czechoslovak 106,092 22,997 6,371 4,064 45,086 5,061 4,131 18,382 Tchécoslovaque H S. H S. 1,156,773 25,952 1,045,089 25,477 462 9,249 50.544 S. H. S. Other Companies 849,636 834,038 9,138 6,460 ——— Autres comp. Roumanian 481,259 465,592 13,374 1,058 —— 1,235 — Roumain Grand T otal 3,923,919 1,505,691 110,246 1,161,594 124,948 480,473 205,989 334,978 T otal général Note. — Pour pavillon bulgare, nous n’avons pas pu trouver des données. Les chiffres du trafic extérieur du Royaume des Serbes, Croates et Slovènes ne s'appliquent qu’au Syndicat S. H. S. Les chiffres du trafic intérieur du Royaume des Serbes, Croates et Slovènes s’appliquent à toutes les compagnies de navigation yougoslaves. Les chiffres des compagnies de navigation à vapeur ( Continental Motorship, Co., sous pavillon hollandais, autrichiennes comprennent ceux de la ( Süddeutsche, sous pavillon allemand. La rubrique « Roumanie » ne comprend que les chiffres de la N. F. R. et de la S. R. D. Note. — No data for Rulgarian flag. S. H. S. figures for external traffic represent S. H. S. Syndicate only. S. H. S. figures for internal traffic represent all S. H. S. shipping companies. . . . . , r. , , ( Continental Motorship Co., which is under Dutch flag. Austrian steamship companies figures include | süddeutsche, under German flag. Heading “ Roumanian ” représentés N. F. R. and S. R. D. only. — 72 —

Tableau 3. — T r a f ic (e n t o n n e s ) p a r p a v il l o n s e n 1924. Table 3. — T r a f f ic (in t o n s ) b y F l a g i n 1924. En provenance de. —- From Royaume des Tchéco­ To T otal Hongrie Alle­ A destination de Roumanie Bulgarie >erbes, Croates slovaquie Autriche magne Roumania Bulgaria et Slovènes Czecho­ H ungary A ustria S. H. S. slovakia Germany

German 22,285 10,000 260 500 7,000 3,000 1,525 Allemand Austrian 41,715 11,680 595 3,807 3,480 15,865 5,994 294 Autrichien Hungarian 33,657 2,868 64 1,174 1,369 10,362 10,703 7,117 Hongrois > Czechoslovak 20,245 1,420 356 16,981 1,488 Tchécoslovaque S. H. S. 3 11,027 11,027 S. H. S. Other Companies Autres comp. Bulgarian Bulgare Roumanian Roumain Total 128,929 25,968 659 16,624 22,330 34,715 19,697 8,936 Total German 75.100 35,400 1,000 200 1,000 15,000 2,500 20,000 Allemand Austrian 326,487 93,672 17,253 29,234 2,353 114,263 42,894 26,818 Autrichien Hungarian 135,679 38,593 4,696 9,221 3,347 62,493 13,110 4,219 Hongrois .. Czechoslovak > 13,573 8,986 812 1,643 485 1,246 401 Tchécoslovaque c S. H . S. 31,339 --- 31,339 — ------S. H . S. Other Companies Autres comp. o Bulgarian Bulgare Roum anian 55,961 55,961 --- —— ------Roum ain Total 638,139 232,612 23,761 71,637 7,185 193,002 58,504 51,438 Total German 45,800 5,000 — 2,200 100 500 13,000 25,000 Allemand Austrian 197,775 24,960 1,878 25,36-1 3,259 62,728 38,919 40,667 Autrichien Hungarian 172,509 17,198 851 6,768 6,769 84,490 9,792 46,641 Hongrois Czechoslovak 18,834 1,222 1,669 15,943 Tchécoslovaque S. II. S. 39,596 39,596 S. H . S. = Other Companies Autres comp. * Bulgarian Bulgare a Roum anian 5,755 5,755 Roum ain Total 480,269 52,913 2,729 75,150 11,797 147,718 61,711 128,251 Total German 26,500 2,700 — 20,000 — 3,000 300 500 Allemand Austrian 90,443 28,577 7,467 27,055 2,526 22,629 1,956 233 Autrichien Hungarian 69,683 13,364 7,025 10,153 233 37,681 247 980 Hongrois a Czechoslovak 34,199 7,814 5,187 7,342 10,434 2,687 656 79 Tchécoslovaque g- S. H. S. 49,681 49,681 S. H. S. - Other Companies n Autres comp. 5 Bulgarian Bulgare F. Roum anian 448 448 Roumain Total CO 270,954 52,903 19,679 114,231 13,193 65,997 3,159 1,792 Total German 7,060 660 200 1,700 2,000 500 2,000 Allemand Austrian 66,025 2,043 7 124 13,486 16,670 30,384 3,311 Autrichien y ? Hungarian V) 11,725 1,533 15 1,600 4,932 898 1,388 1,359 Hongrois Czechoslovak 10,502 9,877 625 Tchécoslovaque - a S. H . S. 'X 1,110,213 50,859 1,014,259 29,139 1,006 8,537 6,413 S. H. S. Other Companies 30,219 30,219 Autres comp. Bulgarian Y* Bulgare Roum anian 799 799 Roumain s s Total 1,236,543 86,113 22 1,016,183 59,134 20,574 40,809 13,708 Total German 24,640 3,500 20,390 540 210 — --- — Allemand Austrian 52,389 1,273 14,064 786 9,784 2,627 13,439 10,416 Autrichien Hungarian 16,949 2,445 3,299 805 1,598 1,042 2,057 5,703 Hongrois Czechoslovak 6,226 5,094 1,132 Tchécoslovaque S. H. S. ———— S. H. S. Other Companies 5 1,715 1,715 Autres comp. Bulgarian Bulgare Roum anian 100,784 100,500 4 280 ———— Roumain Total 202,703 114,527 37,757 2,411 11,592 3,669 15,496 17,251 Total German 17,850 8,810 600 1,750 890 1,700 4,100 Allemand Austrian 50,362 12,607 8,060 9,076 2,612 2,736 10,578 4,693 Autrichien Hungarian lu 30,674 6,150 4,241 10,916 1,480 3,569 2,101 2,217 Hongrois Czechoslovak c | 5,833 4,298 600 935 Tchécoslovaque = S. H. S. d 41,701 41,701 ———— S. H . S. 2 Other Companies 418,321 405,608 5,013 7,700 Autres comp. 5 Roum anian » 235,732 210,134 22,348 3,250 ———— Roumain a Total 800,473 647,607 40,262 73,243 6,777 7,195 14,379 11,010 Total German 219,235 66,070 21,390 24,000 5,260 28,390 21,000 53,125 Allemand Austrian 825,196 174,812 49,324 95,446 37,500 237,518 144,164 86,432 Autrichien Hungarian 469,876 82,151 20,191 40,637 18,728 200,535 39,398 68,236 Hongrois Czechoslovak H 109,412 27,612 6,599 10,563 40,301 5,421 656 18,180 Tchécoslovaque S. H. S. 1,283,557 50,859 1,187,603 29,139 1,006 8,537 6,413 S. H. S. Other Companies 450,255 437,542 5,013 7,700 Autres comp. Roumanian 399,479 373,597 22,352 3,530 ———— Roumain Grand T otal 3,757,010 1,212,643 124,869 1,369,479 131,008 472,870 213,755 232,386 Total g é n é r a l N ote. — Pour pavillon bulgare, nous n’avons pas pu trouver de données. Les chiffres du trafic extérieur du Royaume des Serbes, Croates et Slovènes ne s’appliquent qu’au Syndicat S. H. S.. Les chiffres du trafic intérieur du Royaume des Serbes, Croates et Slovènes s’appliquent à toutes les compagnies de navigation yougoslaves. Les chiffres des compagnies de navigation à vapeur f Continental Motorship Co., sous pavillon hollandais ; autrichiennes comprennent ceux de la : \ Süddeutsche sous pavillon allemand. La rubrique « Roumanie » ne comprend que les chiffres de la N. F. R. et de la S. R. D, N ote. — No data for Bulgarian flag. S. H. S. figures for external traffic represent S. H. S. Syndicate only. S. H. S. figures for internal traffic represent all S. H. S. shipping companies. Austrian steamship companies’ figures include j und^^rma " * " ^ ♦ Heading “ Roumanian ” indicates N. F. R. and S. R. D. only. Tableau 4. — Trafic sur le Rhin en 1913.

Table 4. — Rhine Traffic for 1913.

QUANTITÉS DE MARCHANDISES (en tonnes) — QUANTITIES OF MERCHANDISE (in tons) Produits onlim. ZONES DU TRAFIC y comp. pétrole Engrais ZONES OF TRAFFIC Fer Minéraux Houille Céréales Bois Divers T otal Goods (rom F erti­ Minerais Coal Cereal colonies, inet, lisers Wood Miscellaneous petroleum.

M er-R uhr...... 162,700 8,959,800 2,100 1,800,000 60,900 99,100 266,900 397,100 10,956,600 Sea-Ruhr Mer-Rhin Moyen. 80,000 820,900 341,200 2,859,100 463,900 364,600 961,700 1,707,100 7,599,300 Sea-Mid Rhine Mer-Haut Rhin (non Sea - Upper Rhine compris la Suisse) . 16,700 2,000 140,100 585,500 24,400 6,700 54,300 117,400 947,100 (Switzerland not incl.) R uhr-M er...... 1,450,700 14,200 11,757,900 1,000 — 194,900 5,300 356,700 13,780,700 Ruhr-Sea Ruhr-Rhin Moyen . 200,700 1,000 7,472,500 4,200 1,800 — 1,600 170,100 7,851,900 Ruhr-Mid Rhine Ruhr-Haut Rhin (non Ruhr - Upper Rhine compris la Suisse) . 69,900 1,903,500 800 100 100 15,900 1,990,300 (Switzerlandnot incl.) Rhin Moyen-Mer . . 461,400 15,000 9,600 10,300 5,100 136,800 71,300 3,054,800 3,764,300 Mid Rhine-Sea Rhin Moyen .... 112,800 4,400 168,500 73,100 32,600 33,000 145,400 4.180.200 4,750,000 Middle Rhine Rhin Moyen-Ruhr . 209,900 839,200 300 4,600 4,100 5,200 170,100 1.234.200 . 2,467,600 Mid Rhine-Ruhr Rhin Moyen - Haut Mid Rhine - Upper Rhin (non compris la Rhine (Switzerland Suisse)...... 4,400 100 124,000 206,500 24,000 1,100 3,400 393,900 757,400 not included) Haut Rhin-Mer. . . 1,500 900 .— — 100 14,900 1,000 21,000 39,400 Upper Rhine-Sea Haut Rhin-Ruhr . . 102,800 3,700 — 200 —— 119,100 13,100 238,900 Upper Rhine-Ruhr Haut Rhin - Rhin Upper Rhine - Mid Moyen ...... 1,700 3,800 1,500 1,900 —— 139,900 156,600 305,400 Rhine 2,876,000 10,665,000 21,921.200 4,755,200 617,000 856,300 1,940,100 11,818,100 55,448,900 Trafic local .... 2,032,000 Local Traffic Trafic rhénan pour le compte de la Suisse Swiss and Luxemburg et du Luxembourg 77,000 traffic on the Rhine

T o t a l . . 57,558,000 T o t a l

Chiffres extraits de la décision arbitrale, en date du 8 janvier 1921, concernant les biens que l’Allemagne doit céder à la France en vertu de l’article 367 du Traité de Versailles,

Taken from the Arbitrator's Determination, dated January 8th, 1921, in the matter of the cessions by Germany to France under Article 367 of the Treaty of Versailles. — 74 —

Tableau 5. — Trafic des Ports principaux du Danube.

Table 5. — Traffic of Principal Danube Ports.

T o n n e s . — T o n s .

(Données fournies par le Gouvernement intéressé.) (Data supplied by Governments concerned.)

1911 1923

Expéditions Arrivages Expéditions Arrivages T otal T otal Outbound Inbound Outbound Inbound

Ratisbonne .... 185,704 76,667 162,371 196,708 109,321 306,029 Ratisbon P assau ...... 24,641 126,833 151,474 113,083 74,523 187,606 Passau L in z ...... 115,258 35,934 151,192 30,509 23,619 54,128 Linz Spitz ...... 85,178 37,003 122,181 Spitz V ien n e...... 1,307,255 465,205 1,772,460 140,142 599,877 740,019 Vienna B ratislava...... 1 20,000 1 20,000 1 40,000 67,888 63,254 131.142 Bratislava Kom arno...... 23,155 4,487 27,642 Komarno Komenice...... 26,994 390 27,384 Komenice Budapest...... 690,839 2.398,575 3,089,414 85,137 537,802 622,939 Budapest V u k o v a r...... 9,467 152,326 161,793 Novi sad...... 15,100 113,870 128,970 Novisad Belgrade...... 45,000 2 2 0 ,0 0 0 265,000 13,703 432,145 445,848 Belgrad Pancsovo ...... 89,600 18,100 107,700 50,179 94,433 144,552 Pancsovo Orsova...... 32,120 9,076 41,196 Orsovo Turnu Severin . . 77,671 21,236 98,907 62,093 13,791 75,884 Turnu Severin Corabia...... 277,100 17,641 294,741 63,336 1,008 64,344 Corabia Calafat...... 187,315 18,691 206,006 67,722 15,355 83,077 Calafat Turnu Magurele. 239,175 14,994 254,169 98,970 13,271 112,241 Turnu Magurele Giurgiu...... 285,913 101,611 387,524 293,959 66,264 360,223 Giurgiu Oltenita...... 139,197 29,555 168,752 68,365 62,693 131,058 Oltenitza Calarasi...... 210,973 19,942 230,915 79,768 14,037 93,805 Calarasi Harsova ...... 119,717 7,530 127,247 134,220 4,207 138,427 Hersova Braïla par mer . 1,614,591 268,147 1,882,738 982,479 40,824 1023,303 Braila overseas Braila s. Danube. 1,032,907 1.613,115 2,646,022 102,618 889,266 991,884 Braila River Galatz par mer . 763,006 302,395 1,065,401 496,355 127,219 623,574 Galatz overseas Galatz s. Danube 304,253 255,822 560.075 206.320 185,890 392,210 Galatz River M atin...... 157,938 2,239 160,177 135,927 1,051 136,978 Macin V id in ...... 53,102 17,165 70,267 15,366 5,897 21,263 Vidin L o m ...... 55,080 13,871 68,951 20,067 22,058 1 42,125 Lom Orehovo ...... 58,291 8,036 66,327 59,350 3,942 63,292 Orehovo Somovid...... 27,170 37,994 65,164 4,578 34,631 39,209 Somovid Sistov ...... 34,899 42,991 77,890 17,286 26,770 44,056 Sistov Roustchouk .... 52,311 68,945 121,256 28,312 126,548 154,860 Rustchuk

Constanza...... 1,255,440 145,185 1,400,625 2542,802 2155,006 2697,808 Constanza Non sur le Danube. — Données fournies pour permettre la comparaison avec les chiffres de Braïla et de Galatz. Not on Danube — Data furnished for comparison with Braila and Galatz.

1 Chiffre approximatif. — Approximate. 2 1924. Table 6. 76 — — 7 7 —

T ab leau 6. — Expéditions à l’mboueh bras de Soulina, par pavillon.

Table 6. — Sulina E ni ran ,bound Movement by Flag.

1912 1913 1911 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 Catégorie PAVILLON Tonnage Tonnage Tonnage Tonnage Tonnage Catégories PAVILLON de navires Tonnage Tonnage Tonnage de navires Nombre enregistré Nombre enregistré Nombre enregistré Nombre enregistré Nombre enregistré Nombre enregistré Nombre enregistré NATIONALITY K ind of boat enregistré NATIONALITY Number Registered Number Registered Number Registered Num ber Registered Number Registered >amber Registered Number Registered Kind of boat tonnage tonnage tonnage Registered tonnage to n n a g e tonnage tonnage tonnage

Allemagne . . . Vapeurs 35 58,235 29 68,982 23 57,927 12 29,601 37 68,126 41 93,533 Steamers Germany Autriche-Hongrie » 200 402,656 143 310,974 158 313,219 » Austri a-Hungary Belgique .... » 35 44,914 30 44,068 26 37,894 16 33,683 6 11,778 11 24,610 11 19,987 Belgium B r é s i l ...... » Brazil Voiliers 60 5 922 433 Sailers Bulgarie .... Bulgaria Vapeurs 2 2,474 1 1 ,3! 128 2,474 Steamers 3,396 Canada Vapeurs 2,195 Steamers Canada Danemark » 11,751 10,018 7 10,517 2,921 9 19,842 » Denmark Dantzig . » 4 7,852 » Dantzig Egypte. . » 3,134 3,184 11,419 15 29,206 17 30,456 » Egypt Espagne . » 6,474 3 12,167 10;060 1 1,111 » Spain Esthonie . 106 » Esthonia Etats-Unis 73,424, 68,206 4 15,348 » U. S. A. Finlande . 1 3,052 Finland 28 France Vapeurs 23 42,709 18 33,374 54,779 101 133,568 60 85,277 57 77,011 50 81,849 Voiliers 1 974 Sailers France 24 43,683 548,217 278 669,589 Grande-Bretagne Voiliers 535 1,182,867 247 Sailers Vapeurs 271,4a 346,350 163 345,220 154 348,509 126 255,729 Steamers Great Britain Voiliers 3 1,125 1 355 G r è c e ...... 650 359 3 370 Sailers Vapeurs 361 642,066 298 558,311 112 211,729 118,051 137,887 167 180,568 133 152,679 223 288,465 Steamers Greece 364 643,191 299 558,666 118,721 138,246 170 180,938 Pays-Bas Vapeurs 18,294 4 9,637 8 18,729 25,978 42,673 48 95,545 54 113,333 55 122,114 Steamers Holland Hongrie . 9 30,435 15 49,426 14 42,684 » Hungary Interalliés 22,957 Inter-Allied Italie . . 81 134,334 26 40,916 118 181,860 178,1821 172,147 103 176,945 191 418,085 136 242,541 Italy Japon . . 7,452' 10,556 Japan S . H. S . . 2,454 19,395 4 6,035 16 36,807 11 17,838 S. H. S. Maroc . . 1 1,039 Morocco Memel . . 3,668 Memel Norvège . 8,773 18,870 15,484 11255 27,413 12 27,981 7 13,427 9 23,718 Norway Panam a . 1 3,662 — Panama Perse . . 667 1 12 2,754 Persia Pologne . 4,220 Poland Portugal . 4,047 2 526 Portugal 318 Roumanie Voiliers 1 318 1 Sailers Vapeurs 43 64,063 40 47,703 56 77,229 9 i,e 103,230 55 114,953 75 140,412 55 107,048 Steamers Roumania 44 64,381 57 77,557 91,! Voiliers 1 42 3 205 1 8 167 Sailers Russie . Vapeurs 53 40,459 58 52,105 65 65,971 43,92! 31 10,771 27 14,190 10 11,986 Steamers Russia Remorq. 13 4,871 Schlepps 67 45,472 61 52,310 66 65,979 56 44,0! Voiliers 1 691 Samoa . Sailers Samos Vapeurs 6 5,958 Steamers Suède . 4 7,306 2 4,492 12,31 18,208 4,467 11 18,175 10 18,036 Sweden Syrie 198 Syria Voiliers 87 20,402 63 12,294 30 4,847 1« 5 254 Sailers Turquie 118 196 Vapeurs 29 18,503 20 21,566 8,369 1 165 2 684 Steamers 116 38,905 83 33,860 38 13,216 938 Ukraine Vapeurs Steamers Ukraine Uruguay 1 1,655 » Uruguay

T o t a l 1,532 2,710,680 1,008 1,788,1.56 936 1,742,907 648 '53 ,1,156,344' 691 1,154,100 794 1,512,791 797 1,382,498 T o t a l

Extrait des Statistiques de la Commission européenne du Danube. From Statistics of G. E. D. Table 7. — Iron Gates. Cargo in tons ------Total number of barges ------Loaded barges ------

21 22 23 24 Year 06 07 0 9 10 11 12 13 21 22 23 24

Average cargo in loaded barges Average cargo for all barges - — 79 —

Table 8. — Iron Gates. Traffic arranged by flag.

39 38 37 36 3 5 Austrian 34 (DD sg . + SD.) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 - 24 ■§ 23 | 22 £ 21 « 20 « 19 J 18 ■ 17 a 16 f i \ H 15 A Hungarian 14 ~ T (MFTR.) 13 / 12 I ' 11 10 Roumanian 9 8 7 6 5 All others 4 Serb 3 2 1

1910 11 12 13- Year 2 0 21 22 23 2-< — 8 0 —

Table 9 . -— Passenger Traffic.

Passenger traffic begins about April 1st and becomes more intensive during the summer months, when the following services are maintained (local services, especially on the lower river, where no other form of transportation exists, are generally continued until stopped by ice and are begun in the spring as soon as possible) :

D. D. S. G. 1. Passau - Linz : Local steamer Six times weekly » ineach direction_ Mail steamer r our » » ) 2. Linz - Vienna : Mail steamer Daily in each direction. Express steamer 3. Melk - Krems : Local steamer Six times weekly in each direction. 4. Vienna - Bratislava - Budapest : Mail steamer Four times weekly in each direction. 5. Vienna - Bratislava - Budapest - Belgrade - Lom - Rustchuk - Giurgiu : Express steamer Twice weekly in each direction. 6. Budapest - Mohacs : Local steamer Daily in each direction. 7. Vidin - Rustchuk : Passenger and Express Goods steamer Four times weekly in each direction.

Czechoslovak Danube Navigation Co. :

1. Bratislava - Devin : Twice daily in each direction. 2. Komarno - Dunamoc : Three times weekly in each direction.

M. F. T. R. 1. Budapest - Bratislava - Vienna : Three times weekly in each direction. 2. Vidin - Rustchuk : Twice weekly in each direction. 3. Budapest - Baja - Mohacs : Six times weekly in each direction. 4. Budapest - Visegrad - Domos - Esgtergom : Three times weekly in each direction.

S. H. S. Syndicate. 1. Belgrade downstream to Radu- evatz : Twice weekly in each direction. 2. Belgrade - Dubrovica - V. Gra- diste - : Four times weekly in each direction. 3. Belgrade - Novisad - Osek - (Drave) : Three times weekly in each direction. — 81 —

4. Belgrade -Titel - St. Becej - Senta (Tisza) : Three times weekly in each direction. 5. Vel. Beekerek (Bega Canal) - Titel (Tisza) Slankamen : Daily in each direction. 6. Vukovar - Novisad : Six times weekly in each direction. 7. Zemun - Belgrade - Pantchevo : Several times daily in each direction. 8. Belgrade - Zemun : About every twenty minutes in each direction. 9. Belgrade-Pantchevo-Smederovo : Daily in each direction. 10. Belgrade - Titel (Tisza) - V. Beekerek (Bega Canal) Srp. Krstur (Tisza) - Osek (Drave) - Bezdan : Once weekly in each direction.

S. F. R. 1. Galatz - Brail a : Four times daily in each direction. 2. Ma ci n - Braila : Twice daily » 3. Braila - Sulina : Three times daily » 4. Braila - - Ismail - Valcov : Twice weekly » 5. Braila -Tulcea - Ismail - Chilia : 6. Galatz - Silistra : 7. Ostrov - Silistra - Calarasi : Three times daily in each direction.

8. Giurgiu - Rustchuk : )> )) )) )) )> 9. Galatz - Turnu Severin Once weekly » » 10. Turnu Severin - Bazas : Twice weekly » »

S. fi, D. 1. Braila - Valcov : Daily in each direction.

The Pre-War Service was as follows : D. D. S. G. 1. Passau - Linz : Daily in each direction. 2. Linz - Vienna : 3. Grein - Melk - Krems - Hollen- burg : 4. Vienna - Bratislava : 5. Vienna - Budapest : 6. Budapest - Mohacs : 7. Budapest - Zemun : 8. Zemun - Belgrade - Orsova - Galatz : Four times weekly in each direction. 9. Galatz - Tulcea - Sulina Three » » 10. Sabac (Save) - Belgrade : Three » » 11. Belgrade - Dubrovica : Twice weekly 12. Zemun - Slankamen - Titel : Daily 13. Szeged - Titel - Zemun : Three times » 6 — 82 —

M. F. T. R. 1. Domos - Visegrad - Budapest : Daily. 2. Baja - Apatin : Six times weekly. 3. Vukovar - Novisad : Six » » 4. Zem un - Belgrade - G alatz : Three » »

First Serbian S. S. Co. 1. Belgrade - Dubrovica : Daily in each direction. 2. Belgrade - Sabac (Save) : Three times weekly in each direction. 3. Belgrade - : Twice » » » » 4. Belgrade - Zemun : Hourly » » »

N. F. R. 1. Galatz - Braila : Four times daily » » » 2. Braila - Galatz - Tulcea - Sulina : Three times weekly » » » 3. Macin - Braila : Twice daily » » » 4. Giurgiu - Rustchuk : Five times daily » » » Platzhalter Tableau 11. — • T r a f i c a u x P o r t e s d e F e r e n 1910 e t 1911

Table 11. — Traffic, Iron G ates 1910-1911

A LA REMONTE A la Descente A LA REMONTE A LA DESCENTE T a x e s T o t a l U p s t r e a m D o v a s t r e a m U p s t r e a m D o w n s t r e a m p e r ç u e s T o t a l T a x e s e a r C h a l a n d s Ch a l a n d s C h a l a n d s V a p e u r s —- S t e a m e r s l e v i e d B a r g e s B a r g e s B a r g e s C o m p a g n ie C o m p a n y Chargés C h a rg é s

— Y Chargés g Loaded I f Loaded l a Loaded I f i

nnée h Tags o t a l o t a l | J o t a l o t a l A O I e2

i 6" T a x é s

Quintaux Taxed Taxés Taxed

Quintaux Hellers Taxed MM Quintaux Hellers T T T T Quintals H Quintals 1 1 Quintals Remorqueurs

§ i Nombre Nombre Number II i l Number

1 9 1 0 2 5 0 1,103,062 481 731 4 6 6 1,952,489 99 5 6 5 7 1 8 3,055,551 580 1,296 713 2 1 0 9 2 3 7 0 5 187 8 9 2 1 ,4 1 0 3 9 7 5 5 9 ,3 2 9 91 D .D .S .G ...... 1911 3 9 9 1 ,6 7 2 ,3 5 8 1 0 8 5 0 7 2 8 3 1 ,0 0 6 ,0 2 3 1 5 4 4 3 7 6 8 2 2 ,6 7 8 ,3 8 1 2 6 2 9 4 4 5 6 9 2 4 8 8 1 7 5 6 2 2 2 8 790 1,131 476 4 2 2 ,2 9 5 5 0

1 9 1 0 9 4 4 2 7 ,0 6 2 2 3 5 3 2 9 141 614,117 12fi 2 6 7 2 3 5 1 ,0 7 1 ,1 7 9 361 5 9 6 2 7 3 2 8 2 5 5 5 2 7 7 2 1 5 4 9 2 5 5 0 4 9 7 1 8 4 ,6 2 1 11 M.F.T.R ...... 1911 1 3 7 5 8 5 ,1 0 8 1 3 2 2 6 9 9 4 4 3 8 ,8 1 2 1 3 7 2 31 2 31 1 ,0 2 3 ,8 3 0 2 6 9 5 0 0 2 5 9 2 97 5 5 6 2 6 3 261 6 2 3 5 21 5 5 8 1 7 5 ,9 6 5 4 2

7 4 5 ,4 1 1 1 2 9 1 8 9 1 ,0 4 8 ,7 9 0 2 6 7 1 7 6 10 1 8 6 171 1 8 0 3 4 7 1 9 1 6 8 ,5 2 7 4 0 1 9 1 0 Navigation roumaine . . . 127 11 1 3 8 67 3 0 3 ,3 7 9 67 7 8 9 Rumanian Navigation . 1911 1 2 8 6 8 3 ,2 9 7 14 1 4 2 6 5 3 6 0 ,4 6 9 8 6 151 1 9 3 1 ,0 4 3 ,7 6 6 1 0 0 2 9 3 1 5 5 11 1 6 6 1 5 8 7 1 6 5 3 1 3 1 8 1 8 6 ,4 2 9 41

1 9 1 0 4 2 1 8 7 ,1 7 3 8 4 2 7 3 ,1 5 6 9 6 1 6 9 8 2 81 1 6 3 8 8 81 1 6 9 1 7 0 1 6 2 3 5 ,2 7 9 21 Navigation serbe ...... 4 3 8 5 31 8 5 ,9 8 3 5 3 7 3 Serbian Navigation .... 1911 7 3 3 1 0 ,0 9 5 41 1 1 4 3 8 9 5 ,3 3 6 6 0 9 8 111 4 0 5 ,4 3 1 1 01 2 1 2 1 0 6 73 1 7 9 1 0 7 74 181 2 1 6 1 4 7 4 2 ,6 7 5 81

1 9 1 0 Navigation de l’Allema­ 3 6 2 2 7 ,1 7 4 4 4 0 4 1 2 ,8 0 0 2 3 2 7 4 0 2 3 9 ,9 7 4 2 7 67 2 8 ,9 3 1 7 0 gne du Sud ...... 31 1 911 SouthGermanNavigat.ion 1 8 8 ,4 0 1 31 5 1 5 ,0 3 3 2 6 31 3 6 2 0 3 ,4 3 4 2 6 6 2 2 1 ,7 1 8 5 8

1 9 1 0 21 8 3 ,1 9 4 16 3 7 11 4 4 ,3 5 0 m 3 3 3 2 1 2 7 ,5 4 4 3 8 7 0 2 8 4 3 2 2 3 8 31 51 12 1 5 ,7 8 2 7 5 Autres compagnies .... 1911 A ll o th e r s ...... 7 9 1 9 2 ,4 3 6 1 5 9 4 12 3 0 ,0 7 1 8 2 9 4 91 2 2 2 ,5 3 4 97 1 8 8 6 9 11 8 0 6 4 1 6 " 8 0 1 3 3 2 7 1 9 ,6 5 7 2 3

1 91 0 5 7 0 2 ,7 7 3 ,0 7 6 7 9 0 1 ,3 6 0 7 1 5 3 ,0 4 3 ,1 1 8 3 9 0 1,105 1,285 5,816,194 1,180 2,465 1,272 587 1 ,8 5 9 1,264 500 1,764 2 ,5 3 6 1 ,8 8 7 9 9 2 ,4 7 2 0 8 T o t a l ...... 1911 6 4 7 3 ,6 3 1 ,6 3 2 3 1 0 1 ,1 5 7 4 9 7 1,945,744 545 1 ,0 4 2 1,344 5,577,376 855 2,199 1,158 610 1,798 1,153 586 1,739 2 ,3 1 1 1 ,2 2 6 8 6 6 ,7 4 1 9 5

Différence : Difference :

2 7 7 8 5 6 ,5 5 6 1 5 5 5 9 5 3 86 1 3 9 E n p lu s — P lu s ...... En moins — Minus. ... 4 8 0 2 0 3 2 3 8 1 ,0 9 7 ,3 7 4 63 2 3 8 ,8 1 8 325 266 114 61 111 25 225 125,730 13

Autorités royales hongroises pour la navigation sur le Bas-Danube. A. No. 500/1911. Royal Hungarian Authority for Lower Danube Shipping. Ad. No. 500/1911. Tableau 12. — Trafic aux Portes de Fer en 1923 e t 1924. Table 12. Traffic, Iron Gates 1923-1924. Statistiques de la Commission internationale du Danube. — Statistics of International Danube Commission.

A LA REMONTE A la D e s c e n t e A LA REMONTE A LA d e s c e n t e T otal T otal U pstr ea m D o w n str ea m U ps tr e a m D o w n str ea m T otal d e s h a la n d s arg es tea m e r s t a x e s p e r ç u e s e a r Ch a la n d s — B a rg es Ch a la n d s — B a rg es C — B V a p e u r s — S Y P av illon T ota l T a x es Chargés Chargés Chargés l e v ie d

— — “ p- Loaded Loaded 2 s Loaded £ ® F lag h) Empty >a Empty i §cc H H H otal O O O otal Tugs Tugs Quintaux Quintaux Quintaux Tugs $ s Francs Cent. T T nnées H H H passagers Passagers Passenger Passenger A Quintals Quintals Quintals Remorqueurs Remorqueurs Nombre Nombre Nombre Number Nombre Number! Nombre Nombre Number Number Number Number Remorqueurs 187 864,393 27 214 33 190 1,013,932 217 437 59 59 58 9 58 117 310,610 27 1923 Allemand ...... 149,530 223 220 — — 1924 G e rm a n ...... 212 1,067,724 29 241 39 158,549 176 215 251 1,226,273 205 456 71 — 71 70 — 70 141 — 326,644 98 205 850,347 74 192 328 1,236,876 594 120 53 173 118 51 169 238 104 436,275 31 1923 A utrichien...... 279 123 386,529 315 266 Austrian ...... 1924 335 1,338,423 144 469 253 771,704 210 463 578 2,110,127 354 932 157 17 204 156 47 203 313 94 663,724 20 11,501 1 4 14,583 — 4 4 4 60 1923 Français ...... 3 4 1 3,082 14 15 15 19 — — — — 20,907 French ...... 1924 2 13,800 — 2 — — —— 2 13,800 — 2 4 — 4 6 — 6 10 — 3,589 97 10,380 11,457 9 3 3 3 3 6 85 1923 G r e c ...... 4 — 4 — 1,077 5 5 5 — — — 15,865 G re e k ...... 1924 9 29,712 — 9 2 7,200 3 5 11 36,912 3 14 1 — 1 — —— 1 — 7,809 43 523,593 32 147,118 124 186 86 84 84 23 1923 H o n g ro is...... 126 160 58 182 670,711 156 342 86 — — 170 — 210,689 Hungarian ...... 1924 202 857,834 8 210 76 243,680 127 203 278 1,101,514 135 413 92 1 93 86 1 87 178 2 3 0 2 ,9 3 9 6 9 — 1 9 2 3 Hollandais ...... 1 4 4 4 ,0 2 9 14 13 6 1 ,3 1 3 8 21 2 7 105,322 8 3 5 — — 32,480 2 5 Dutch ...... 1 1924 3 6 150,334 3 7 2 3 7 1 ,1 2 3 18 41 5 9 221,457 18 78 16 — 16 15 — 15 31 — 58,142 15 220,311 77 1923 R o u m a in ...... 50 127 95 452,219 77 172 145 672,530 154 299 61 70 131 61 71 132 122 141 155,634 93 R o u m an ia n ...... 1924 52 286,545 51 103 65 318,564 36 101 117 605,109 87 204 46 78 124 44 77 121 90 155 143,130 05 1923 246 1,158,421 67 313 38 151,380 259 297 284 1,309,801 326 610 87 106 193 86 104 190 173 210 340,948 42 Serb-Croat-Slovenc . . 1924 227 1,054,487 83 310 106 442,139 232 338 333 1,496,626 315 648 82 78 160 81 78 159 164 156 403,273 33 339,814 1923 Tchécoslovaque...... 55 205,985 8 63 38 133,829 36 74 93 44 137 36 — 36 35 — 35 71 — 88,987 04 Czechoslovak ...... 1924 61 261,552 19 100 62 203,369 35 97 143 464,921 54 197 36 — 26 37 — 37 73 — 124,430 39

1923 Anglais ...... —— — ———— —- —————————————— English ...... 1924 6 25,317 — 6 1 3,053 1 2 7 28,370 1 8 1 — 1 1 — 1 2 — 56,359 —

1923 Ita lie n ...... 1924 2 4 500 892 3,888,960 286 1,178 1,304 1,291 5,375,046 1,191 2,482 452 22!) 681 449 226 675 901 455 1,612,398 90 1923 T otai 399 11,486,0861905 1924 1,152 5,085,728 335 1,487 627 |2,219,381 |838 1,465 1,779 7,305,109 1,173 2,952 508 201 712 498 203 701 1,006 407 2,040,543 19

Diff. : En plus — Plus 260 11 ,196,768 49 309 2 2 8 733,295 161 4 8 8 1,930,063 470 56 31 49 26 105 4 2 8 ,1 4 4 29 Diïf. : En moins—Minus 67 18 25 23 4 8 1 i

La Commission élal>ore également des statistiques indkjiinnt le trafic pur principales catégories tie marchandises, 'flie. Commission nlso keeps statistics showing above inoveinfuts l>y principal classes of goods. — 85 —

Table 13. — I r o n G a t e s . Upstream traffic.

Wheat W heat Barley Maize Oats Millet Oil and Par- Year Gasolene Coal Wood Salt Misc. Total

Quintals

1923 179,709 66,205 92,577 316,153 250,978 37,262 1,426,106 51,516 441,233 387,798 142,700 496,723 3,888,960 1924 302,566 307,227 134,735 751,322 393,421 51,762 2,021,145 91,832 323,193 150,625 557,910 5,085,728

From International Danube Commission Statistics. The above is suggestive only and intended to indicate the sort of information available for traffic at the Iron Gates.

Table 14. — Statistics published by the European Danube Commission.

1. Boats of each nationality leaving the Danube, divided according to flag and registered tonnage. 2. Classification of the same boats according to their tonnage. 3. Boats entering the Danube under ballast and boats leaving the Danube under ballast.

4 . The number of boats of companies maintaining a regular service on the Danube. 5. Boats loading at Sulina, divided according to flag and tonnage and whether or not the boats were loaded in the port or in the roadstead. 6. Boats having been loaded upstream and those, having taken their cargo partly upstream and party in the roadstead of Sulina, divided according to flag and the weight of loading so accomplished. 7. Boats entering and leaving the Danube under ballast. 8. Beceipts collected by, the Cashier’s Office in Sulina. 9. General comparison of vessels of each nationality leaving the Danube. 10. Comparison of tonnage according to categories of tariff and shipping dues paid. 11. Loading effected in roadsteads of Sulina and in the interior ports of the river. 12. Vessels taking refuge in Sulina. 13. Statistics of treatment given in European Danube Commission’s hospital at Sulina. 14. Statistics of epidemic cases treated in European Danube Commission’s hospital at Sulina. 15. Fines, etc. imposed by police between Braila and Sulina. 16. Wrecks and accidents in the Lower Danube. 17. Sea-going vessels and lighters wrecked at the mouths of the Danube and in the river ; vessels repaired. 18. Goods exported through the Sulina mouth. 19. Destination of goods exported by Sulina mouth. 20. Depths of water in Sulina arm. 21. Meteorological table and technical observations regarding Sulina mouth. 22. Chart showing location of the entrance channel and the ends of the jetties and contour of the bar. 23. Table showing when the river has been frozen over. Tables 15, 16 and 17 are insetted between pages 86 and 87. Tableau 18. — Trafic marchandises. Table 18. — Freight Traffic.

Kilomèlres-ionnes — Ton-Kilomelers.

1911 1912 1913 1914 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924

Lloyd bavarois — Bavarian Lloyd . No i encore cons tit ué 13,000,000 67,000,000 82,000,000 118,000,000 170,000,000 183,000,000 Not organised D. D. S. G. — D. D. S. G...... 1,199,350,329 1,296,860,933 1,127,876,020 266,988,409 338,602,658 472,896,993 C10 tchécoslovaque de navigation sur Not encore constit ué 52,957,200 30,893,942 34,024,900 79,500,000 100,241,219 le Danube — Czechoslovak Danube Not organised Navigation C o ...... M. F. T. R ...... •405,770,414 *64,540,654 *246,960,454 S.H.S. Syndicat— S. H. S. Syndicate Non encore constit lé 345,402.745 S. R. D ...... Not organised 60,236,890 79,496,260 86.377.000 121,590,998 121,455,642 N. F. R ...... 116,000,000 72,000,000 94.250.000 108,750,000 104,100,000 - * Ce chilfre ne comprend pas le tonnage des chalands qui n’appartiennent pas à la compagnie. • Does not include tonnage of barges not belonging to the Company.

Tableau 19. — Transport de passagers. Table 19. — Passenger Traffic Kilom'elres-passagers. — Passenger-Kilomelers.

1911 1912 1913 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 d . d . s. g ...... 108,197,257 112,753,287 95,470,885 79,604,498 81,387,874 78,134,774 Compagnie tchécoslovaque de navigation sur le Danube Non encore constitué 4,587,840 1,681,420 744,128 — Czechoslovak Danube Navigation Co...... Not organised M. F. T. R ...... 41,511,174 38,482,552 49,258,300 Compagnie serbe de navigation—Serbian Navigation Co. 13,826,000 19,742,000 25,171,000 Fusion avec le Syndicat S. H. S. Syndicat S. H. S. — S. H. S. Syndicate ...... Non encore constitué 64.073.000 48,731,000 48,686,000 70,576,000 56,546,000 Not organised N. F. R ...... 30.770.000 20,300,000 28,350,000 21,870,000 20,000,000 S. R. D ...... Non encore constitué Not organised G alatz-G iurgiu*...... 1,544,790 ——— B ralla-V alcov ...... 2,489,100 6,136,000 11,144,200 14,440,000 12,183,100

* Pour les années postérieures à l’année 1921, aucun chiffre n’est fourni. Le service a probablement été supprimé. * No figures given after 1921. Service presumably discontinued. Tableau 15. — Embouchure du Bras de Soulin/ Table 15. —- Sulina Entrance. Exportations par catégories de marchandises. (En tonnes sauf où in. ^ autrement.) Exports by Class of Goods. (In tons except where otherwise indicated.) 1911 1911

Gibraltar (pr I demander Etats-Unis Danemark Espagne Grande- Pays-Bas Hongrie Italie Xorvège Portugal Russie Suède Turquie Allemagne Autriche Belgique Bulgarie Egypte France Bretagne instructions) Algérie d'Amérique D e s t i n a t i o n T otal Bulgaria Denmark Egypt Spain France Greece Netherlands Hungary Italy Norway Portugal Russia Sweden Turkey G ibraltar Algeria Germany Austria Belgium Great Britain (to await Tunis United States instructions) ol America _ Froment — W h e a t...... 10,343 10,106 588,921 10 2 ,1 0 0 188,907 45,310 12,555 226,062 1,435 207,837 2,403 5,548 14,785 95,336 505 1,412,183 Seigle — R y e ...... 3,595 35,922 1,568 — --- 9,476 7,806 — 137,306 — 4,512 30,733 1,099 102 232,119 Maïs — Maize ...... 59,390 36,400 281,949 59,158 — 65,848 87,581 71,802 1,716 209,809 26,841 256,068 12,865 1,370 947 594,292 1,766,036 Orge — Barley...... 60,483 216 142,040 14,273 —— 8,834 103,936 1,631 94,500 315 1,079 7,633 483 856 84,756 521,035 Avoine — Oats...... 1,454 6,341 15,783 ——— 7,279 32,385 1,080 36,771 1,642 20,922 — 41 55 2,361 126,114 Fèves — Beans...... 2,522 1,315 23,151 — 25 — 36,750 2,752 2 0 2 5,712 858 1,099 — 327 365 10 75,088 Millet — Millet...... 10,082 101 2,836 — — — 392 2,704 — 464 — 532 — 50 17,161 Graine de colza — Colza seed . 285 495 ——— 780 » de raves — Turnip seed 4,729 10 11,539 — — — — 1,638 — 7,100 — >— — 25,016 » de lin — Flax seed .... 548 214 •—■ — — 762 » de chanvre — Hemp _ seed 62 232 329 623 Son — B ra n ...... 3,561 1,668 6,877 — 100 3,612 2,366 50 18,234 Bois — Wood : Planches — Boards (quantité — quant.) (en m3 — cub. m.) — 1,577 23,938 --- 127,506 2,225 37,083 1 0 ,8 8 8 46,127 204,002 — 91,858 — 192,156 2,264 31,587 4,014 775,225 Chêne— Oak (quant.— quant.) — ———— 19,306 19,306 (en tonnes -—• tons) — — — 4,995 — — ——-—— 734 5,729 Fûts vides — Empty barrels ———— ---- —. . — 6 Benzine...... 684 — 684 Bétail (par tête) — Oxen (head) --- ——— 176 —— 4,474 — 4,650 Cellulose...... 173 218 --- —— 160 248 427 156 20 392 — 559 2,343 Ciment — Cernent...... 1,769 ———— 3,687 8,463 Cuir —Leather...... 900 7 2,329 177 -— ---- —— 22 1,671 5,106 Farine — F lo u r...... 6,053 919 781 5 3,432 633 3,856 119 3,765 773 183 — 18,242 419 39,180 Débris de fer — Iron scrap .... 345 9 — — —— 2,358 — 1 11 2,724 Fromage — Cheese...... — — — — 7 7 Graine de moutarde -— Mustard seed...... 1,685 21 125 — ---- —— 693 103 778 ——— 3,405 Goudron —-Tar...... 87 ——— 50 137 Huiles minérales — Mineral oil 73 1,743 z ——— 1,816 Lentilles — L entils...... 261 — 91 ---- —— 268 — 532 ——— 1,154 Naphte — Naphtha...... 7,564 ———— 7,564 Noix — N u ts ...... 29 — 5 — ———— 34 Oignons — Onions...... 43 ———— 43 Peaux — Skins...... 13 ---- — — — — 13 Pois — Peas...... 3,586 109 1,743 — 1,137 8,523 45 32 — 15,175 Pétrole — Petroleum...... 1,927 ———— 13 1,940 Pommes de terre — Potatoes.. --- 3 — ———— 65 68 Poissons — Fish...... — —— — 89 — 1 91 Résidus de pétrole — Petroleum waste...... — 154 _ 154 Riz — Rice ...... 527 1,030 331 --- 8 — 320 313 5 2 00 — 37 — 378 3,149 Sel — Sait...... 1,922 — — — 1,922 Graine de tournesol — Sun­ flower seed ...... 10 — 109 46 ——— 289 454 Sucre — Sugar...... 89 --- 1— — ———— 225 314 Tabac — Tobacco...... — 2 1 2 — — — 17 — 229 Tourteaux de colza — Colza cakes ...... 2 0 0 — 100 — — — — 625 — — 565 ——— 1,490 Tourteaux de graine de lin — Linseed cakes ...... 343 — —— 5 348 Marchandises diverses — Va­ rious goods ...... 531 85 892 693 --- —— 252 14 80 796 32 121 165 — 1,293 4,954

Statistiques de la Commission européenne du Danube. — Statistics G. E. D. T o ta l : 4.308.497 tonnes et 775.225 mètres cubes. — T o ta l : 4,308,497 tons and 775,225 c. m.

• Table 16. — S u l in a E n t r a n c e . Tableau 16. — Embouchure du Bras de Soulina. Exports by Class of Goods. (In tons except where otherwise indicated.) Exportations, par catégories de marchandises. (En tonnes sauf où indiqué autrement.) 1923 1923 Gibraltar (pr attendre les Suède Turquie Argentine Portugal Perse Syrie Grande- Grèce Pays-Bas Tunisie Italie Norvège Russie instructions) Allemagne Algérie Belgique Bulgarie Danemark Egypte Espigne France Bretagne T otal Gibraltar Portugal Persia D e s t i n a t i o n Tunis Italy Norway Sweden Turkey (to await Argentina Syria Germany Algeria Belgium j Bulgaria Denmark Egypt Sna^n France Greece Netherlands * Great Britain instructions) 1 1 1 1 __ —. — 14,687 __ 2,423 523 90 6,909 Froment — W h e a t...... _ 3,027 - 1,715 ——— 240 — — — — ——— 1,770 1,210 - — — — — 320 Seigle — R y c ...... 65 70,538 — 3,955 — 534,878 4,766 — 76,967 2,389 90,852 1 ,0 0 0 77,325 13,894 — 9,145 — 16,682 22,783 87,683 100 31,619 25,115 Maïs — Maize ...... 1,874 54,630 — — — 668,698 — 12,669 25,441 18,320 41,072 1 ,2 0 0 5,896 5,345 — — 1 176,013 43,019 258,529 — 19,360 5.329 Orge — Barley...... _ 601 __ —— 98,980 — 1,359 2,770 1,362 24,454 — — 5 — 594 1,576 52,993 — 331 12,935 Avoine — Oats...... 292 — — —— 86,556 W — 38,571 432 3,o53 9,597 — 9,307 ——— 237 Fèves — Beans ...... 7,087 — 16,537 — 943 55 — 1,150 ——— 52 — — —— — 4,836 .— 156 — — x — 2,391 557 — Millet...... 475 566 — 80 165 — 101 Graine de colza — Colza seed . —— 2 2 0 — — — — — — —— — — — —— , — » de lin — Lin seed ...... — — — d de chanvre — Hemp — — —— seed ...... — — 167 —— 1 ,0 1 0 — 1,209 — ——— — —— — 3,569 Pois — Peas...... 329 854 — 150 — — —— — — I — 4,906 217 500 — 276 140 2,070 1,553 Son — B ran ...... _ —— 268 20 134 — 585 1,007 Farine — F lo u r...... —— — ~ Bois — Wood : Planches (en mètres cubes) — I> OS” I> 247,357 7,148 4,104 84,869 7,911 145 6,045 — 3,304 975,393 3,369 11,499 3,652 918 248,662 127,787 139,352 1 Boards (cub. m .) ...... 1 — — — — — k — —— Chêne — O ak...... 11 __ ———— Douves — Staves...... — 9,000 3,656 2 0 273 — 53 — — — 71 — — — — I — 17,713 Tourteaux de colza — Oil cakes 1,801 2,839 — — 52 — — — 14 832 ” — 121 34 7 119 — 26 — — — Noix — N u ts ...... 39 — 216 —— 204 — — — —— — 36 1,005 — 2 0 J — 4 23 10 33 — 13 — Pruneaux secs — Prunes Dried 758 — 108 — Graines de courge — Pumpkin __ 1,±72 — 95 _ 157 315 — 306 — 518 — — 83 15 3,088 Seeds ...... — — 127 — —— 2 ,0 0 0 — — —— — — — — — —— — — 2 ,0 0 0 Farine de colza — Colza Flour — 3,000 — — — — — —— —— — — ——— 4,818 Cuir — Leather...... 818 1 ,0 0 0 ——— 12 — 922 54 — 86 —————————— — 1,700 Colle forte — G lue...... 580 — 46 —— — 2,107 982 — 726 ————————— — — 4,785 Moutarde — M ustard...... 429 — 541 — — - 2,507 — —— 2,931 — 393 — — — —— 31 — — — — — — Bétail (par tête) - Oxen (Heads) — ~ Marchandises diverses — Va­ __ Y — 1.957 188 920 277 1,765 24 186 — — 296 — 423 7,037 rious Goods ...... 623 240 2 0 5 95 1 I 1 1 18 1 | T o ta l : 1.466.362 tonnes et 975.393 mètres cubes. — T o ta l : 1,466,362 tons and 975,393 c. m. Statistiques de la Commission européenne du Danube. Statistics C. L. D. Tableau 17. — E m b o u c h u r e d u B r a s d e S o u l in a . Table 17. — Sulina Entrance.

Exportations par catégories de marchandises. (En tonnes sauf où indiqué autrement.) Exports by Class of Goods. (In tons except where otherwise indicated.)

1924 1924

G ibraltar (pour Grande- attendre des Allemagne Algérie Belgique Bulgarie Danemark Egypte Espagne France Bretagne Grèce Pays-Bas Hongrie Italie Norvège Russie Syrie Turquie instructions) c Argentine Destination T o t a l Belgium Bulgaria Spain France Greece Netherlands Hungary Italy Norway Russia Syria Turkey Gibraltar Argentina Germany Algeria Denmark Egypt Great Britain (to await instructions) 1 1 I 1 — __ — __ —— Froment — Wheat ...... 1,273 19,407 2,880 20 1,986 1,500 1,481 5 ,8 3 4 1 4 ,6 7 7 40U 4 5 ,3 4 5 3 ,7 4 2 9 8 ,5 4 5 Seigle — R y e...... | 959 — 663 — 1,105 — — 56 209 3 5 2 ,7 9 7 — 181 —— — ——— 6 ,0 0 5 Mais — Maize ...... 58,050 2,839 53,684 — 82,075 22 0 — 57,799 27,464 4 ,5 9 6 7 9 ,0 4 8 — 5 1 ,8 9 2 — — — 3 5 0 2 2 4 ,5 4 6 — 6 4 2 ,5 6 3 Orge — Barley...... 30,151 — 53,162 — 13,695 — — 10,286 10,477 5 ,0 5 6 2 3 ,9 0 7 — 8 ,8 5 8 — — — 1 0 0 6 1 ,5 3 6 — 2 1 7 ,2 2 8 Avoine — Oats ...... 839 — 807 — •— — — — 957 7 8 4 6 8 6 — 1 2 ,1 7 9 — —— — 2 6 0 — 1 6 ,5 1 2 Fèves —Beans ...... 5,066 — 10,216 — 840 65 — 16,382 633 1 ,1 3 2 1 ,655 — 1 2 ,9 3 6 — — 123 — 1 ,5 1 6 — 5 0 ,5 6 4 Millet...... 6,471 — 130 — — — — 451 —■ 1 6 3 1 ,5 2 8 — 2 7 8 —— — — 6 5 5 - 9 ,6 7 6 Graine de colza — Colza Seed .. 30 — 42 —— — — — — — 15 — ■ — 6 — 93 I » de lin — Linseed ...... — — ——— —— — — , de chanvre — Hemp Seed...... — — — __ _—___ Pois — Peas...... 231 — 697 — — —— 548 — — 3 5 8 — 5 0 — — — ■— — — 1 ,8 8 4 Son — Bran ...... 2,197 — 516 — 980 — — — 1,189 1 2 0 1 ,0 3 6 — — — —- — ■ — — - — 6 ,0 3 8 Farine — Flour ...... 747 — —— — 1,799 — 146 159 6 ,6 7 3 20 — 2 1 9 — — 5 1 0 1 0 7 — — 1 0 ,3 8 0 Bois — Wood : Planches (en mètres cubes) — Boards (in Cub. m.) ...... 4,592 23,040 2,756— ■—- 271,165— 125,802 104,937 3 7 0 ,4 7 2 9 ,0 0 9 — 1 0 1 ,7 6 4 — — 6 8 ,5 5 6 2 ,1 8 0 4 2 7 6,104 1 ,0 9 0 ,8 0 4 Chêne —-Oak...... — —— — — —— — __ Douves — Staves ...... — — — — — —— — — —— —— — Tourteaux de colza — Oil cakes... 6,517 — — 6,271 — — 3,314 220 835 145 3 1 7 ,3 0 5 Noix — Nuts ...... 1,597 — 375 — — 240 — 541 96 4 8 871 2 4 4 —— — 9 — — 4 ,0 2 1 Graines de courge — Pumpkin Seeds ...... 1 ,220 — 30 — 1,054 — 2 1 2 — 1 3 6 4 5 3 — 50 —— 43 198 I l l — 3 ,5 0 7 Moutarde — M ustard...... 834 — 78 — — —— 241 — 2 4 170 — — — — — — ■ — — 1 ,3 4 7 Lentilles — Lentils ...... 99 — 10 — — —— 374 — 5 0 —— 2 5 6 —————— 7 8 9 Cuir — Leather ...... 1,762 — —— — —— 5,000 — ——— 9 0 0 —————-— 7 ,6 6 2 Colle forte — G Sue ...... 256 —— — — 9 — 35 42 — 3 0 — 10 — — — ■ — — — 3 8 2 Pois chiches — Chick Peas ...... — — — — — 314 — — — ■ — 9 3 — — ——— — 4 0 7 Pruneaux secs — Dried prunes . .. 24 — -— — — —— Bétail (par tête) — Oxen (Heads) — ——— — — — — — 34 ———— — — 19 —— 53 Marchandises diverses — Various goods ...... 952 — 531 — — 57 1,513 192 1 7 3 3 3 767 — — 184 67 2 6 5 3 4 ,7 3 7 1 -

Statistique de la Commission européenne du Danube. — Statistics C.E.D. Total : 1.099.722 tonnes et 1.090.804 mètres cubes. — Total 1,099,722 tons and 1,090,804 c. m. Annex III. RIVER FLEETS.

In general, the type of barges used on the Danube is the same throughout all sections of the river. There are some differences, however, which are worthy of note. The greatest number of barges are those of the type built by the Austrian and Hungarian companies before the war. These have a moulded hull and carry about 650 to 700 tons cargo. Their draught runs between 1.9 and 2.1 meters. While, of course, there are many variations from this type, there are two principal exceptions, which are the barges owned and operated by the on the lower river and the standard 1,000-ton barge of the Bavarian Lloyd. The Greek barges are in general similar to those described but are designed to carry 1,000 to 1,500 tons and draw as much as 3.2 meters. The draught of the Greek barges makes them unpractical for use above the Iron Gates. Consequently, they engage in traffic in Boumanian and Bulgarian ports, almost to the exclusion of work elsewhere. The Bavarian Lloyd barges, which have all been built during and after the war, are in general of 1,000 tons. They are so designed, however — that is, made longer and wider than the Greek barges — that their draught when loaded to capacity is only 2.3 meters. While at first sight it would appear that the Bavarian Lloyd barge is in excess of what can be economically employed in the upper stretches of the river, no doubt they have been built in anticipation of the completion of the Bhine-Main-Danube Canal, and also of the realisation of the 2-meter project which has been worked upon fora number of years in Austria, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. The tug boats on the upper river are practically all paddle-wheel steamers, and run from about 250 to 1,400 h.p. There are only a few boats of 1,000 or more h.p., and these are used almost exclusively in the work through the Iron Gates Section. At and below Budapest there is an increasing number of screw boats, these being particularly numerous in Boumanian waters. The only screw tug noted at the Iron Gates was the one belonging to the Dutch Company ; it is used principally to assist self-propelled barges in passing the most difficult sections. The development of self-propelled barges on the river seems to be the most important change in the type of equipment which has appeared in recent years. Some of these barges are equipped with steam machinery and others with Diesel motors. The increasing efficiency of the latter has led to their being installed in the most recent boats of this type. At present regular services are maintained by the Dutch Company, and jointly by the Bavarian Lloyd and Czechoslovak Navigation Company with this type of boat. It is thought that for small cargoes and for service in cargoes of crude oil and its derivatives these boats will find an in­ creasing application on the river. The large passenger boats are almost without exception paddle-wheel steamers, except those used on the section below Braila, and the largest have a draft of from 1.6 to 1.7 meters. AH boats of this type are considerably handicapped by the necessity of making their construction correspond to the bridge clearances. The tables following give in such detail as was made available information on the principal companies operating on the Danube. FLOTTE DANUBIENNE — DANUBE FLEET 1 9 2 4.

Bateaux de Bateaux-citernes voyageurs. Remorqueurs Chalands Chalands il moteurs Bateaux- à m oteur citernes Self-propelled tanks Passenger Tugs Barges Self-propelled barges Tanks Steamers. and barges

Nombre. H. P. Nombre H . P. Nombre Tonnage Nombre Tonnage H . P. Nombre Tonnage Nomb Tonnage H . P. Number. H. P. Number H . P. Number Tonnage Number Tonnage H . P. Number Tonnage Numb Tonnage H. P.

Lloyds bavarois - Bavarian Lloyd 16 10,260 90 86,367 7 2,871 *1,700 4 3,842 2 1,256 660 Autres compagnies allemandes — Other German companies . . . 31 14,740 192 117,800 14 3,129 1,700 D. D. S. G...... 31 18,040 43 23,290 424 232,965 8 3,795 2,920 19 13,137 ——— Süd-deutsche ...... — 3 1,530 7 3,296 5 3,250 1,200 5 3,902 — — ---- Erdex ...... __ — — __ 4 480 1,060 ——-— ---- Wiener Baustofîe A. G...... 1 * 350 17 * 5,000 Continentale...... —— 1 700 5 3,220 4 2,164 1,000 — — 4 2,240 1 ,2 0 0 Clc tchécoslovaque de navigation — Czechoslovak Navigation Co. . . 2 738 9 5,987 120 78,744 8 3,800 3,120 — — —— M. F. T. R ...... 48 11,292 30 14,010 200 112,421 2 1,239 320 5 3,791 - —— M. B. R ...... — — 3 1,680 24 20,907 — ————-—— Autres compagnies hongroises — Other Hungarian companies . . 5 282 15 2,469 60 28,780 2 615 380 2 1,410 — — Syndicat S.H.S. - S.H.S. Syndicate. 24 8,695 59 26,623 520 320,969 31 24,752 — —— Autres compagnies S.H.S. — Other S.U.S. Companies . . . 131 1,065 352 7,620 3743 127,660 — — — 3 2,098 - —— N. F. R ...... 19 6,170 23 11,790 151 95,405 2 700 470 12 5,102 ——— S. R. D...... 3 1,580 16 3,315 71 81,568 ——— 13 11,522 -—— Autres compagnies roumaines — Other Roumanian companies. . —— 48 11,110 279 255,566 Navires étrangers enregistrés en Roumanie — Foreign vessels registered in Roumanie : Navires grecs — Greek vessels —— 28 6,720 168 168,485 » anglais — English » —— 1 150 5 5,025 » français — French » —— 19 8,970 78 70,976 » italiens — Italian » —— 3 650 11 13,950 » beiges — Belgian » —— 3 900 9 6,725 » bulgares — Bulgarian » —— —— 5 5,025 — — — — — — —— Navires bulgares — Bulgarian v e s s e l s ...... — — 7 1,440 68 8,747 —— T o t a l ...... 145 47,862 394 154,304 2,878 1,849,801 56 22,043 13,8 70 94 69,456 j 6 j 3,496 1,860

* Approximatif Approximate — 8 9 —

BAVARIAN LLOYD (B. L.).

Stock owned : Preferred Common German Reich 23 */, % 13 % Bavaria 23 V.3 % 8 % Deutsche Bank 53 V. % 54 % Privately 25 % } 79 % Subsidy None

Fleet

T y p e Year Number Tonnage Horse-power Tugs 1924 16 _ 10,260 Barges 1924 90 86,367 Self-propelled barges 1924 7 2,871 1,700 Tank barges 1924 4 3,842 Self-propelled tank barges 1924 2 1,256 660 Total 119 94,336 12,620

Company organised just before beginning of war, hence no figures for 1913 are given. Present condition : Good. In use, about 80 per cent.

Agencies. City Kind of organisation. Ratisbon Head office, Agency Deggendorf Represented by affiliated concern Passau Agency Linz Agency Vienna Branch office for Austria, 3 agencies Bratislava Agency Budapest Branch office for Hungary, 2 agencies Osek Agent Belgrade Branch office S.H.S., Agency Orsova Agency Turnu-Severin Agency Giurgiu Agency Braila Representative Bucharest Representative Sofia Lorn Palanka Represented by “ Bulgarian Lloyd ” Bustchuk Munich Representative Berlin Representative Representative Aschaffenburg Bamburg Wurzburg Represented by “ Donau-Main-Rhein Nuremburg Schiffahrts A.-G. (Demerag) Duisburg Frankfort-on-Main

Port facilities.

Port Quay Warehouses Equipment Remarks Ratisbon 530 m. Three warehouses Joint use of govern­ Agency building, ment cranes (no workshop, oil- cranes owned) storage plant, storehouse for technical material, coal-yard. — 9 0 —

P ort Quay Warehouses E quipm ent Remarks Passau 132 m. One warehouse ; two One half portal crane ; Agency building 77 » grain-silo ; two 1 pneumatic grain coal-yards. warehouse - shant­ conveyor ; one jib- ies. crane ; one floating crane. Deggendorf 330 m. Two revolving steam Agency building. (leased) cranes (leased) Linz 80 m. Coal-yard Vienna 266 m. One warehouse ; One electric double Agency building ; 70 » One auxiliary ware­ crane ; one revolv­ workshop, elec­ (joint use house ; one ware­ ing steam crane ; trical moving plat­ with Neuner house building; one one warehouse jib- form, two electrical and Co.) warehouse. crane ; one floating elevators; one land­ crane ; one ware­ ing stage ; coal­ house crane. yard. Budapest 280 m. Four warehouses. Two floating cranes. Agency building ; 93 » workshop, store­ house for technical materials landing stages ; coal-yards. Budafok 70 m. (Landing place for wine) Mohacs Coal-yard Novisad Coal-yard Lom Palanka Landing stage ; hand crane ; pontoon. Rustchuk Landing stage ; hand crane ; pontoon.

ERSTE DONAU-DAMPFSCHIFFAHRTS-GESELLSCHAFT. (D. D. S. G.)

35,750 shares of stock, 1,050 A.K., e a c h ...... 247,537,500 Austrian Kr. Stock owned by Danube Navigation Company, London 19 per cent. Stock owned by Private O w ners ...... 81 per cent. Subsidy — None. Fleet. Type Year No. Tonnage Horsepower Passenger-steamers ...... 1913 48 — 22,520 1924 31 — 18,040 Difference — 17 — — 4,480 Tugs 1913 82 37,300 1924 43 — 23,290 Difference — 39 — — 14,010

Barges 1913 8 6 8 472,764 — 1924 424 232,965 Difference — 444 — 239,799 —

Self-propelled barges 1913 12 4,475 3,580 1924 8 3,795 2,920 Difference — 4 — 680 — 660 Tank barges 1913 — 1924 19 13,137 — Difference + 19 + 13,137 —

Total 1913 1 ,0 1 0 377,239 63,400 1924 525 249,897 54,250 Difference — 458 — 227,342 — 19,150 Present condition : Good. In use, 81 per cent. — 91 —

Agencies and stations.

Place Type Country Remarks Ratisbon ...... Agency Bavaria Deggendorf...... » » Passau...... » » Obernzell...... » » Engelhartszell...... » Upper Austria Niederranna ...... » » Wesenufer...... » » Obermuhl ...... » » Neuhaus ...... » » Aschach ...... » » Brandstatt-Eferdmg ...... » » XVilhering...... » » Linz ...... » » Mauthausen...... » » Wallsee ...... » Lower Austria Grein ...... » Upper Austria Ybbs...... » Lower Austria Marbach...... >> » Pechlarn ...... » » W eitenegg...... » » M eik...... » » Schonbuhel...... Station » Aggsbach-Dorf ...... Agency * Spitz...... » » Arnsdrof ...... » » Weissenkirchen...... » » Dürnstein ...... Station » Stein...... Agency » Krems ...... Station » Korneuburg...... Agency » Nussdorf ...... » » Vienna— North landing-place Main agency » Vienna — Prater quai ...... » Hainburg...... » Devin...... Czechoslovakia Bratislava ...... » » Not open at present Kertveljes...... » » » B e s...... » » » Koloznema ...... » » Gonyii ...... » Hungary Gy or ...... » » Kom arno...... » Czechoslovakia Komarom-Ujvaros...... Station Hungary Dunaradvany (Dunajske Radvan) ...... Agency Czechoslovakia Not open at present Piszke...... Agency Hungary Esztergom...... » » Park an (P ark an y )...... » Czechoslovakia Szob...... » Hungary Nagymaros ...... » » V acz...... » » Ujpest ...... » » Budapest Batthyanyter » » B udapest...... Main Agency » Budapest Donauuferbahnh . Agency » Budafok...... » » Ercsi...... » » Adony ...... » » ...... » » Dunapentele...... » » Dunafoldvar...... » » H a rta ...... Station » O rdas...... Agency * P a k s...... » Uszod...... » » ...... » » Fadd-Tolna...... » » — 9 2 —

Place Type Country Remarks Ersekcsanad ...... Agency Hungary Baja...... » » Dunaszekcso...... » » M ohacs...... » » B ezd an ...... » Kingdom of the Serbs, Croates and Slovenes Apatin...... » » Bogojevo (Combos)...... » » Not open at present V ukovar...... » » ...... » » Palanka ...... » » Novi S a d ...... » » Zemun...... » » Belgrade (Danube) ...... Main agency » P ancevo...... Agency » Smederevo...... » Veliko-Gradiste...... » » Moldova-veche...... » Roumania D rencova...... » » Not open at present. Orsova ...... » » Turnu Severin 1...... » » Calafat1 ...... Station » Vidin 2...... Agency » Akcar Palanka2 ...... Station Bulgaria L om 2 ...... Agency » Cibar2 ...... Station » Kozloduj 2 ...... » » Orechovo 2 ...... Agency » Vadin2 ...... Station » Beslij 2...... » » Corabia1 ...... » Roumania Som ovit2 ...... Agency Bulgaria Nikopoli 2 ...... » » Turn Magurele2 ...... Station Roumania Swischtow2 ...... Agency Bulgaria Bustchuk 2 ...... » » Giurgiu1 ...... » Roumania Braila1 ...... » » Galatz1 ...... » »

Port facilities.

Place Landing place Pontoons Landing-place equipment Length Area m eters sq. m. Ratisbon ...... 1,075 35,000 None Warehouse No. 1, capacity 10,000 tons. (of which » » 2, » 3,000 » 5,580 with » » 5, » 300 » buildings) » » 6 , » 800 » Electric Loading Equipment. V. A. No. 15 Travelling ship elevator, 36 tons capacity per hour for heavy goods. » » 17 1 Sack elevator ; capacity 400 » » 18 J sacks per hour for heavy goods. » » 17 Revolving crane 1 %-3 tons capacity. » » 35 i » » 36 Revolving cranes travelling on » » 47 > overhead rails : capacity 1 M>-3 » » 49 tons » » 50 / » » 10 Fixed revolving crane, l

1 Roumanian station, formerly property of D.D.S.G., expropriated by Roumanian Government after the war. 1 Bulgarian stations — Customs stores. — 9 3 —

Place Landing place Pontoons Landing-place equipment Length Area meters sq. m. Ratisbon (continued) V. A. No. 12 Fixed revolving crane, 15-ton capacity. » » 45 Wagon "and barge capstan with 1.200 traction power. » » 72 Travelling warehouse winch, 1,000 kg. capacity. Deggendorf 200 19,100 None 1 warehouse, capacity 187 tons. Passau. . .. 520 18,800 None Warehouse No. 1, capacity 250 tons. (of which » » 2, »> ' 10,000 » 2,800 with » » 3, » 1,600 » buildings) » » 4, » 600 » V. A. No. 12 Fixed revolving crane, 5-ton capacity. » » 21, 23, 24. Sack elevators, capacity 400 sacks per hour. » » 25 Grain-loading plant, capacity 40 tons per hour, including wagon-shunting plant, 750 kg. tractive force. » » 29 Grain elevator, 80-ton capacity per hour, including wagon-shunt­ ing plant of 750 kg. tractive force. » » 53 Barge and wagon capstan of 1.200 kg. tractive force. » » 73 Travelling rope winch. S. V. A. No. 11 Revolving steam crane, 4-ton capacity. Engelhartszell 290 1,400 None 1 warehouse, capacity 124 tons, Obernzell 150 500 1 1 warehouse, capacity 36 tons, Niederranna . 130 1 ,2 0 0 1 1 warehouse, capacity 60 tons, Wesenufer .. . 110 1 ,0 0 0 1 1 warehouse, capacity 37 tons, Obermühl . . . 160 700 1 1 warehouse, capacity 435 tons, Neuhaus ...... 1 00 480 1 1 warehouse, capacity 82 tons, Aschach ...... 270 680 None 1 warehouse, capacity 31 tons, Brandstatt .. . 80 480 1 1 warehouse, capacity 167 tons, Wilhsring . .. 80 400 1 1 warehouse,capacity 66 tons, Linz ...... 680 24,000 5 Warehouse N o. 1, capacity 5,200 tons. » » 2, » “ 4,800 » » » 3, >> 800 » V. A. No. 33 Travelling revolving crane con­ nected with sack-transporting plant 1.5 tons capacity. » » 37 Sliding platform. » » 54 Chain elevator, capacity, 400 sacks per hour. Mauthausen...... 485 468 1 1 warehouse, capacity 204 tons. Wall see ...... 500 1,600 1 1 warehouse, capacity 41 tons. Grein ...... 402 2 00 1 1 warehouse, capacity 238 tons. Ybbs...... 1 ,1 0 0 250 2 1 warehouse, capacity 133 tons. Marbach...... 130 60 1 Pôchlarn ...... 900 960 1 1 warehouse, capacity 932 tons. W eitenegg...... 350 100 1 1 warehouse, capacity 383 tons. M elk...... 80 600 2 2 warehouses, capacity 156 tons. Schonbühel...... 80 1 00 1 Aggsbach Df...... 80 150 1 1 warehouse, capacity 43 tons. Spitz...... 1,250 600 1 1 warehouse, capacity 595 tons. Arnsdorf...... 80 150 1 1 warehouse, capacity 44 tons. Weisenkirchen ...... 80 150 1 1 warehouse, capacity 73 tons. Dilrnstein...... 80 100 1 None. Stein and Krems . . . 620 1,200 2 1 warehouse, capacity 178 tons. Korneuburg...... 730 300 1 2 warehouses, capacity 1,304 tons. V. A. No. 14, Fixed crane with hock, capa­ city 10 and 5 tons. Nusdorf 216 1,600 1 1 warehouse, capacity 605 tons. Place Landing place Pontoons Landing-place equipment Length Area meters sq. m. Vienna — North landing place . 535 42,850 None 2 warehouses, capacity 1,700 tons. (of which S. V. A. No. 1, Electric floating belt con­ 10,720 with veyor, maximum capacity 80 building) tons per hour. » » 26, Travelling coal-loadingbridge 40 kg. capacity 60,000 kg. per hour. » » 46, Electric capstan, 12,000 kg. tractive force. » » 58,59,Electriccoal-loadingbridges, including belt conveyors of 500 kg. capacity, 80 tons per hour. » » 6 0 , Electric wagon-tipping device, capacity 35,000 kg., 140,000 kg. per hour. » » 61, Belt conveyor with 140,000 kg. capacity per hour. » » 62-63, Sliding platform of 5,000 capacity. » » 64-66, Shunting capstan, 1,200 kg. tractive power. 5 coal-yards with space for 11,500 tons. Vienna-Praterquai Warehouse .... 1,140 68,700 13 warehouses, 45,900 tons capacity. (of which V. A. No. 1, Electric fixed revolving crane, 45,000 with 2 0 tons capacity. buildings.) » » 2, Electric travelling revolving crane, 3.5 tons capacity. » » 3-5, Electric travelling revolving crane, 2.5 tons capacity. » » 6-9, Electric sack elevator, 400 sacks per hour. » » 11, 31, 32, 39-44 wagon capstans of 750-2,000 kg. tractive force. » » 47, 70, 71 travelling rope winches 500-1,000 kg. tractive forcé. » » 16, 19, 38 sliding platform. » » 22, travelling ship elevator, 50 tons capacity per hour. » » 30, travelling ship elevator, 80 tons capacity per hour. » » 27, 28. Loading bridge, 1 ton capacity. » » 34, Loading bridge 1.5 ton capacity. » » 55 and 56. Loading bridge 1.5 and 3-ton capacity. S. V. A. No. 12, Revolving steam crane, 4-ton capacity. Nainburg 300 1,600 1 1 warehouse, capacity 272 tons. Devin . . . 15 165 1 None. Bratislava 340 13,600 6 3 warehouses, capacity 3,213 tons. (of which V. A. No. 51, Electric loading bridge with 1,900 with travelling crane above 3-5 ton buildings.) capacity. Kertvelyes . 150 750 None. 1 warehouse, capacity 1 2 0 tons. Bes...... 203 9,400 None 1 warehouse, capacity 17 tons. G ô n y i...... 160 2 ,0 0 0 2 1 warehouse, capacity 165 tons. V. A. No. 10 steam elevator for grain and coal, 30 tons per hour. Kolosznoma 60 2,300 None 1 warehouse, capacity 1 2 2 tons. Place Landing place Pontoons Landing-place equipment Length Area meters sq. m. Gy or 150 15,000 Warehouse No. 7 capacity 200 tons. » » 11 » 200 » » » 12 » 200 * » » 17 » 200 » Shed » 13 » 60 » V. A. No. 52. Fixed loading bridge with un­ derneath traveller, capacity : bulk goods, 300 q. ; general goods, 2 0 0 q.p.h. Komarom-Ujvares .. Komarno...... 70 1,400 1 1 warehouse, capacity 296 tons. Dunajsks R advany.. 110 1,000 None None. Piszke...... 120 1,000 None None. Esztergom...... 68 2,000 1 1 warehouse, capacity 306 tons. Parkany...... 75 3,000 None 2 warehouses, capacity 950 tons. Szob...... 1 None. Nagymaros ...... 20 600 1 None. V acz...... 60 2,700 1 2 warehouses, capacity 267 tons. Ujpest ...... 40 856 1 None. Budapest Batthyanyter .... 323 4,650 1 2 warehouses, capacity 1,224 tons. Budapest 958 28,400 3 15 warehouses, capacity 9,171 tons. Main agency and S.V.A. No. 2. Revolving steam crane, Budapest 1-ton capacity. Donauufer Station. » » 4. » 1 » » » 5. » 1 » » » 6 . » 1 » » » 7. » 2 » » » 8 . Revolving electric crane, 2 -ton capacity. » » 13. Revolving steam crane, 4-ton capacity. (11 fixed revolving hand cranes belonging

Budafok...... 100 400 1 None. Eresi...... 30 500 1 None. Adony ...... 1 10 16,500 1 1 warehouse, capacitv 1 1 2 tons. Da. Vecse ...... 2 0 0 1 2 ,0 0 0 1 1 warehouse, capacity 81 tons. Da. Pentele...... 150 600 1 1 warehouse, capacity 150 tons. Da. Fôldvar ...... 180 7,200 1 1 warehouse, capacity 59 tons. H arta...... 53 1,500 1 1 warehouse, capacity 280 tons. ...... 114 4,000 1 1 warehouse, capacity 1 10 tons. P a k s...... 140 2,800 1 2 warehouses, capacity 501 tons. U szod...... 48 1,400 1 1 warehouse, capacitv 79 tons. Kalocsa ...... 150 700 1 1 warehouse, capacity 149 tons. Fadd T o ln a ...... 95 5,700 1 2 warehouses, capacity 408 tons. Baja...... 150 4,500 1 2 warehouses, capacity 475 tons. Pa. Szekcab...... 33 330 1 None. Mohacs...... 350 30,000 1 warehouse, capacity 550 tons. Ersekcsanad ...... — 1 None. Bezdan...... 80 4,000 1 1 warehouse, capacity 292 tons. Apatin...... 80 5,000 None None. Begojevo ...... 180 4,000 None. 1 warehouse, capacity 190 tons. Vukovar...... 2 0 0 2 ,1 0 0 None 1 warehouse, capacity 340 tons. Ilok...... 70 1 ,0 0 0 None 1 warehouse, capacity 275 tons. Palanka...... 150 2,500 None 1 warehouse, capacity 510 tons. Novisad ...... 150 6 ,0 0 0 1 2 warehouses, capacity 1,468 tons. Zemun...... 500 1 0 ,0 0 0 1 4 warehouses, capacity 2,380 tons. Belgrade-Danube. . — — 2 S.V.A. No. 3. Revolving steam crane, 4 tons capacity. Pancevo ...... 300 3,000 None 1 warehouse, capacity 440 tons. Smederevo...... 70 2 ,0 0 0 None None. Mol do va-veche 1 .. 90 1,500 None 1 warehouse, capacity 299 tons. Vel. Gradiste...... None None.

1 Roumanian stations, formerly property of D.D.S.G., expropriated after the war by the Roumanian Government. — 96 —

Place Landing place Pontoons Landing-place equipment Length Area meters sq. m.

Orsova 1 ...... 400 6,800 1 1 warehouse, capacity 1,739 tons. Drenkova1 ...... n o 1,300 None 1 warehouse, capacity 170 tons. Turnu Severin 1 162 300 None 1 warehouse, capacity 500 tons. Calafat1 ...... 26 800 None 1 warehouse, capacity 135 tons. Vidin 2 ...... 60 — 1 None. Akcar Palanka 2 . .. —— None None. Lom 2 ...... 60 — 1 None. Cibar 2 ...... —— None None. Kosleduj 2 ...... —— None None. Orechovo2 ...... —— 1 None. Vadin 2 ...... —— None None. B eslii2 ...... •— — 1 None. Corabia 1 ...... 75 2 0 0 None 1 warehouse, capacity 2 0 0 tons. Som ovit2 ...... 60 — 1 None. T. Magurele 1 ...... 56 2 0 0 None 1 warehouse, capacity 2 0 0 tons. Nikopoli2 ...... 10 0 300 1 None. Sistov 2 ...... 80 — 1 None. Rustchuk 2 ...... 84 — 1 None. Giurgiu 1 ...... 65 1,500 None 1 warehouse, capacity 500 tons. Braila 1 ...... 45 780 None S.V.A. No. 9. Elevator for grain (steam), 180 tons per hour. Galatz 1 ...... 145 5,800 None 3 warehouses, capacity 2,383 tons.

RHEIN-DONAU-EXPRESS-SCHIFFAHRTS-A. G. (ERDEX).

S t o c k ...... 100,000,000 Austrian kr. Owned by D. D. S. G...... 50 per cent. Owmed by M. F. T. R ...... 50 per cent. Subsidy : None. Fleet.

Type Year No. Tonnage Horse-power Self-propelled barges ...... 1924 4 480 1,060 Not organised before wrar. Present condition : Good. In use : 100 per cent.

Agencies. City K ind of Organisation Vienna Danube H. Q. and agency Lorn Dalanka Agency with own personnel Rustchuk

Port facilities. Port Warehouses

Vienna Danube Canal 2 warehouses with 371 m.2 floor space.

SUDDEUTSCHE DONAUDAMPFSCHIFFAHRT GESELLSCHAFT. (S. D.)

C apital...... 1,400,000 marks, divided into 7,000 shares Stock owrned by D.D.S.G...... 60 per cent. Stock owned by jVl.F.T.R...... 40 per cent Subsidy : None.

1 Roumanian stations, formerly property of D.D.S.G., expropriated after the war by the Roumanian Government. 2 Bulgarian stations : Customs warehouses. — 97 —

Fleet.

Type Year No. Tonnage Hors e-power Tugs...... 1913 12 6,800 1924 3 1,530 Difference — 9 5,270

Barges ...... 1913 115 76,751 1924 7 3,296 Difference — 108 — 73,455 Self-propelled barges . . . 1913 3 1,950 720 1924 5 3,250 1,200 Difference + 2 + 1,300 + 480 Tank barges...... 1913 — — 1924 5 3,802 Difference + 5 ■+ 3,802

Total ...... 1913 130 78,701 7,520 1924 20 10,348 2,730 Difference — 110 — 68,353 — 4,790 Present condition : Good. In use : 100 per cent.

Company is German. Boats are under German flag. Before the war stock was bought by Austrian Government. After passing through other hands present ownership is as indicated above.

Port facilities.

Station Warehouses Loading equipment No. Surface Remarks Kind Capacity in sq. m. Tons Ratisbon ...... No private warehouses or loading equipment. Deggendorf...... 1 530 Ground level —— Passau...... 1 417 One storey —.— Linz ...... 1 2,916 One storey 1 electric revolving crane 3 Vienna-Kaiserplatz 1 3,500 One storey 3 electric semi-portal revolving cranes 3.5 each 1 4,800 Three storeys 2 electric warehouse internal cranes 1 .5 each 1 electric crane 3 » 1 electric capstan 1 electric sliding platform 30 1 car scales 1 wagon scales Vienna-Zwisshun - bruckon ...... 4 5,219 Ground level 3 electric cantilever cranes 3 each 1 electric fixed revolving crane 5 1 hand crane 1 2 electric capstans 1 electric sliding platform 50 1 electric sliding platform 40 1 wagon-weigher 1 cart-weigher Vienna Danube Quay Station . 2 1,160 Ground level 1 electric portal revolving crane 2.3 Vienna town .... 1 1 ,0 0 0 Ground level 1 electric revolving crane 1.5 Budapest-Rudolf- rakpart ...... 6 2,346 Ground level 1 electric revolving crane 5 3 steam floating cranes Budapest-O’Buda 1 364 Ground level

7 — 9 8 —

CONTINENTALE MOTORSCHIFFAHRTS A.-G. AMSTERDAM.

Stock owned privately. Subsidy : None. Fleet.

Type Year No Tonnage Horse-power 1. T u g s ...... 1924 1 — 700 2. Barges ...... 1924 5 3,220 — 3. Self-propelled b a r g e s ...... 1924 4 2,164 1,000 4. Self-propelled tank barges ...... 1924 4 2,240 1,200 Total...... 14 7,624 2,900

Company not organised before the war. Present condition : good. In use : 1 0 0 per cent.

Agencies.

City Kind of Organisation Passau A. Glas & Co. Vienna Josef Popper Bratislava Jan Hobasek Budapest Albert Gross Novisad Fenyô & Brother Belgrade “ Bohemia ” Orsova “ Danubia ” Vidin “ Iskra ” Lom Eliezer Benaroya & Co. Sistov Mingrelli Filipoff & Co. Somovit Papazoff and Panajotoff Rustchuk Eliezer Benaroya & Co. Giurgiu “ Unitas ” Braila “ Unitas ” Galatz “ Unitas ”

Port facilities.

Port Quay Warehouses Equipment V ie n n a ...... 1 1 Crane Danube Canal ......

CZECHOSLOVAK DANUBE NAVIGATION COMPANY.

Stock owned by G overnm ent...... 72 per cent. by Bankconsortium .... 28 per cent. Subsidy 1,100,000 Cr. Cr. 1922 and 1923 to cover deficit of 1,500,000 Cr. Cr. in passenger and package freight business in those years.

Fleet.

Type Year No. Tonnage Horse-power Remarks

Passenger s t e a m e r s ...... 1924 2 738 T u g s ...... 1924 9 5,987 B a r g e s ...... 1924 12 0 78,744 Self-propelled barges ...... 1924 8 3,800 3,120 4 steam 4 motor Tank barges...... 1924 T otal...... 139 116,744 9,845 Company not organised before war. Present condition : good. In use : 100 per cent. — 9 9 —

Agencies.

City Kind of organisation Ratisbon ...... Agency Passau...... » Linz ...... » V ie n n a ...... » Bratislava ...... H. Q. and local office Komarno...... Agency Kam enice ...... » B udapest...... » B e z d a n ...... » Vukovar...... Warehouse and office Novi sa d ...... Agency O s e k ...... » B elgrade...... » O rso v a ...... » Turnu-Severin 2 Vidin 1 Lom 1 Sofia 1 Sistova 1 Giurgiu 2 R ustchuk 1 Bucharest2 Braila 2 Galatz 2

Port facilities.

Port Quay Warehouses Equipment Remarks Ratisbon.. 300 m. 400 tons. 2 portal cranes. Municipal warehou 1 portal crane under ses leased. construction. Deggendorf. One barge length. S. D. G. warehouse. Passau .... 1 2 0 m. Warehouse leased S. D. G. Linz. 190 m., together with S. D. G. warehouse, 1 travelling portal Leased. S. H. S. Syndicate 2 0 0 tons. crane. and M. F. T. R. 1 crane under con­ struction. Ybbs .. Coal barge. Vienna Three barge lengths. Warehouse VIII, 998 Portal crane. sq. m. upper sur­ face, 1,174 sq. m. ground surface, - v 2,172 sq. m. storage space. About 600 tons by arrangement with S.D.G. Bratislava. Of the 2,284 m. of Four warehouses Two electric eleva­ Three pontoons. quay on the river (11,761 sq. m. ca­ tors of 2.5 tons ca­ side, about 400 m. pacity 23,562 tons). pacity. is leased to D. D. May also be used 1 electric elevator of S. G. The remain­ by other compa­ 5 tons capacity. der is under State nies. 1 sack elevator. Administration 1 bucket elevator. and at the disposal 1 sack slide. of all flags.

1 Represented by “ Balkan Transport Co., Ltd. ”, Sofia, also for Vidin, Somovit and Sistov. 1 Represented by “ Internationala ”, Bucharest. 100 —

P ort Quay Warehouses Equipm ent Remarks Komarno .. 170 m. (2,350 sq.m.), Warehouse IV, 2,700 Floating crane, 10 Railway connection. of which 85 m. sq. m. storage tons capacity. (1,500 sq. m.), free space. port, 85 m. (850 sq. 2 pontoons. m.) coal export store. 1 coal barge.

Budapest 126 m. Ujpest own ware­ 60 m. projected. house 35 x 8,280 sq. m. D. U. B. warehouse. Leased coal barge.

Vukovar .. 11,000 sq. m. 1 warehouse of 2 sto­ Pontoon. reys and 2 of 1 storey. 3 x 550 sq. m. 1,650 sq. m. 629 2,279 sq. m. Capacity 1,600 quin­ tals and also space for 4,000 tons. Novisad . Barge No. 4001 as warehouse and coal barge. Orsova .. Barge No. 4201 as warehou e and coal barge. Lom .... Pontoon No 6, 20 m. bridge. Rustchuk Pontoon No. 4, 20 m. bridge. Giurgiu .. Storage space by ar­ rangement with agents “ Interna­ tio n a l ”. Galatz . .. Storage space by ar­ rangement with agents “ Interna­ tio n a l ” .

ROYAL HUNGARIAN RIVER AND SEA NAVIGATION COMPANY. (M. F. T. R.)

Stock ow'ned : By Government, 20 per cent. By Danube Navigation Company, London, 13 per cent. Privately, 27 per cent. Subsidy : Amounts in depreciated currency to about $30 a year.

Fleet.

Type Year No. Tonnage Hors e-Power 1913 15 5,860 Passenger steamer1 1924 48 11,292 Difference + 33 + 5,432 1913 33 13,040 Tugs 1924 30 14,010 Difference — 3 + 970

1 Includes 30 ierry boats of a total of 3,532 hors e-power. — 101 —

Type Year No. Tonnage Horse-power Barges ...... 1913 275 149,177.70 1924 195 108,629.10 Difference — 80 — 40,548.60

Self-propelled barges .. . 1913 1924 2 320 Difference + 2 + 320

Tank barges ...... 1913 1924 5 3,791.60 Difference + 5 + 3,791.60

Total...... 1913 323 149.177.70 18,900 1924 275 112.420.70 25,622 Difference — 48 — 36,757.00 + 6,722

Present condition : good. In use : 80 per cent. In addition to changes noted above, this company made substantial increases in its fleet during the war which were lost under the provisions of the treaties of peace.

In 1925 the Company M. F. T. R. has Representatives, Agencies and other Stations in the following places :

R epresentatives .

Numbers Seat of Representatives Staff No. of employees 1 G erm any...... München 5 2 A ustria...... Vienna 11 3 Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes . Zemun 3 4 Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes . Belgrade 1 5 Roumania...... Bucharest 3 6 B u lg a r ia ...... Sofia 3

T o t a l 26

S p h e r e o f a u t h o r i t y o f representatives .

München : The whole territory of Bavaria. Vienna : The whole territory of Austria. Zemun : All stations in the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, except the Agency of Belgrade, as also in respect of the commercial administration of the free traffic between stations in the Danube lying above the Save, Drave and Zemun. Belgrade : The Tisza stations of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, to the traffic of the Serb-Croat-Slovene stations below Belgrade and to the Belgrade Agency. Bucharest : The whole territory of Roumania. Sofia : The whole territory of Bulgaria. — 102 -

M. F. T. R. Agencies.

Nos. River Country Name of Agency

1 . Danube Germany Ratisbon 2 . » » Deggendorf 3. » » Passau 4. Austria Linz 5. » » Vienna-Reichsbrucke 6 . »» Vienna-Handelskai 7. » » Hamburg 8 . » Czechoslovakia Bratislava 9. » » Komarno I. b. 1 0 . » Hungary Gyor 1 1 . » » Gonyu 1 2 . » » Komarno r. b. 13. » » Nyergesujfalu 14. » » Esztergom 15. » » Szob 16. » » Domos 17. »» Nagymaros 18. »» Visegrad 19. »» Vacz 2 0 . »» Dunâbogdany 2 1 . » » Tahitotfalu 2 2 . » >> Szentendre 23. »» Ujpest 24. »» Budapest left side 25. »» » right side 26. » » » Ectvos Square 27. » » Danube Goods 28. » Budafok 29. » Ercsi 30. » » Adony 31. » » Dunapentele 32. » » Dunavecse 33. » » Dunafoldvar 34. » » Paks 35. »» Kalocsa-Fokto 36. » » Fadd-Tolna 37. »» Baja 38. »» Dunaszekcso 39. » » Mohacs 40. » Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes Batina-Bezdan 41. » » Vukovar 42. » » Novisad 43. » » Zemun 44. » » Belgrade 45. » » Semendria 46. » Roumania Orsova 47. »» Turnseverin 48. »» Calafat 49. » » Corabia 50. »» Giurgiu 51. » » Braila 52. » » Galatz 53. » Bulgaria Vidin 54. »» Lom 55. » » Rahova 56. »» Somovit 57. » » Sistov 58. » » Rustchuk 59. Tisza Hungary Szolnok 60. » » Csongrad 61. » » Szeged 62. » Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes Titel 63. Bega Roumania Temesvar — 103 —

M. F. T. R. Other Stations.

River C o u n tr y Name of Station Nos. 1. Danube Czechoslovakia Devin » Hungary Venek 2 . 3. » Gizellatelep 4. » Zebegeny 5. » Kisoroszi 6 . » Tahi 7. » Leanyfalu 8. » Pocsmegyer 9. » Romaifurdo 10. » Bulgaria Cibar 11. » Kozloduj 12. » Vadin 13. » Beslij 14. » Nikopol 15. Tisza Hungary Tiszavarkony 16. » Vezseny 17. » Nagyrev-Ukecske 18. » Tiszakurt-Tiszaincka 19. » 20. Szentes 21 . Csanytelek 22. Mindszent 23. Sovenyh aca-Any a s 24. Algyo

Local and ferry services : Budapest. 15 stations Budapest 1 station Ujpest.

Total 16 stations. M. F. T. R. Port Facilities,

Area ot Site of Station Warehouse Open Pontoons, Coal ground Cranes and Stations on the Danube depot Number in Length in meters Square Own Hired Area of storage-room in sq. m. their capacity meters in sq. m. sq. m.

Ratisbon- Donaulânde .... 1 barge-length 444 1 266 Ratisbon- • Luitpoldhafen .. 2 barge-lcnglhs 1,270 1 1 ,0 2 0 250 Deggendorf1 ...... — 140 meters 240 _ —— _ — Passau- Donaulânde2. . .. — 2 barge-Iengths 2,174 1 — 504 — 1,310 1 floating steam 1 360 (No. 1) crane with 3.5 tons capacity Passau- Store : Racklauhafen . . . 3 barge-lengtlis 4,263 1 Gr. floor . 1,800 1,779 Electric.-driven 1st floor . 1,800 aut. elevator 2 nd floor . 1,800 with 2 cranes of 1 ton cap. 5,400 each, fitted on Store : either side. Linz ...... 1 64.5 3,395 1 Gr. floor . 1,620 540 920 1 electric-driven 65 1st floor . 1,741.5 aut. crane with 2nd floor . 1,741.5 2 tons capacity 129.5 Cellar___ 1,741.5

6,844.5 Pôchlarn ...... 40 500 1 211 Stein-Krems ...... — 1 barge-length 1,225 1 — 171 ——— Korneuburg ...... — 1 barge-length —— 1 72 304 —— Wien-Nordbahn- lândeand Kommunalbad8 . V 160 3,000 — — — —— — Vienna-Reichs- Brücke4 ...... i 75 4,631 1 — 2 0 0 —— __ Vienna- Handcls-Kai .. . 608.6 45,940.3 1 — 1,064 —— 1 electrically dri­ 1 1,312 ven aut. crane 1 810 and 1 electri­ 1 Store : cally driven Gr. floor . 1,092 aut. crane. The 1st floor . 1,092 first with 2 tons 2,184 capacity, the 1 Store : other one with Gr. floor . 2,794.5 2 .6 tons capa­ 1st floor . 2,878.- city. 2nd floor. 2,878.— 3rd floor . 2,878.- 1 1 ,4 2 k . 5 1 Vienna-Stacllauer Total 1 6,798. 5 lïrid^c-...... J _ 1 / K cr n te le p ...... 100 11,970 1 \ _ \ H a m b u r g ...... 1 1 barge-length 44 — — _ Bratislava ...... 2 Common landing-place 1 436 _ l'or pass, steamers 170 m. long, 2 barge- lengths on Danube, 4 barge - lengths in winter harbour.

Gonyii ...... 1 240 6,361 _ G ÿ o r ...... 1 1 barge-length — 1 277 Komarom, right side 1 300 meters 4,800 — Komarom, left side 1 45 1 ,1 1 2 1 2 1 2 Nyergesujfalu .... 1 2 barge-lengths ___ .— 1 45 Pàrkàny ...... — 12 0 --- — Esztergom ...... 1 2 0 0 --- 1 ___ 198 Szob ...... 1 1 barge-length --- —— Zebegèny ...... 1 1 barge-length --- — __ _ D ô m o s ...... 1 1 barge-length ----- 1 ___ 35.34 Gizailatelep-fürdô. 1 1 barge-length ----- — ___

Nagymaros ...... 1 1 barge-length ------1 — 49.40 — — » àtkelés . . . 1

Visegràd ...... 1 1 ------1 barge-length — 30 — — » àtkelés ... 1 V â c z ...... 1 1 2 0 ----- 1 ___ 230 Kisoroszi ...... 1 1 barge-length ---- — — Dunabogdàny . . . 1 1 barge-length ----- —— _ T a h i...... 1 1 barge-length ----- — — Tahitôtfalu ...... 1 1 barge-length ----- —— L eà n yfalu ...... 1 1 barge-length ----- —— Pocsmagyer ...... 1 1 barge-length ----- — — Szentendre ...... 1 1 barge-length ----- — — Rômai-fiirdo...... 1 1 barge-length ----- — — _ Ujpest ...... 1 1 barge-length 1,240 1 — 2 0 0 _ Budapest,; left side 1 625! 7 9,124.9 5 2,880 5,584.9 660 2 electr. aut. open cranes with depot. 2 .6 tons capa­ city each Budapest, right side 1 227 1 — 1,358 372 986 — Budapest, Eôtvôs Square ...... 3 2 259.4 2,853.4 415.4 — — Budapest-Danube 1 984 goods station . . . Floating steam 2 barge-lengths 1 504 crane No. 11, 1 .8 tons capa­ Budapest-Danube city. coal station .... 2 2 barge-lengths 1,280

1 Additional storage room in excess of 240 sq. m. available if required. 2 One-third of warehouse No. 1 placed at disposal of S. H. S. River Syndicate. 3 Designated by Authorities as definitive site for landing-stage for passenger steamers 4 Provisional Site. M. F. T. R. Port Facilities (continued).

Area of Site of Station Warehouse Open Coal Pontoons, ground Cranes and Stations on the Danube depot Number Area of storage-room in their capacity Length in meters Square Own Hired in sq. m meters in sq. m. sq. m.

Budapest, local and ferry-boat stations : S./ Left Side : U jp c s t ...... Hungria-ut . . . 20 5 00 Margitsziget- Budapest side Ujpesti rakp. Arped-utcza . 80 4 8 0 Lanchi-dfo ... 5 2 .6 5 7 8 .6 Vigadé Square 87 957 Eskii Square . 4 8 .7 — Vâmbâz Square 7 2 .5 ■— Borâros Square 2 7 . 3 131 B. /R ight-side : Obuda ...... 65 1,300 Felsô-Margitsz Csâszârfurdô . 6 6 . 5 2,3 2 7 .5 Also-Msziget . Margithidio .. 20 Batthyâny-tér 6 8 . 5 685 Lânchidfo . . . 60 94 Transfers : b /Right bank Tabân ...... 1 27 162 Lâgymânyos . . 1 70 4 10 Coal Place .... 1 3 2 . 3 8 0 7 .5 B u d a fc k ...... 1 1 barge-length 1,200 E r o si...... 1 60 — Adony ...... DDSG 1 barge-length — Dunapentele . . DDSG 1 barge-length — Dunavecse .... DDSG 1 barge-length — Dunafôldvâr . . 1 pon­ 70 128 toon barge P a k s ...... 1 4 7 . 5 _ 162 Kalocsa-Fokto 1 1 b a rg e - le n g th — 126 Fadd-Tolna . .. 1 53 ■—- 126 B aja...... 1 47 888 1 89 Negotiations for lease of ware­ house from StateRailway still pending. Dunaszekesii...... 1 50 5 ,4 5 1 .6 M o h a c s ...... 1 50 1 ,349 126 Vukovar Town . . . SHS » 50 Vukovàr TransiL . . si is i | --- Zemun ...... s u s 1 _ -- Belgrarl ...... SHS 1 — — O rso v a...... 91 --- Turnu-Severin .... SI! 2 — --- C alafat...... —— --- Vidin ...... 1 1 barge-length --- Lom...... 1 1 barge-length --- Rahova ...... 1 1 barge-length --- Corâbia ...... —— --- Cibar ...... 1 1 barge-length --- Kozloduj...... 1 1 barge-length --- Beslij ...... DGT 1 barge-length --- (DOG J) S o m o v it...... 1 1 barge-length --- S isto v ...... 1 1 barge-length --- Nikopol ...... DGT 1 barge-length --- (DDSS) R ustch u k ...... 1 1 barge-length --- Giurgiu ...... 1 60 meters landing place --- 70 B r a ila ...... —— - Galatz 3...... SM R1 — --- Szolnok ...... 1 1 barge-length --- 304 Tiszavarkony...... 1 1 barge-length --- V e z se n y ...... 1 1 barge-length --- Nagy re v ...... 1 1 barge-length --- TiszakurtTiszaincka 1 1 barge-length --- Tiszau g ...... 1 1 barge-length - Csongrad ...... 1 170 --- Szentec ...... 1 1 barge-length 8,000 Csanytelek...... 1 1 barge-length — Mindszent ...... 1 100 — Sovenyhazaanyds . 1 1 barge-length — Algyo ...... 1 1 barge-length — Szeged ...... 1 100 Zenta...... — 75 400 Aljmas Dravatorok — 198 3,936 Baros ...... ■— 90 2,272 217 Samac ...... — 90 9,076 Boza Temesvar . . . 1 barge-length Gr. floor 120 — 1st floor .... 120

1 Pontoon of Sub-Company used against payment. 2 Service hydraulique. 3 Service maritime Roumania. — 108 —

HUNGARIAN INLAND NAVIGATION COMPANY (M. B. R.)

Stock and subsidies not reported. All boats are chartered by M. F. T. R. Fleet. Type Year No. Tonnage Horse-power T u g s...... 1913 13 — 4,695 1924 3 — 1,680 Difference — 10 — — 3,015

B a r g e s...... 1913 88 49,703 — 1924 24 20,907 — Difference — 64 — 28,716 —

T o t a l ...... 1913 101 49,703 4,695 1924 27 20,907 1,680 Difference — 74 — 28,716 — 3,015

Present condition : good. In use : 100 per cent.

S. H. S. SYNDICATE Stock owned : By Government, 81 per cent. By Brodarski Syndicate, 19 per cent. Subsidy : None. Fleet. Type Year No. Tonnage Hors e-power Passenger steam ers...... 1925 24 — 8,695 Tugs...... 1925 59 1 — 26,623 Barges...... 1925 520 320,969 Self-propelled barges...... 1925 — — Tank barges ...... 1925 31 24,752 T o t a l...... 634 345,721 33,318

Present condition : poor. In use : 70 to 75 per cent. Syndicate formed after war. Figures for First Serbian S. S. Co. not furnished.

Agencies. Danube. Danube : Bezdan Zemun Apatin Smederevo Marij a Aljmas Kovin Bogojevo Dubravica Dalj Vel. Gradiste Vukovar Golubac llok Dobra Palanka Cerevib Beocin Kamenica Korbovo Novi Sad Sremski Karlovci Slankamen 1 Includes 6 tugs of 2,198 h.p. which are to be broken up. — 109 —

Danube (continued) : : Radujevac Sisak Ratisbon Bos. Gradiska Passau Bos Brod Linz Slav. Brod Vienna Bos Samac Bratislava Slav Samac Komarno Zupanja Budapest Brcko Mohac Bos Raca Durotevo Sr. Mitrovica Braila Sabac Orsova Zabrezje Tisza . Beograd Srp. Krstwi Star a Kanjiza Biga Canal : Srp. Kanjiza Senta Vel. Beckerek Ada Mol Temes : Stari Becej Novi Becej Paucsovo Titel : Osik

Port facilities. Within the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, the Syndicate has one or more pontoons and occasional warehouses in all ports. In Ratisbon it rents part of city warehouse; in Passau, part of M. F. T. R. warehouse ; in Vienna it leases a place of its own and rents part of S. D. warehouse ; in Bratislava and Komarno 1. b. it rents part of State warehouses ; in Budapest it rents a warehouse and quay space from the city for its private use.

ROUMANIAN FLUVIAL NAVIGATION.

The Company is owned and operated by the State. Fled. Type Year No. Tonnage Hors e-power Passenger steamers .... 1913 h — 3,210 1924 19 — 6,170 Difference + 8 — + 2,960 Tuga . 1913 12 — 6,680 1924 23 — 11,790 Difference + 11 —■ + 5,110 Barges 1913 107 67,556 — 1924 151 95,405 -— Difference + 44 + 27,849 — Self-propelled barges 1913 1 400 * 120 1924 2 700 470 Difference + 1 + 300 + 350 Tank barges 1913 13 5,694 — 1924 12 5,102 — Difference — 1 — 592 — Total . 1913 144 73,650 10,010 1924 207 101,207 18,430 Difference + 63 + 27,557 + 8,420 Four tugs under repair. Ten barges under repair. Thirty barges unsuitable for general use due to need of repairs to decks. Now used for transport of wood. 110 —

Port facilities.

Port Quay Warehouses (m.) (sq. m.) B a z ia s ...... 60 — Moldova-Veche...... 60 — D renkova...... 60 — O r so v a -V ille ...... 60 72 T. Severin...... 60 640 G r u i a ...... 60 — C etatea...... 60 160 C alafat...... 60 427 B is tr e t...... 60 — B e c h e t ...... 60 -— Corabia ...... 60 495 T. Magurele...... 60 240 Z im n icea ...... 60 140 Giurgiu...... 120 738 O l t e n it a ...... 120 368 Turtucaia...... 60 — S ilistra ...... 60 116 (in construction) C a la r a s i...... 60 273 O str o v ...... 60 — O l t in a ...... 60 141 C e r n a v o d a ...... 60 154 H a r s o v a ...... 60 175 Gura I a lo m it e i...... 60 — B r a i l a ...... 120 280 M a c i n ...... 60 — G a l a t i ...... 120 1,000 R e n i...... 60 220 ...... 60 — T u lc e a ...... 60 — I s m a i l ...... 60 750 Kilia N o u a ...... 60 300 Kilia Veche ...... 60 — Valeo v ...... 60 —

ROUMANIAN SOCIETY OF NAVIGATION ON THE DANUBE.

Roumanian Stock Company with total capital of 45,000,000 lei, divided into 90,000 shares of 500 lei. All shares are held by private persons. Fleet.

Type Y e a r N o . T o n n a g e Horse-power Passenger steamers 1924 3 — 1,580 Steam and motor tugs 1924 16 — 3,315 B a r g e s ...... 1924 71 81,568 — Tank barges .... 1924 13 11,522 — T o t a l...... 103 93,090 4,895 No data available on condition or amount in use. Agencies at Sulina *01tonits * Tulcea * Giurgiu Isaccea Zimnicea ♦Valcov T. Magurele * Chili a Noua Corabia * Ismail Calafat ♦Reni Gruia ♦Galatz T. Severin ♦Braila Budapest Cernavoda Vienna Silistra N. B. — All agencies marked * possess warehouses and handle traffic in goods, parcels and passengers. — Ill —

Port facilities.

Port Quay sq. m. Storehouses, sq. m. Giurgiu 60 144 Oltenita 60 144 Braila 2 to 60 m. 613 Galatz 60 800 Reni — 60 Tulcea 60 60 Ismail 60 272 Chi lia Noua — 200

On that part of the river suitable for navigation by sea-going vessels, in addition to the Roumanian Sea Navigation Companies, the following foreign lines maintain a schedule of regular sailings : 1. Cie. Fraissinet, Marseilles 2. Lloyd Triestine, Trieste 3. Soc. Italiana di Servizi Marittimi, Genoa 4. Furness Withy, Liverpool 5. Byron S. S. Co., London 6. Deutsche Levante Linie, Hamburg 7. Deutsche Orient Linie, Stettin 8. Keninklype Nederlandsche Stoomboet Maat Schappi, Amsterdam 9. Haleyez Line, Rotterdam. The first three listed carry passengers regularly and are the only companies having per­ m anent loading facilities. Others, including the Roumanian Sea Navigation Companies, use the public accommodations.

SOCIÉTÉ “ FRAISSINET ”

Unloading facilities.

Port Quay Warehouses Remarks Galatz 110 m. 700sq. m. Braila 100 m. 1,261 sq. m. 714 sq. m. of warehouses belong to the docks ; 547 sq. m. of own warehouses.

SOCIÉTÉ “ LLOYD TRIESTINO ”

Unloading facilities.

Port Quay Warehouses Remarks Galatz 100 m. 900 sq. m. Own warehouse Braila 110 m. 644 sq. m. » »

SOCIÉTÉ “ SITMAR ”

Unloading facilities.

Port Quay Warehouses Remarks Galatz 110 m. 540 m. q. Warehouses belong to the docks. Braila 110 m. 547 m. q. » » » » — 112 —

Annex IV. SHIPYARDS.

Location. Name. Class of work. Remarks. Ratisbon ...... Uebigau B Busy — large amount of S.H.S work Ruthhof B on reparations account. Heeling B

Deggendorf...... Deggendorfen Herft and B Small B. L. shop here also. Eisenbahn G. m. b. H.

Linz ...... Schiffswerft Linz A.-G. A Excellent shop. Idle except for con­ struction of Diesel motors.

Korneuburg ...... D. D. S. G. B Principally for barges. Machinery repairs.

Vienna...... D. D. S. G. E

K om orn o...... Skoda B Old M.F.T.R. works. Used for Czech. S. Co.’s work and Czech. Govt. work.

O Buda...... D. D. S. G. A Floating dry dock. Best equipped on river.

Ujpest ...... M. F. T. R. A Good-sized plant, well equipped. Ganz Danubius A Excellent large plant — practically idle. Schlick Nicholson B Fairly well equipped — little work. Rex Lloyd.

B u d afok ...... M. B. R.

Belgrade (Apatin) ...... S. H. S. Syndicate C No ways — otherwise fairly well E equipped — busy. Zemun...... Karl Gnuss C

Sm ederevo...... Vickers B Fairly busy only. Orsove ...... Caro) Hsttingen C

Turnu Severin...... State B Not very busy — good plant.

G iurgiu...... State B New plant being enlarged. For Service Hydraulique. B ra ila ...... C 50 workmen Danubiu C 59 Vulcan D 18 For ordinary small Braila D 30 repairs. Ystrul D 20 S. R. D. E 100 Galatz ...... Romain de Danube B Good foundry and machine-shop. Docks of Galatz (State) B Some small floating dry docks. Unirea C Vulcan D Ancora D

A. Capable of building hulls and engines. B. Capable of building hulls and installing engines — heavy repairs, including hauling. C. Capable of effecting ordinary repairs to hull and machinery — No ways. D. Small shore plant — No ways. E. Floating workshop. PART 3.

A nnex V. TH E WATERWAY. A nnex VI. CUSTOMS, POLICE, ETC., DUES. A nnex VII. DELAYS AT FRONTIERS. A nnex VIII. DELAYS IN OPERATING VESSELS. A nnex IX. QUESTIONS CONSIDERED BY THE C. I. D. A nnex X. SUMMARY OF REPORT. PART 3.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

A nnex V .

THE WATERWAY Page General D escription ...... 117

Detailed D escription : Section I. Ulrn - Kehlheim ...... 118 Section II. Kehlheim - Ratisbon ...... 1 1 9 Section III. Ratisbon - Hofkirchen...... 1 1 9 Section IV. Hofkirchen - Passau ...... 120 Section V. Passau - Linz...... 121 Section VI. Linz - D e v in ...... 122 Section VII. Devin - S za p ...... 124 Section VIII. Szap - Mouth of Tisza...... 125 Section IX. Mouth of Tisza - M oldova...... 126 Section X. Moldova - Turnu-Severin ...... 128 Section XI. Turnu-Severin - Braila ...... 132 Section X II. Braila - Black Sea : Braila to Chatal d’I sm a il...... 134 Chatal d’Ismail to Chatal St. George (Tulcea Arm, St. George Pass) 135 Chatal St. George to Sulina (Sulina Pass) ...... 135 Entrance Channel...... 136 The D rave...... 138 The T i s z a ...... 138 The Bega ...... 139 The Save ...... 139 The P ru th ...... 139

Aid to Navigation...... 139 Germany ...... 140 Austria ...... 140 Czechoslovakia...... 140 Hungary ...... 140 S. H. S. Kingdom ...... "...... 140 R oum ania...... 141 C. E. D. (European Danube Commission)...... 141

Additional Data ...... 141 Table 1. Winter Ports ...... 142 » 2. B ridges...... 143 » 3. Floating Plant for Improvement of Waterway...... 144-145 » 4. Summary of Physical Characteristics of Waterway by Sections ... 146-147 — 116 —

Table 5. Depth of Water, Ratisbon - Passau 148 6. » » Passau - Linz 148 7. » » Linz - Vienna 148 8. » » Vienna-Gonyii ... 149 9. » » Gônyü - Budapest 149 10. » » Budapest - Moldova 149 11. » » Moldova - Turnu-Severin 150 12. » » Turnu-Severin - Braila 150-151 13. » » Braila - Chatal St. George 152 14. » » Sulina Arm...... 153 15. » » Sulina Entrance...... 154 16. Occurrence of Ice from 1836-1924 155 17. Fairway in the Austrian Danube in 1923 155 18. » » » » » 1924 155 19. Approximate Profile of the Danube 156 20. Port Facilities, Germany 157 21. » » Austria ...... 157 22. » » Czechoslovakia 158 23. » » Hungary 158 24. » » S. H. S. State 159 25. » » Bulgaria...... 160 26. » » Roumania 161-162

Annex VI.

CUSTOMS, POLICE, ETC., DUES ... 163

Annex V II.

DELAYS AT FRONTIERS ...... 166

Annex VIII.

DELAYS IN OPERATING VESSELS...... 170

Annex IX.

QUESTIONS CONSIDERED BY THE C. I. D...... 174

Annex X.

SUMMARY OF REPORT.. 183 — 117 —

Annex V. THE WATERWAY.

The following notes on the Danube are based on a short study of documents made available by the League of Nations, the Riparian States, the Danube Commissions, the navigation com­ panies and private persons and on personal observations made on trips on the river from the end of April to the middle of July 1925. In the text and in the tables which appear at the end of this annex the references to kilo­ meters are based on the system adopted by the International Danube Commission, in which all points are located with reference to Sulina. References to miles are based on the system in use by the European Danube Commission for which Sulina is also the origin. Galatz, according to the C. I. D. system, is therefore located by 150 kilometers and, according to the C. E. D. system, 81 miles. Above Braila only the C. I. D. system is in vogue. The Danube River System, in addition to numerous tributaries navigable for small craft, includes the following, which are available for barges of the same size used on the main river : The Drave. The Save. The Tisza. The Bega. The Temos (3 or 4 kilometers). The Koros (30 kilometers). The King Peter and Prince Alexander Canals (formerly called Franzen s ^ Canal and Franz Josefs Canal). The Pruth, although too small to accommodate vessels used on the Danube, is navigable for several hundred kilometers for barges of 300 tons. There are only four or five of 526 tons. The International Danube River system, as laid down in the Danube Statute, includes the Danube itself from Ulm to the Black Sea, the Morava and the Traya, where in their courses they form the frontier between Austria and Czechoslovakia, the Drave from Bares, the Tisza from the mouth of the Samos and the Maros from Arad. The Morava and Traya are not navigable in the true sense of the word, and such navigation as exists on the Maros is very small indeed. The principal tributary of the Danube, the Save, the Temes and the King Peter and Prince Alexander Canals are not internationalised. Roumania and the S. H. S. Kingdom claim that the Bega, which serves one of the most important agricultural sections in Europe, is likewise not internationalised. The really navigable portion of the Temes is only that part which serves as a means of access to the port of Pancsova. The part of the Maros which is navigable at present is believed not to be of any particular importance. Of the streams not admittedly internationalised, the Bega lies in two different countries — the S. H. S. Kingdom and Roumania — and the feeder canal of the King Peter and Prince Alexander Canal system rurs from Baja in Hungary to Bezdan ii the S. H. S. Kingdom. For an open river, the physical aspects which affect its navigable capacity are : 1. Depth. 2. Width. 3. Current, velocity and direction. 4. Character of banks and bottom. 5. Stability of channel. 6. Radius of curvature of channel. 7. Floating and semi-fixed obstructions such as tree trunks, wrecks, etc. 8. Formation and movement of ice. 9. Winds and storms. 10. Clearances (vertical and horizontal) of bridges, cableways, transmission lines, etc. 11. Fogs and mists. — 118

The Danube, being a long river, necessarily presents a variety of these characteristics Based on them, and for the purposes of this study, it has been divided into twelve sections, viz • I. Ulm - Kehlheim. II. Kehlheim - Ratisbon. III. Ratisbon - Hofkirchen. IV. Hofkirchen - Passau. V. Passau - Linz. VI. Linz - Devin. VII. Devin - Szap. V III. Szap - Mouth of Tisza. IX. Mouth of the Tisza - Moldova-Veche. X. Moldova-Veche - Turnu-Severin. XI. Turnu-Severin - Braila. XII. Braila - Black Sea. The distinguishing features of these sections are shown in Tables Nos. 4 to 15, and are described more fully in the succeeding pages. In so far as ice, fogs, mists, winds and storms are concerned, there is no need to divide the river into a large number of sections. Above the Iron Gates, the countries report ice conditions as follows : Germany From December to February (12 to 22 days). Austria ...... From December to February (10 to 15 days). Czechoslovakia From Christmas to March 1st. H u n g ary From December to March (40 to 60 days). S.H.S. Kingdom Average one month ; maximum four months, from December to March. The accompanying table -—■ No. 16 — furnished by the C. E. D., shows the situation as regards ice a t the mouth of the river. This may also be taken as an index of the conditions existing throughout the section below the Iron Gates. In addition to obstacles to navigation formed by the ice, there is usually less water in the river during the winter months than at any other time, thereby increasing the difficulties of navigation. Proceeding downstream until one reaches Belgrade, there is little danger to shipping from Minds and storms. It is reported that the part of this port lying along the Danube is not satis­ factory on account of the high winds which sweep down from the north and east. On the Roumanian section of the river, the north winds occasionally stir up a considerable sea, making it uncomfortable for small boats. The worst storms in the Black Sea at the entrance to the Danube occur during the winter months. However, they are sometimes sufficiently dangerous during the open season to make the entrance channel difficult and to force the dredges to stop work. M Fogs and mists do not, as a rule, present any serious difficulties to navigation, seldom lasting throughout an entire day. They, however, serve to shorten the number of hours when boats may proceed and are worse in the early spring and late autumn. A sketch is furnished at the end of the annex (No. 19) giving the profile of the river.

S e c t i o n I. — ULM - KEHLHEIM . 2,588 to 2,418 kilometers.

This section in conventionally navigable only. The low-water discharge at Ulm is given as only 40 cubic meters, which, with the steep slope throughout, makes navigation of any consequence impossible and the development of the stream commercially unsound. The pre-war project of the Bavarian engineer Edward Faber provided for a lateral canal 18 meters — 119 — wide with a depth of 2.5 meters at an estimated cost of 83,000,000 marks, which would cer­ tainly have to be increased to agree with present prices for labour and material. A comparison of this sum with the benefits to be expected can point to only one conclusion.

Section II. — KEHLHEIM - RATISBON. 2,418 to 2,380 kilometers.

This section is used for navigation by small boats which are able at the same time to enter the old King Ludwig Canal at Kehlheim. It is separated from the section below by the old Roman bridge at Ratisbon. The piers of this bridge are very large and, together with some auxiliary works, form a very effective weir. The result of this is to increase the depth of the pool above the bridge and also to make the entrance thereto impossible except for small boats, wiiich have to be hauled under the bridge, through the exceedingly swift current, by means of cables attached to shore windlasses. This reach will form one of the links in the new Rhine­ land - Danube Canal, the principal features of which will be described under Section IV.

Sectio n III. — RATISBON - HOFKIRCHEN. 2,380 to2.2,258 kilometers.

This section is quite similar to the one just described, but, due to the obstacle formed by the bridge at Ratisbon, is the first on the river on which navigation is practised to any large extent and on which the usual Danube craft are seen. The discharge is about the same as that in the previous section. The banks and bottom are sand and gravel — a material subject to the effects of the current but at the same time one which can be easily handled. The po­ sition of the channel has been fixed to some extent both by high-water levels at certain places and by mean-water regulation throughout. Longitudinal dykes and bank revetment extend throughout the section. Their original purpose was to obtain two meters, which they have succeeded in m aintaining for an average of only 150 days a year (see Table No. 5). W hen it was manifest that these works would not secure and maintain the depths desired throughout the greater p art of the year, an attem pt was made to maintain 1.4 meters by means of periodical dredging. This has been done principally a t the m outh of the , where an average of 30,000 cubic meters has been removed annually. The new project for this section provides for open-river regulation by means of sills and spur dykes to obtain and maintain a depth of two meters at low water. To this end two expe­ rimental sections have been constructed of six and seven kilometers in length. The lower one is at Niederalteich, below the mouth of the Isar, and the upper one is just below Ratisbon at Donaustauf. According to the reports of the German engineers in charge of the work, both have shown good results so far. The channel is, however, not yet fixed in these sections, and the controlling depth is about 1.6 meters according to the last survey. Depths of 1.7 and 1.8 meters appear in several places. Additional groins will probably improve this con­ dition, and the desired results will be secured after their installation. As was to be expected, some dredging has been necessary at the downstream ends of these sections. The low bridge at Deggendorf forms a serious obstruction to navigation, as do the numer­ ous cableways of the ferries. At the end of April it was necessary for our boat not only to lower her stacks when going under this bridge but also to dismantle the pilot-house and take off some of the gear of her bridge. In addition to the above, one of the navigation companies reports the following obstructions, many of which will, of course, be removed on the completion of the new project. Kilometers 2,377 Schwabelweis Bridge : Shoal of rocky boulders. 2,368 Walhalla : Ledge rock on left bank. 2,361 Frenghofen : Shoal, the left bank being covered with boulders. 2,356 Eltheim : Shoal-sand and gravel — 120 —

Kilometers 2,355 Geissling : Shoal-sand and gravel 2,352 Seppenhausen : )) )) 2,344 Niederschdorf : )) )> 2,341 Pendorf : )) )) 2,324 Kagers : )) )) 2,320 Peterword : )> » 2,306 Pfelling : )) )) 2,302 Stefansposching : )) )) 2,294 Sommersdorf )) )) 2,289 Netten : Shoal. 2,285 Deggendorf : Insufficient horizontal and 2,271 Aicha : Shoal-gravel and sand. 2,269 Euckesing : » )) 2,260 Endlau : » ))

Section IV. — HOFKIRCHEN - PASSAU 2,258 to 2,227 kilometers.

This is the last section lying entirely within German territory, and one which has from the beginning formed a most difficult passage for navigation. It is usually called the Bavarian Kachlet (series of rapids). The river runs through a narrow defile, the banks and bottom being for thé most part ledge rock. The position of the channel has, of course, been fixed by the nature of its bed, but the steep slope and many pinnacles of rock have reduced the available navigable depth here to as little as 0.7 meters, and frequently to 1 meter (see Table No. 5). Recognising that open-river regulation could not succeed at this point, the German Gov­ ernment adopted, and the C. I. D. approved, a project for canalising this section. With the completion of the works at Passau, not only will sufficient water be made available from Hof­ kirchen to Passau but the swift current here will be eliminated. These works form a part of the Rhine - Main - Danube Canal system, which is projected as a connecting link between the Rhine and Danube for barges of 1,200 tons. This project contemplates the replacement of the existing waterways by a combination of open-river low- water regulation, from the German frontier to just above Passau, and from Hofkirchen to Ratisbon, of canalised sections of the Danube from Passau to Hofkirchen — this section — and from Ratisbon to Kehlheim, and of lateral and across-country canals from Kehlheim via to . From this point the Main is to be canalised to Aschaffenburg. The old Ludwig Canal, which at present forms the cross-country connection, was opened in 1846, but, due to its small capacity and the competition of the railways which were then being built, it never attained any commercial importance. The interests and amortisation of the capital employed in carrying out this undertaking are to be obtained from the sale of the energy pro­ duced by the hydro-electric plants being installed in connection with the works for the improve­ ment of navigation. Altogether, 34 dams, with locks and power-stations, are contemplated. The dimensions of the locks and the power which it is expected will be obtained are as follows :

Locks Power Stations Section Width Length No. Av. Capacity Annual Capacity HP. K.W.H. M a in ...... 12 300 16 61,200 360,000,000 W e a r n ...... 12 300 3 34,400 203,000,000 Canal Bamberg - Kehlheim. 12 210 12 96*500 570,000,000 Danube at Ratisbon . . . 12 210 2 11,300 66,000,000 Danube at Passau .... 24 300 Twin 42,600 251,000,000 T o t a l . . . — — 35 246,000 1,450,000,000 — 121 —

From the point of view of Danube navigation, the works at Passau are of particular interest and warrant a short description. They promise immediate relief from a very bad situation and are the first works to close the river. The locks — 230 x 24 x 3 meters — are on the left bank and are large enough to allow a paddle-wheel tug and a tow of four barges to enter at one time. The lift varies from about five to nine meters according to the stage of the water. The gates of the miter type — 12.8 meters wide by 13.2 meters high— are arranged with buoyancy tanks at the bottom, so that part of the weight is taken off the hinges when manoeuvring. The estimated time for a lockage as given by the engineer in charge of the works is 17 minutes. Next to the locks is the power-house, winch is to be provided with eight vertical turbo-gene- rators of 7,000 h.p., each making the total installed capacity 56,000 h.p. The screen is of the usual type, 274 meters long, and is almost parallel to the direction of the current. The power-house is about 148 meters long and 16.5 meters wide and 42 meters above the foundation. The dam or weir extends from the power-house to the right bank — a distance of 175 meters. It is provided with six openings of 25 meters each, the piers betwreen the openings being 5 meters thick. Each opening is provided with twro gates and slotted for the installation of an emergency dam. As a general rule the upper gate will be used for regulating the pool level and for passing ice and floating debris, the lowrer gate being used to pass large amounts of water and to clean sediment from the bottom. The gates are operated from a bridge carried on the piers. As the dam has no navigable pass, two openings have been left until the completion of the channel-ward lock, which has been made sufficiently deep over the upper sill for it to be left open during the completion of the centre section of the dam. It is expected that navigation will be routed through this lock during the summer of 1925, and the entire works will begin to function as planned in 1926.

Sectio n V. — PASSAU - LINZ. 2,227 to 2,136 kilometers.

For a short distance below7 Passau, the width of the channel is so small that some passenger steamers proceed downstream backwards for a considerable distance before finding sufficient room to make a turn safely. Below this point the river widens and, below the mouths of the Enns and Taun, is sufficiently large to accommodate all except the largest passenger steamers. For the most part, confined as it is between hills, the position of the channel is stable within narrow limits, and has been made more so by training works which are found throughout the entire section. These, in general, consist of bank revetments and longitudinal dykes, both continuous and intermittent, connected to the shore by groins. The most important of these works are in the vicinity of Aschach. Others of considerable extent are found just below Passau. The banks and bottom are, in general, sand and heavy gravel. Large boulders are, however, found in certain places, and outcroppings of ledge rock are not uncommon and form a menace to navigation where present. As is shown in Table No. 6 and in Chart No. 17, the regulating works have not secured the results desired. Here, as is the case in practically all parts of the river, two meters at low water has been the depth sought. In this section the principal obstructions to navigation are, first of all, the Aschacher Kachlet, and, second, two sharp bends which are found between Neuhauss (2,169 kilometers) and Wesenufer (2,194 kilometers). Just below Aschach the of the Danube widens conside­ rably, and so far all efforts to confine the low-water bed so that two meters will always be available have been unavailing. There are many large boulders in this section, which are conti­ nually cropping up with the movement of the gravel around them. From time to time parts of them have been removed by blasting and dredging. This part of the river presents one of the most serious obstacles to navigation. Navigation on the section between Neuhaus and Wesenufer is protected by three signals, and one-way traffic is necessary when water is low. Although it was impossible to see all of the regulating works due to high water, it was noticeable that such of them as could be seen were in need of repair in several places. In order to provide additional depths where the regulating w'orks have not been successful in maintaining those projected, dredging has been resorted to. This work is done by ladder dredges, and — 122 —

occasionally by means of a rake fastened to a powerful tug, which scrapes the gravel from the bottom. On being loosened, the current has sufficient velocity to carry this material further downstream to a deeper spot. At best, this sort of work can be considered as having only temporary benefits. In addition to the two bad obstacles just mentioned, the following have been indicated by one of the shipping companies :

Kilometers 2,219 Schildorf : Shoal. 2,103 Jochenstein : Outcroppings of ledge rock on the right bank.| 2.146 Oberranna : Outcroppings of ledge rock in the middle of the stream. 2,187 Schlagen : Shoal of gravel and small stones and sharp curve at this point makes the navigable channel extremely narrow even at mean water. The training works are reported as having been neglected at this spot for years. 2,159 /57 Aschacher Kachlet : (See above). 2,156 Brandtstatt: Shoal extending from the right bank; one of the worst places in Austria. 2,155 Langenhaufen : Shoal of gravel ; small stones and rocky boulders. At low water the channel is reduced to 25 meters in width. 2.147 Hagenau : Shoal. 2,143% Withering: Exceedingly narrow channel at low water and deterioration of training works. 2,142 Below Withering : Exceedingly narrow channel at low water and deterioration of training works. It will be noted that the first two of these obstructions lie in the section of the river forming the frontier between Austria and Germany. An agreement between these two countries dating back many years provides for the maintenance of the channel. It was understood from Berlin that an agreement was now being sought with Austria for carrying out the new works projected along this section, which will form the southern terminus of the Rhine - Main - Danube Canal. Vienna claimed, however, that no definite arrangement had been sought but that it had a general knowledge of the project. The evident failure of the present system for improving the river at Aschach has forced the Austrian authorities to the conclusion th a t the only suitable method of securing the necessary depths will be either to canalise the river or else to construct a lateral canal, the latter at present being considered by them as the best solution. It will be noted that here again, if the project is carried out as at present projected, there will be a combination of river improvement together with the development of hydro-electric power. It is thought by some that the Brandstatt stretch should also be improved by canalisation.

Section VI. — LINZ - DEVIN. 2,136 to 1,880 kilometers. The entire section lies in Austria and in many respects is similar to the one just described. From Linz to Ardagger the country is fairly open and several subsidiary channels appear. From Ardagger to Krems the river again passes through a defile. Below this point and as far as Greifenstein, the valley widens and presents in a lesser degree the same appearance as it does further down in the Hungarian plains. From Greifenstein to Klosterneuberg both banks of the stream are hilly. From the last-named place to Devin, the valley is comparatively wide ; the hills, however, approach the river quite closely on the right bank, the plain being on the left, where several secondary arms are found. The banks and bottom throughout are generally of sand and gravel, with only occasional outcroppings of rock. This condition has permitted the construction of training works to fix and deepen the channel. These include levées for the protection of the surrounding lands from high water, longitudinal dykes, bank revetments, spur dykes and sills. The principal works in this section lie in the vicinity of Vienna, where elaborate measures have been taken both — 123 — to prevent inundation and to fix and maintain a navigable channel. The flood plain is very definitely fixed here by levées on both banks, and a lock and dam are provided on the right bank so as to maintain the navigability of the Vienna Canal and at the same time to pass some of the flood waters below the city. The Austrian Government has considered the improvement of the bad stretch at Struden by canalisation. Many new projects have been under consideration for further development of the river in the vicinity of Vienna, but these are concerned principally with an enlargement of the port facilities at that point. As these are already too large for the present traffic, any extension in the near future would seem unwarranted. All new projects in Austria are, however, still in the first stages of development, and there is 110 intention 011 the part of the Government actually to undertake their construction. The success of the works throughout this section can be seen from an examination of Tables Nos. 7 and 8 and Charts Nos. 17 and 18 and a consideration of the following obstacles reported by one of the navigation companies : Kilometers 2,135 Linz : Highway bridge is serious obstacle to shipping, since the access to the bridge is not normal to the direction of the current, and the horizontal clearances are too small. Serious collisions with the pillars of the bridge have occurred here. 2,111 Mauthausen railway bridge : Shoal of gravel, stones and boulders. 2,110 Albern : Shoals. 2,082 /2003 Wallsee to below Dornach : Regulation works never completed. Shoals develop at low water. 2,079 Greinerschwall : Eddy particularly dangerous at high water. 2,075 /7 Struden : This has already been touched on. The speed of the current, the sharp curvature and the rocky reefs make navigation in this section exceedingly difficult. 2,054 /57 Ybbserscheibe : In the upper part of this section there is an accumulation of gravel and small stones interspersed with boulders. In the latter part there are rocky reefs in the middle of the stream which considerably narrow the channel. 2,045 Pôchlarn : Shoals of gravel and small stones. 1,939 Above Weitenegg : Regulation works not completed. Shoals develop at low water. 2,027 Aggsbacher Schwal : Shoal. 1,995 Hollenburg : Rocky reefs extending from right bank over more than half of width of stream, and opposite Hollenburg from the left bank; narrow channel makes shipping difficult. 1,970 and extending upwards to Stein : Boulders. 1,974 Uferlocken : Need for contraction works evident. Remains of old Mole dangerous to shipping. In autumn 1922 a loaded barge wrecked here. 1,950/63 Low-water regulation works never completed in this section. Makes navigation difficult, particularly for passenger ships operating at night. 1,938 Kuchelau : Shoal. During the last period of low water the smallest depth in Lower Austria was registered at this point, i.e. 1 m. 1,930 Vienna Prater Quay : In order to provide manoeuvring space for vessels, certain of the spur dykes on the left bank were never constructed. The intention was to keep this space clear by dredging. This has been neglected, and during 1924 there have been reported serious accidents at this point. In March 1925 a loaded barge was wrecked here. 1,886 /l,906 Regulation works incomplete : shoals at Deutsch-Altenburg (1,887 km.), Wildungsnauer (1,895 km.). Orth (1,902 km.). — 124 -

S e c t io n VII. — DEVIN - SZAP. 1,880 to 1,810 kilometers.

This is the last section where the river is somewhat torrential in character. Szap is taken as the end of this section as the profile of the stream changes sharply at this point. Naviga­ tors, however, generally change their tows at Gonyu, a little farther down the river where ancho­ rage conditions are better. There are several subsidiary arms and channels in the section, but the current is still swift and the sand and gravel carried is of a coarse variety. The country is fairly rugged from Devin to Bratislava, but below that point the hills are at some distance from the river. The regulation works in Austria in the sections further up the river have assisted the natural tendency of the stream to deposit its burden here, and have considerably increased the difficulty of improvement. In the lower part of the section the works constructed so far consist of levées for protection against inundation of the surrounding territory, of longitudinal dykes and revetments, and of dams to cut off secondary channels. In 1896 it was found that this work was not sufficient to maintain the desired depths at low water, eight to ten shoals appearing with a minimum depth of 1.4 m. In about 1908 the Hungarian Government began the construction of spur dykes and groins at the upper end of the section in an attempt to secure the projected two meters. Tins work was carried down the river for about thirty kilometers, when the war stopped construction. Not only was new constructed stopped but, since the war, maintenance of the existing works has been neglected, and the channel is now tortuous and contains many shoals. In the Protocol entered into between the representatives of Czechoslovakia and those of Hungary on the s.s. “ Orel ” in October 1923, it was agreed as follows : (1) From 1,840 to 1,862 km. the channel is in a satisfactory condition. (2) Section at Vajka (1,833 to 1,840 km.) forms an obstacle to navigation, as the depth above the three shoals is only 16/17 dms. at low water. The Bratislava Strom- bauamt recognise that the reasons for this unfavourable condition are as follows : (a) The damaged mean-water regulation works, through which too much water escapes into the side arms. (b) The dams for closing the side arms are in places so much damaged that they no longer fulfil the original purpose of directing the water into the main channel. (c) The low-water regulation works have probably sunk, so that they no longer have the effect required for maintaining the low-water channel. (3) The most serious obstacles for navigation at present are the group of shoals situated between 1,815 and 1,821 km. (Baka, Bes, Varjas and Asvany). The reasons for these shoals are, in the opinion of the hydrographic offices in Bratislava and Komarno, the same as those described under 2. (4) The Czechoslovak representatives draw attention to the narrow places at Remets and Bagomer, 1,826 km. With regard to the narrow place at Bagomer, the Hungarian representatives consider that the existing works are not in danger and that there is no obstacle to shipping at this place. An original fault of the regulation was that the channel was made too straight. With a deterioration of the works it has become more and more difficult to maintain a satisfactory low-water channel, and frequent shoals are to be expected. The principal ones reported by navigators are as follows, these, it will be seen, agree with the points mentioned in the Pro­ tocol previously referred to : No. 1877 Devin (stone quarry) 1844 Csoloszto 1826 Remets — 125 —

No. 1824 Lipot 1821 Boka 1819 Bes 1816 Asvany - Varjas. It is to be noted that in general for the upper 30 km. the only bad shoal is just below the mouth of the Morava at Devin. An obstruction was also reported at Bratislava, 1,867 km., but it is believed that this was a snag, lost anchor or the like and not a sand bar. The maintenance of this section is now particularly difficult, as it forms a frontier for its entire length with the exception of about 11 % km. in the vicinity of Bratislava. Above the short stretch at Bratislava, the river forms the frontier between Austria and Czechoslovakia and below it, between the latter country and Hungary. In the Austrian section the shoal at Devin was particularly bad, tying up traffic completely for about ten days last year. After much negotiation the interested Governments (Austria and Czechoslovakia) signed an agreement on May 16th, 1925, laying down a project for further regulation of this section. It is under­ stood that work was promptly begun, but on July 20th, 1925, was still incomplete. Each country was to build the dykes and sills on its own shore, the Czechoslovaks to do the necessary dredging during and after the completion of the project. Costs are to be borne equally by both countries. It is thought that a better arrangement would be to divide the section so that each country would be given a definite stretch of a certain number of kilometers in which it would be responsible for the maintenance of the projected depth. On the Hungarian stretch the work to be undertaken is on a much larger scale and the effect of the negotiations is less visible. In the protocol previously referred to, a definite scheme was laid down for drawing up within a reasonable time a scheme for the execution of the necessary regulating works. Although two years have elapsed, this has not yet taken definite form, the Czechoslovaks desiring to collect more data before embarking on a costly programme and the being short of funds. It is understood, however, that the technical committee referred to in the protocol has undertaken surveys of the worst stretch (about 12 km.) and that it will present a project for the approval of the two Governments in the fall. It is hoped that when the project is adopted it will provide for progressive regulation of the entire section and that each Government will accept the responsibility for a definite stretch of the river rather than for each to do the work on its own shore having no one responsible for the channel. Due to the location of the quarries, it would appear desirable for the Czechoslovaks to take the upper part of the section and the Hungarians the lower part. In October 1924 the agreement was reached whereby the Czecho­ slovaks and Hungarians are to dredge alternately such shoals as may appear pending the adop­ ting of the definite project for regulation. The Czechoslovak dredging plant is the most modern on the river, and it should succeed in preventing any long delays to traffic due to shoals. It should be noted, however, that Iowr water here cuts off Bratislava, all Austria and Germany from the lower river, and a glance at the traffic maps and charts will show the serious consequences of such a condition. In considering the future project for improvement, both Czechoslovakia and Hungary have agreed that in principle there is no objection to dividing the river so as to give each a definite sector where it will be responsible for all regulation works from bank to bank.

Section VIII. — SZAP - MOUTH OF TISZA. 1,810 to 1,216 kilometers.

This is the first section where the river enters the plains and where the velocity of the current is much decreased. The cross section is somewhat greater than in the section just described. Both of these conditions tend to make navigation easier, this being the first section described where night navigation is regularly possible and permitted. From Komarno to Buda­ pest either one or both banks are formed by hills, the narrowest and most mountainous part of the valley being at the big bend just below Estergom, at Visegrad. Below Budapest, the banks are in general low and subject to overflow. Occasionally there are low cliffs of loess, a — 126 mixture of sand and clay. We have throughout this section on the low banks high levées at varying distances from the channel which confine the flood waters and prevent the neighbouring territory from being inundated. For the most part, too, there are regulating works for the mean stage of water. These consist of dams across secondary arms, cut-offs at large bends, revetment of banks, longitudinal or parallel dykes, continuous and intermittent, sometimes connected to the shore by groins, and occasional spur dykes. The work, although according to the compre­ hensive Hungarian plan of 1894, has been undertaken to relieve bad conditions as they have appeared in different stretches of the section and not begun at one end and carried through continuously to the other. Some of the cuts were made many years ago, not so much in the interests of navigation as of flood control. The works are not so numerous in the lower part of the section as above Fajsz, in the vicinity of Budapest, and near Komarno, where th ey are practically continuous. The Hungarian authorities have been criticised for not having begun at one end of the section with the works and for not carrying them methodically forward to the other. It is certainly questionable as to whether this criticism is justified, as for the most part they have eliminated many of the bad places in present-day Hungary and had started progressive regulation on the frontier section in 1908. The remaining ones reported are : ; Kilometers 1,806 Modve : Shoal. 1,800 Szogye : Shoal. 1,791 Gonyu : Shoal. 1,789 Czali : Shoal. 1,715 Garam-Kovesd : Shoal. 1,711 Helemba : Shoal, rocks, direction of current unfavourable. 1,482-1,507 Fajsz : Cut-off ; 10 km. of moving shoals ; cut-off just above Baja ; shoals and shifting tortuous channel. 1,425 Batina : Narrow channel, bad anchorage. 1,312 Mohovo : Cut-off ; rock in lower entrance, narrow channel. 1,234 Beska : Shoal. 1,220 Cerevic : Shoal. The shoals between Baja and Fajsz control navigation between Belgrade and Budapest. The ones below the mouth of the Tisza referred to in the following section are, however, almost as bad. In this section the river forms the frontier between Hungary and Czechoslovakia above Szob (1,708 km.) to Szap (1,810 km.). The arrangements between the two countries for mainte­ nance and improvement of the river on that stretch have been discussed under Section VII. According to a report from the Hungarian Government : “ In consequence of the war and the chaos resulting therefrom, regular regulation and improvement works have — with a few exceptions of minor importance — been suspended since 1917 ; and from the modest material resources available for the purpose all we are able to do is to carry out the most essential repairs... Despite the fact that for the past eight years we have been compelled to restrict ourselves to carrying out the most essential works on the Danube . . . the navigation facilities existing to-day are approximately what they were prior to the Great War. Yet in the immediate future it will be necessary to resume the systematic improvement works suspended by force of circumstances and to further improve shipping routes It should be noted that the removal of the shoal at Kaposztasmagyar two years ago by regulation and dredging formed a real benefit to navigation. No date has been set for beginning the “ systematic improvement works

S e c t io n IX. — MOUTH^OF THE TISZA - MOLDOVA. 1,216 to ^1,049Jrilometers.

Of the sections of the Danube described to this point, this is the most favoured by nature in so far as navigation is concerned. Generally flowing through a vast plain, its left bank is almost invariably low, its right, where the river skirts the foothills from Belgrade to Smederevo, — 127 — rises to considerable heights. They, as well as the bottom, are generally sand with some mud. Under these conditions, it is to be expected that the main low-water channel would not be very stable and that numerous arms of varying importance would develop from time to time. For years efforts have been made by the Government and by local societies to confine the high- water bed of the river in order to regain large areas of very fertile land which up to the time of undertaking the works had been under water at various stages of the river. The levées built have continually restricted the Danube in its meanders, but not sufficiently so as to guarantee a suitable channel for navigation. Under the Hungarian project of 1894, certain training works have been constructed where they seemed most necessary. Due to the excellent conditions as to navigation compared with sections higher up, the size of the river and the consequent magnitude of the works necessary and the sums of money involved, these works are not very numerous. The banks were protected by revetments, secondary arms were closed, training works were built and cut-offs made at : Kilometers 1,216-1,225 1,195-1,204 1,174 1,172 1,170 1,163-1,169 1,150 1,148 1,145 1,135-1,140 1,127-1,133 1,124 1,116 In 1915 at the mouth of the Tisza one shoal was reported with a minimum depth of 1.8 m. ; in 1921 a shoal with the same amount of low water over it developed at Belarica (1,183 km.), and in 1923 five others appeared. These were due undoubtedly to the change in bed of the river, due to erosion of the banks, and also, but to a small extent, to deterioration of the training works installed. Such of the surveys now being made by the S. H. S. Kingdom as could be examined show a considerable difference from the maps prepared of the same section by the Hungarians in 1904. With a river of the type of the Danube such changes can be expected, and furthermore are not to be considered permanent, as the channel will shift within limits every few years. As proof of this the Belarica shoal was considerably reduced with the high water of last year. Very little has been spent on maintenance of existing structures, and that only at points where levées have been endangered since the war. Since the war, no dredging has been attempted in the channels, as depths in this sector have always been as great or greater than those a Fajsz. As reported by the engineers of the S. H. S. Kingdom, obstacles to free navigation exist at : Kilometers 1,215 Slankamen : Shoal, small depth. 1,198 Belegis : Shoal. 1,192 Benovci : Shoal. 1,183 Belarica : Shoal, small width of channel. 1,132 Grocka : Shoal. 1,101 Brza Vrba : Shoal, small depth, unfavourable direction' ofj current. Floating tree trunks are also present in this sector, and when they become partially embedded in the bottom they form a serious menace to navigation. In 1919 there were 80 of these in the whole S. H. S. sector. Last summer the situation was reported “ a little better ” by the Direc­ tor-General of Waterways. He likewise stated that now, as soon as a floating tree trunk is reported, its removal is undertaken. — 128 —

In this section there were many wrecks and vessels sunk during the war, only a few of which have yet been removed. As reported, these were : ...... 8 B a r g e s ...... 48 P o n to o n s...... 19 Wooden b a r g e s ...... 11 Of this number, three steamers and 10 barges had been removed up to the beginning of July 1925. Some still remain in and on the edge of the channel. Their location was not reported nor was it possible to inspect these, due to lack of time and high water. Since the navigation companies do not complain, however, it is safe to assume that the wrecks are sufficiently well marked by buoys and so located as not to form a serious danger. As stated above, the S. H. S. Government is now making surveys to determine the actual condition of the river. What it proposes to do in the future is still uncertain. According to its report, “ the advisability of obtaining greater depths at low water is being studied from technical and economic standpoints ”. If the old two-meters project is retained, it will probably seek to maintain this depth by dredging and a minimum amount of permanent work. If more than two meters is decided on, the means to be adopted will depend on further study. (For depths in past, see Table 10).

Sectio n X. — MOLDOVA - TURNU-SEVERIN. 1,049 to 930 kilometers.

This section, where the Danube finds its way through the Carpathians, is the worst on the river. Its bed is everywhere composed of rock with a small amount of overlying material in some places. It presents a series of cataracts where navigation has always been difficult and sometimes impossible. These are, moving downstream, Stenka, Kozla-Dojka, Izlas- Tachtalia, Greben-Milanovac, Svinitza (Jucz), Iron Gates (Vaskapu) and the Little Iron Gates. About half way through the section there is a narrow gorge where the greatest depths on the river are found. With the exception of a very narrow spot at the upstream end of the Kazan Pass, navigation is not difficult there, the current being moderate and the depths everywhere sufficient. 6^ The difficulties at the rapids have been overcome to some extent by open-river regulation works undertaken by the Hungarian Government, beginning in 1890. Moving downstream, there are open canals at Stenka, Kozla-Dojka, Izlas-Tachtalia, a longitudinal dyke connected by groins to the right bank just below Greben for the purpose of narrowing and deepening the river at this point and also to maintain a uniform slope of the water and current in the stretch, an open canal in the vicinity of Jucz, together with a longitudinal dyke, and, finally, the Iron Gates Canal. This is an open canal formed by removing certain rock ledges and by the construc­ tion of two dykes in the stream, by which a uniform though steep slope is maintained. In several places not specifically mentioned rocky pinnacles have been removed by blasting and dredging ; the canals are everywhere 60 meters wide. Above Orsova they are two meters deep ; below, three meters. The Hungarian project was based on an insufficient number of soundings and cross-sections. During the progress of the work it was discovered that there were a number of isolated rocky reefs which had not been known up to that time and which would prevent the w'ork from se­ curing the benefits desired. To a lesser extent the small depths over these rocks was due to a lowering of the surface of the pools due to better conditions for the run-off provided by the new works. This condition was reported to Budapest, and an estimate given for completing the rock removal thought necessary, the plans being submitted to the Hungarian Minister of Commerce. The sum necessary for carrying out the work at that time while the plant was still on the job was estimated at 3,045,218 Austro-Hungarian florins. No action was taken. It is understood that when this question was discussed in the Hungarian Parliament strong objections were made by certain members to the improvement, as it was considered that by this work a trade route would be created whereby Russian and Roumanian grain would be — 129 — able to compete with Hungarian grain, with disastrous results to the latter. Whatever the reason may have been, nothing more was done then, and the works, as originally planned, were opened up for navigation. According to the Service des Portes de Fer of the International Commission, present conditions are as follows : The depths sought, viz. 2 meters above Orsova and 3 meters below that place, have been secured in the open canals and where the river has been narrowed. The rocks previously m entioned which appeared during the course of the work, and the sandbanks which have appeared later with the increase in the depths in the canals and with a slight drop in the level of the water, which was produced by the easier means of discharge provided by the works and a downstream drift of sediment, are located at and above , above and below the Stenka Canal, at the lower end of the Kozla-Dojka Canal, at Piatra Lunga, Jeleseva Greek, opposite the mouth of the Izles, Tachatalia (Vlas), between Groben and Svinitza, below Jucz, Kalniki, Ada-Kaleh, and below the Little Iron Gates at Duda. For the most part these spots are rocky reefs, the only sand-bars being in the vicinity of Coronini and at the downstream end of Ada-Kaleh. As to the permanence of these conditions, it may be remarked that an examination of the figures since 1837 shows th at in recent years there has been a tendency for the water level to decrease. 1921 is the worst year on record. (See Table No. 11.) It might be expected that such conditions would move in cycles and that better water in the years to come might reasonably be expected. It is true that conditions as to water do move in cycles. These are, however, exceedingly irregular and cannot be counted upon. There are so many elements entering into the result which determines the discharge of a river that one may never be sure of which combinations are going to occur, and consequently predictions as to the future are generally unreliable. In this case, however, there are special conditions which would tend to indicate that years of lowr water may be expected with more frequency in the future. These conditions arise from the progressive regulation of the river by which large areas of land have been reclaimed, thus decreasing the reservoirs which feed the stream during 1owt water and tending to make the run-off easier at all times. The following projects have been suggested as a means for correcting conditions at the points indicated and for taking care of the future : 1. Continuation of the present system, i.e. the removal by blasting or dredging of the 14 rocky reefs and sand-bars which have been enumerated above. While these measures will provide the necessary depths, additional work is thought necessary by the authors of this plan in order to provide for the economical operation of tugs and tows in this sector. There are two factors which influence the navigation companies in their present system of operation. These are the extremely strong currents which are encountered at all times in the Iron Gates Canal and at times of high water at Greben, and the narrow' width of the canals, which make it impossible for 2 tows or boats to pass in them. With regard to the first, due to the different strength of currents in various parts of this stretch of the river, it has been found economical for tugs to tow7 a different number of barges from place to place. For example, in the Iron Gates Canal, where the current is as much as 10 miles per hour (5 meters per second), and in the Greben rapids, where at high water the velocity of the current is just about the same, a tow-boat of from 1,000 to 1,400 h.p. can handle one barge of 800 tons cargo, or two of 500 tons cargo, whereas, above and below and between these points the same boat can handle several such barges without difficulty. In order to provide the necessary anchorages so that tugs may anchor barges above and below the difficult stretches while proceeding with only one or two, and while returning for others, basins are contemplated at Alibeg, at Berzaska opposite Drencova, at Dobra, Klucs, Svinitza, below Milanovac at Lubotin, at the lowrer end of the island situated near Plavisevitza, at Vodica and at Gura Vaii. In order to provide waiting places for boats and towrs at the ends of the sections which are capable of handling only one-way traffic at times of low water, basins are proposed at Alibeg above Liuborajdia, at Drencova above Izlas, at Greben, at Svinitza above Jucz and at Vodica. It is thought that, without these basins, boats will not be able to pass each other from Alibeg to below Stenka — a distance of 10 km., from Berzaska to Svinitza — a distance of 24 km. and from Svinitza to below Jucz — a distance of 10 km. 9 — 130 —

With all of these basins, the cost of the plan was estimated before the war at 16,000,000 gold crowns. It was estimated by one of the engineers of the International Commission that the minimum amount of work necessary at present, without including all the basins, could be done for a sum not exceeding 8,000,000 gold crowns. This is more in line with the estimate made while the work was in progress. 2. There are two other projects for improvement by means of open-river works. The first of these is in the form of a series of long lateral canals. These canals will p r o v id e a uniform slope over a considerable distance and will thus eliminate to a large extent the s tr o n g currents which now exist. They will likewise provide two routes for navigation : the ro u te through the canals and the open-river route when the water is high. The estimated c o s t of this work is 280 million gold crowns. 3. The last of the open-river projects consists of a series of short lateral canals with locks but without dams across the entire stream. The advantage of this project is that it eliminates the swift currents at the rapids and at the same time leaves the river open, so that boats going downstream at times of high water may take advantage of the current. In this way it also increases the navigable capacity of the stream, as it provides for two-way traffic. T his, like the project described under (1) above, contemplates works in conjunction with those already existing, the total cost of which is estimated at 230 million gold crowns. 4. All of the other projects proposed abandon the idea of an open river and consist of canalisation in one or more forms. While these projects are somewhat more costly than those just described, they also include plans for the development of the enormous hydro-electric resources of the Danube at this point. They include schemes for the construction of one high dam below the Iron Gates, with twin locks and a power-house, and the construction of two dams — one below the Iron Gates and one below Greben cataracts, with the necessary locks and power-houses. Of these projects proposed, the most detailed is that now in preparation by the S. H.S. Kingdom. This project has been drawn up on the basis of all the documents which the Government has been able to secure on the work carried out by the Hungarians and such others as it could obtain. These studies are incomplete, as in some respects they have been carried out entirely on the basis of data which has been collected on the Serb-Croat-Slovene b an k of the river. The necessary information on the geological formation of the bed of the river where the foundations must be placed and, on the Roumanian side, where the other abutm ent and the dam must be, is lacking. According to their engineers, there should be no grave difficulty in solving these two problems, as the geological studies which have been carried out so far indicate that satisfactory conditions will be found. Their work has been divided into four parts : economic, hydro-technical, electric and geological studies. The latter in parti­ cular has furnished data on the geological composition of the Iron Gates sector which was hitherto unknown. They have decided that the best system to adopt would be one providing for two dams, with two locks at each of them. They have under consideration the construction of either one or two power-houses at each location. The two-power-house scheme is advanced particularly so that one may be entirely for the use of Roumania and the other for the use of the S.H. S. Kingdom. With such a scheme a depth of 3 meters would be provided from Turnu- Severin to Belgrade. The first of the dams is to be situated just below Greben, and the other below Sip. Twin locks 3 x 24 x 270 meters are contemplated for each dam. The lift at each place will vary between about 12 meters at low water to about 4 meters at high water. The generators at each dam are supposed to provide 500,000 h.p. It is also thought that, if the economic considerations as to the sale of the energy produced are such as not to require the construction of both of the dams, the upper one may be completed, w'hereby 2 meters depth wrill be obtained for navigation throughout the entire sector. This idea does not seem to be borne out by actual conditions as reported by the C. I. D. Sendee des Portes de Fer. It will be noted, by a reference to the description of actual conditions given above, that there are shoals below Greben which wrouId have to be removed in order that the desired 2 meters might be obtained. The total cost for the entire job is estimated at 800 million gold francs. In the event 131 — that only the Greben dam is built, the cost will be about 300 million gold francs, distributed as follows : 1. Dam, locks and hydro-electric plant ...... 142 million gold francs. 2. Hydro-metallurgical and chemical fac to rie s...... 135 ditto 3. Liquid capital and unforeseen expenses ...... 23 ditto 300 ditto It is contemplated that about 2,900,000,000 kilowatt hours will be produced at the Greben dam, 2,500,000,000 of which will be distributed between the proposed industrial w'orks, leaving 400 million kilowatt hours for sale for ordinary municipal uses. The S. H. S. engineers are convinced that their economic study shows that the investment of the necessary capital in the project is justified. The only point on w hich they are not satisfied is the question of foundations previously referred to. They feel confident that no insuperable obstacles will be found here, but that the displacement of the dams by not over a few7 hundred meters from the point selected will be the maximum change that their further investigation can produce. The old Hungarian projects counted on the development of much less power than indicated in the present S. H. S. project. A total production of only 3,110,000,000 kilo­ watt hours was expected, being only slightly more than that of the upper dam in the present project. The engineers of the International Commission, who wrere questioned, are more or less disposed to consider favourably the first of the suggestions for improving conditions, viz. to continue the old Hungarian project. This has the advantage of being comparatively cheap, of being susceptible of gradual accomplishment and of not closing the river. The scheme has the disadvantage of retaining the strong currents which now exist and of not fully utilising the full economic value of the river. On the whole, the projects for canalisation seem to offer the greatest number of advantages, both for navigation and in other respects. They entirely eliminate the present bad navigation conditions by removal of the risk attendant on operating in strong currents by the release of the large tugs for service elsewhere, by a reduction in operating expenses in traction and in the saving of a great deal of the time now consumed by a tow in having to go through the sector piecemeal. They likewise furnish both the S. H. S. State and Roumania an enormous source of power the indirect benefit of which cannot even be computed. The sole question here is whether Roumania and the S. H. S. Kingdom can embark on an industrial programme of the magnitude contemplated by the S. H. S. engineers. At present the swift current in the Iron Gates is overcome by means of powerful tugs, and also by means of an old and inefficient boat called the “ Vaskapu ”. It is operated by means of a cable lying on the bottom of the canal, and takes two hours to make a round trip, during which time the canal cannot be used by other vessels. All of the larger companies have tow-boats sufficiently powerful to handle their barges without the aid of the “ Vaskapu ”, and it is only the small ones which use this means for going uptream. The cost of maintenance of this boat has always been in excess of its earnings and forms a considerable item in the budget of the Commission for its Iron Gates Service. The “ Vaskapu ” should be scrapped immediately, and if the smaller companies cannot secure the services of powerful tugs belonging to the large companies at a reasonable rate, the Commission itself should request bids for services of these tugs. If the offers are unsatis­ factory, it should rent or buv a locomotive and operate it on the track alongside the canal and haul the barges up in this way. This system is much quicker and much more satisfactory in every respect than is the “ Vaskapu ”. According to reports, this scheme was used during the war writh “ satisfactory success ”. In considering the completion of the old Hungarian project, one should also pay some attention to the total navigable capacity of the river, which now furnishes only a one-way traffic route in certain sections. The maximum traffic through the Gates, according to the statistics of the International Commission, in any normal year has been about 720,000 tons. During the war, on May 15th, 1917, 16 or 18 took 43 barges of 20,000 tons through the Iron Gates Canal. This, with a navigation season of 300 days which could be — 132 - provided by the removal of the present obstacles, corresponds to a figure of 6 million tons a year. It is to be seen, therefore, that this method of improvement would provide for all reasonable increases in traffic which may be expected for a long time to come. Further the towing service by locomotive would probably increase the amount possible to handle through the canal. Even with this the Greben cataract would still present a formidable obstacle, as the current there is, at times of high water, for a short distance, practically as swift as at the canal. It would appear, then, that at certain seasons, i.e. high water, that the large tow-boats would still be a necessity.

S e c t io n XI. — TURNU-SEVERIN - BRAILA. 930 to 171 kilometers.

Throughout this section, which is the last on that part of the river suitable only fo r river boats, the Danube is everywhere of large proportions. Flowing along the edge of and through the broad Roumanian plain, its slope is gentle and the current is moderate. The left bank is generally very flat, the right for the most part being formed by the low hills at the foot of the Balkans. Numberless islands and secondary arms and channels are found throughout the section. The bed of the river is generally a sort of sandy clay with occasional stretches of gravel and ledge rock. The large discharge, together with certain of the other factors mentioned, make conditions here more favourable for navigation than anywhere in the upper river. Although the channel shifts from time to time, such changes have never had a serious effect on navigation. For the most part, depths in excess of the two meters which has been sought have existed without any artificial aid. Such improvement of the channel as has been attempted has been according to the most accepted principles and has consisted of dredging shoals as they began to appear. According to navigators, this work, wiiich has been carried out exclusively by Roumania, has been done very well. After the war, when practically no work was done, conditions are reported to have been not so good but to be continually improving. (See Table No. 12.) The dredged channel is usually made from 50 to 80 meters wide and three meters deep. It is understood that work is begun on a falling stage sufficiently far in advance as to have the channel ready a t low water and also to secure the scouring effect of the current. Isolated sections of levées have been built to protect lowr lands in Roumania, which, with port improvements both in Roumania and Bulgaria, form the only permanent works in this section. The principal shoals reported are : Kilometers 820-823 Jasen. 781-783 Vidbol 764-765 Dessa Island. 760-761 Kerkenez Island (D). 755-756 Petrich Island. 738-739 Below Lom Palanca. 720-721 716-717 Cibar Island. 679 Bechet 646 Gradistea (D). 641 Orlea (D). 640-641 Bjeslij (D). 630-631 Corabia. 596 Gatina (D). 570-571 Berzina. 561 Condura. 559-560 Belini Islands (D). 538 Jantra (D). 496 Slobozia (D). 490 Smarda (D). — 133 —

Kilometers 463 Coreea. 460-461 Rahovo. 458 Cetatea Veche (D). 339 Oltina (D). 320 Fermecatul (D). (D) Indicates places dredged regularly since the war. Of these, the shoal at Oltina seems to be the most persistent and the one which has received ths most attention. The Roumanian Government owns seven dredges and the Bulgarian Government one. The S. H. S. Kingdom has never had any dredges on this section of the river. The largest part of the dredging done by the Roumanians is at the entrance to and in their ports, and all of the dredging so far attem pted by Bulgaria has been in her ports. Other than shoals, there are two obstacles or sources of danger to shipping in this sector. The first of these are numerous snags formed by tree trunks partly embedded in the bottom. Roumania has removed these as they have been reported. The other obstacles are formed by the wrecks of vessels sunk during the war. The total number of these is 233, of which 67 had been removed before May 1st, 1925. This work is a serious task, due to the size and conditions of vessels, the time they have been under water, the current and the severe winter season. Roumania has equipped herself, at considerable expense, to carry out this work, and can be praised for what has been done so far. According to the report of her engineers, she plans to “ intensify her efforts ” in this direction. The wrecks may be classified as follows :

A. Raised and Removed.

1. Barges (schleps) ...... 27 2. Landing pontoons...... 12 3. Tugs ...... 9 4. D red g es...... 1 5. Barges (chaloupes) ...... 8 6. Barges (ceams) ...... 3 7. Floating cranes ...... 4 8. Barges (tanks) ...... 1 9. Barges (bacs) ...... 1 10. Barges (chalands)...... K) Total rem oved...... 76

B. Under Water.

1. Wrecks in channel outside of port limits (marked) 6 2. Wrecks inside port limits : (a) Those which must be avoided by vessels landing at quays ...... 18 (b) Those which are sunk in deep water or against quay (reported by engineers as no obstacle) ... 29 3. Wrecks outside of channel proper and outside of port limits : (a ) Those immediateljTbelow Oltenitza, along left bank 45 (b) Those in other places ...... 68 Total not rem oved...... 166 These include steamers, tugs, barges, tanks, pontoons, elevators, cranes and even two railw ay cars. — 134 —

Of these, navigators find those in the channel and at Oltenitza the most dangerous It is reported that as long as the buoys are in place there is no particular danger, but that the channel buoys are removed before the navigation season is closed in the fall, and that the wrecks at and below Oltenitza are never marked. Barge S. R. D. 7 was damaged by a collision with one of these last autumn. Wrecks which are not marked are reported by one of the companies as lying 011 the Bulgarian side at Marotin, Taban, Orehovo, Biku and in the arm of Ciftada. A large part of this section of the river forms the frontier between Roumania, Bulgaria and the S. H. S. No agreement exists between these States as to how the dredging and marking of the channel shall be carried out, so far both having been done exclusively by Roumania. In the autumn of 1924 Bulgaria addressed a note to Roumania stating that it was ready to assume its part of the responsibility, but so far the delegates of the two countries have not met to discuss a convention. The S. H. S. Kingdom has for some time, according to its Foreign Office, sought an agree­ ment with Roumania both for the work here and in the cataract section, but Roumania was not able to send a delegate to discuss the matter until June of this year. During that month an agreement was made concerning the administration of the Iron Gates. This was presented to the C. I. D. for approval at its last session, but action on it was postponed until the following meeting. The other sections of the river forming the frontier between these two States were not included in the arrangement.

Section XII. — BRAILA - BLACK SEA 171 to 0 kilometers = 98 to 0 miles.

This section may be differentiated from the others in many ways. First of all, it is the only section of the river suitable for maritime navigation. Second, it embraces the entire delta sector where conditions on the river for the most part differ from those found elsewhere. Third, the European Danube Commission has jurisdiction here, whereas the International Commission is charged with the supervision of the other parts of the river. The general situation can be seen on Map No. 19. On account of its peculiar situation, on account of the difficulties encountered in maintaining the river in a state suitable for navigation, and on account of the attacks made on the Commission by and in Roumania, it is believed that a special description is warranted. For this purpose the main river from Braila to Chatal d’Ismail (head of passes) ; the reach from Chatal d’Ismail to Chatal St. George (St. George Pass) ; from the last-named place to Sulina (Sulina Pass), and the entrance channel over the bar will be considered separately. The description is based on reports of the Chief Engineer and the Board of Consulting Engineers of the C. E. D. and on conversations with the Chief Engineer.

Braila to Chatal cTIsmail. This part of the river presents fewer obstacles to navigation than do those further down. Its width between the high-water marks on the banks is always greater than 1,000 ft. It sometimes reaches 3,000 to 4,000 ft., where, at the period of low water, the shoals appear which present the most serious obstacles to the passage of ocean-going ships. The shoals in question are found between the following mile posts : 46 to 48, 51 to 52, 54 to 57, 66 to 67, 72 to 74, 75 to 76, 82 to 84 and 87 to 98. During the last few years only one of these shoals, Jhat situated between the mile 82 and mile 84 called the Zeglina Shoal, a little above Galatz, and at the bend where the Sereth empties into the Danube, has caused any obstacles to navigation. The existence of this shoal is due to the sediment brought down by the Sereth. This runs entirely through Moldavia from n o rth to south, and is fed by mountain torrents having their source in the Carpathians. Traversing the plains at the foot of the latter, it brings down large quantities of alluvial deposits to the Danube during the time of melting snow in the mountains and during the summer rains. — 135 —

The width of the Danube at this point is increased from 1,600 to 4,000 ft., which causes a reduction in the velocity of the current and prevents it from taking away the increased sedi­ ment brought down by the Sereth. The construction of permanent works which might be undertaken here in an effort to remedy this trouble would not be practical from an economic standpoint. The only recourse, therefore, is to dredging. The shoal is, of course, periodically removed by the high water in the Danube after the rains stop in the mountains near the source of the Sereth. The minimum utilisable depth in this part of the river was at the time of our visit 26 ft.

Chatal d'Ismail to Chatal St. George. (Tulcea Arm, St. George Pass.) At the time of low water there are two shoals above the 39 and 40-mile post. It has been necessary to dredge these points during recent years w'hen the depth at the entrance has fallen below 20% ft- It is thought by the Commission that the expense of carrying out permanent works at these places, without taking into consideration the entire elimination of the Tulcea bend, w7ould be too high in comparison to the benefits to be obtained for navigation. This bend, which is the most notable characteristic of this reach, presents certain inconveniences for navigation. Howr- ever, as few' ships have grounded at this point, it may be assumed that these difficulties are not grave. Above Tulcea, between mile 40 and 41, there is a second bend. By the continual erosion of the left bank of the river at this point, the bend has a tendency to become more accentuated from one year to the next. In this way a grave difficulty for navigation will arise unless at some season of high water the Danube itself cuts off the entire bend. At present, although the wridth of the river at this point is large, the channel is very much reduced, and vessels must take special precautions in order to pass. The two bends could be eliminated by making an artificial cut-off between mile 37 and 41. It is to be noted th at there is considerable erosion of the right bank of the river just above Chatal St. George. If continued, this will, at a more or less early date, make a change in the division of the discharge of the river between the arms w'hich form the delta. When the works wrere begun in 1857, the discharge wras apportioned between three arms as follows : Sulina 7 % St. George 30 % Kilia 63 % According to the last gauges this had changed to : Sulina 12 % St. George 20 % Kilia 68 %

Chatal St. George to Sulina. (Sulina Pass.) This branch of the Danube wras used in the past almost exclusively to give access to ocean­ going ships to the interior parts of the river. Before the establishment of the European Danube Commission the least depth in the Sulina arm, reduced to mean low' w'ater in the Black Sea, was only 8 English feet. Its course wras very irregular, and its width, measured between the high- water mark on the banks, varied betw'een 300 and 800 feet. By the execution of 10 cut-offs made between 1868 and 1902 this ann was shortened by nearly 12 nautical miles, eliminating at the same time 27 bends w'hich hindered navigation. By this jjnportant regulation work, as wrell as by the construction of a considerable number of spur dykes and by dredging, the depth was greatly increased, until it reached that of the channel across the bar at the entrance. The width of this arm, measured between the high-water mark — 136 on the banks, varies at present between 400 and 500 feet. The minimum usable depth is actually 23 ft. Dredging is not required except rarely. By the completion of two or three spur dykes situated at 13 1/2 and 23 miles, where generally the least depths are found, even this dredging can be eliminated in the future. It may be remembered that recently, when the usable depth of the Sulina arm was less than that of the channel at the entrance, it was possible to remedy this state of affairs in a relatively short time by the use of a powerful suction dredge of the European Danube Commission. The banks of the arm subject to erosion have been protected by stone revetments. Follow­ ing the world-war, these revetments were in a bad state of preservation. The repair of these is undertaken at the time of low water and when the floating plant now employed at the more important works at the entrance is available to carry out the necessary transport of material. (Extract from C. E. D.’s report). Entrance Channel. At the time of the selection of the Sulina entrance for improvement, the average depth was 8 ft., which was often reduced in the autumn, the season for the exportation of grain. When the European Commission was formed in 1857 it selected the late Sir Charles Hartley as its engineer, who elaborated and presented to the Commission two projects, one for the improvement of the Sulina mouth and the other for that of St. George, warmly recommending the latter. Other plans were drawn up by other engineers recommending different arms for improve­ ment, and different methods for the improvement of those arms. After a considerable discus­ sion, however, the Commission finally decided to improve the channel across the bar at Sulina as a provisional measure. Accordingly, two jetties of a temporary nature were begun on April 21st, 1858, and the work w>as completed on July 31st, 1861, although not to the length ori­ ginally proposed. On the day of the completion of the provisional jetties a navigable depth of 17% ft. could be announced, almost double that which had existed in the beginning. Between 1869 and 1870 the south jetty was prolonged 457 ft., as it was seen that a small shoal had formed under the protection of the north jetty. On this account the usable depth had been reduced to 13% ft. in December 1863. The southern jetty was extended a second time in 1876-77, so that its end wras exactly opposite that of the one on the north. Originally this difference in length had been expressly provided for in order to protect vessels entering the port during northern storms. Experience made it necessary later to sacrifice this advantage, which naturally was more for the benefit of sailing vessels than for steamers. In 1865, 18 ft. was announed for the first time. In 1866 the depth was again reduced to a minimum of 16 ft. and in 1867 it varied between 17 ft. and 16 ft., in 1868 between 18 and 16 y2 ft., and in 1869 between 17 and 16 ft. In 1873, 20% ft. was secured by dredging a small shoal composed of debris from wrecked boats and stone ballast. This shoal was situated between the dikes at the base of the old bar. No dredging was undertaken outside of the ends of the jetties. At the end of the five years which followed the completion of the works, the utilisable depth, increased from 6 to 8 ft., had been maintained, and as there was no way to secure the necessary funds for the improvement of the St. Georges arm, the Commission decided to consolidate the provisional jetties at Sulina. From 1873 to 1894, with the exception of fourm onthsin 1876 and 1879, the usable depthof 20% ft. was maintained without interruption solely by the action of the current and without any dredging. At the end of this period it was necessary to increase this depth by provisional means in order to comply with the insistent demands of commerce. A dredge began work in the autum n of 1894 and increased the depth by half a foot. At the end of 1895 a depth of 24 ft. was announced for the first time, and this depth was maintained with few interruptions until the end of 1906. In that year a sandbank which had formed and had gradually increased to the south of the entrance had shown a decided tendency to advance towards the north. The channel over the bar was at this time moved from the original E. N. E. alignment to N. E. — 137 —

Two more dredges were purchased about this tim e , due to the fact that the general condi­ tion of the Sulina mouth between the jetties was not satisfactory and to combat the continual enlargement and movement to the north of the bar outside the ends of the jetties. The original dredge was not able at that time to take away the deposits of sediment when the year was unusually unfavourable. Although the chief engineer of the Commission in 1907 made an emphatic statement that dredging could be counted to secure only temporary benefits, no attempt was made to create a fund for the extension of the jetties or to provide in any other way for relatively permanent results. The depth of 24 ft. was maintained, however, almost without interruption until 1914, the year of the outbreak of the world-war. This year was the last year in which a usable depth of 24 ft. was assured at the entrance. (See Table No. 15 giving available depth over the bar.) It is understood that the Commission began the creation of a fund in 1911 for the extension of the jetties. Whatever amount was collected never amounted to very much, and it was en­ tirely used up during the war. In 1921 the Commission decided to secure the advice of a board of consulting engineers, which reported on Sulina in May of that year and, after several months, adopted the following project for further work : “ We summarise here the conclusions to which our examination of the question has brought us, the reasons for which are shown in the present report. “ 1. Acquisition of dredging plant, including a hopper ladder dredge of the type of the ‘ Percy Sanderson with two self-propelled hopper barges of proportionate size as attendant plant. “ 2. Extension of the jetties, commencing with the southern jetty at a point situa­ ted about 500 m. from the actual extremity of the jetty. After the completion of a length of about 300 m., commence the elongation of the north jetty at a point situated about 500 m. from the actual extremity of the northern jetty, the axes of these two prolongations to be those of the existing jetties. The progress of the work and the prolongations should be regulated by considerations given in the course of the report. “ 3. Opening of a new channel in the axis of the jetties by means of dredging, which should be carried out with the greatest activity. “ 4. Closure of the two openings left between the old jetties and their prolonga­ tions. “ 5. Supplementary work consisting of : “ (a) closure of the branch of Staro-Stambul of the Kilia arm ; “ (b) construction of works at the points of bifurcation of the arms in order to restore a part of the total discharge to the St. George’s arm. “ (c) the study of a disposition permitting a reduction in the amount of muddy water in the Sulina arm and facilitating, on the contrary, the introduction of clear water.” This project is substantially that proposed by the Chief Engineer of the Commission, the difference being a change in alignment and a shortening of the jetties. The results will, of course, demonstrate the soundness of the change or show the lack of wisdom in making it. In our opinion, the trace and lengths proposed by the Chief Engineer seem preferable. The works were begun in 1922 and, except as to pertain details of construction, have been carried out approximately as laid down by the Board of Consulting Engineers as fast as the necessary plant and funds could be made available. When the depth dropped to 13 ft. during the summer of 1924 the consulting engineers were again summoned to Sulina but made no material change in the project. The channel was simply shifted to a naturally deeper location in the bed to the north of Sulina, where greater depths could be found. This channel has been maintained to date with from 18 to 21 feet of water by means of dredging. The channel through the new jetties was opened to traffic with a 20-foot depth on July 25th, 1925. A two-hundred-foot channel is now available, to be later widened by the action of the current and by dredging to 300 feet. — 138 —

Work on the closure of the Staro-Stambul arm has not yet been begun, nor has anything been done with reference to the construction of works at the point of bifurcation of the Sulina arm, nor in making a study of a disposition which will allow the introduction of clear water into Sulina and preventing the flood and waters charged with sediment. This latter study will evi­ dently last for some time, as up to the present no one has suggested a practical method of secu­ ring this result and maintaining navigation in the St. George Pass.

THE DRAVE.

The Drave is navigable upstream from the point where it enters the Danube to Bares. It forms the frontier between Hungary and the S. H. S. Kingdom between Dolni-Miholjac and Bares. In its lower reaches it is entirely in S. H. S. territory. In consequence of the war and the chaos resulting therefrom, Hungary has not been able to undertake regulation and improvement works. The S. H. S. engineers report th at in 1923 and 1924 they spent 1,225,000 dinars for repairs to regulation works, for dredging of the winter harbour at Osek and for bank protection. They have taken out a number of snags which formed a serious obstacle to navigation. This stream carries a great deal of sediment. The regulation work has never been entirely successful, and consequently needs constant observation and dredging. This has not been done in a way satis­ factory to the shipping companies, and consequently the Danube has been deprived of a feeder which could supply a considerable amount of traffic. It is understood that a mixed commission has been agreed upon by the two frontier States to handle the question of regulation and improvement. This commission has not yet begun to function, and so it is impossible to judge how successful it will be in maintaining the projected depths. Any improvement, however, should tend to increase the amount of traffic on the whole waterway system. TH E TISZA.

The next navigable affluent is the Tisza. This river is navigable as far as Szolnok, 328 km. from the mouth, or Tiszafured, 424 km. above its mouth, depending on the stage of the water. From the latter point, upstream to Tiszaujlak, a length of 320 km., it is only navigable when the water is extremely favourable. At present the river is available for navigation of the type used on the Danube only to Csongrad, 240 km. above its mouth, except during favourable stages of the water. For 153 km. above its mouth, the Tisza flows through the S. H. S. Kingdom, the remainder of the navigable section being in Hungary. The stream has been improved by a combination of regulation work and dredging. According to the navigation companies, conditions were satisfactory before the war. Since then they report that dredging has not been carried out systematically and that conditions are bad. For example, one states that at times of low water shipping on the Tisza has been almost entirely suspended. In the summer and autumn of 1923, steamers with a draught of only 9 dm. could go as far as Novi-Becej (65 km.). In order to place empty barges in position for loading they had to be towed from Novi-Becej by men or horses to their loading positions, which were sometimes 60 or more kilometres upstream. Several barges were necessary to collect what would have been one full cargo if sufficient depth had been available. They were loaded to about 7/7% dm. and were again towed by men to Novi-Becej. At this place the steamer took them to Titel. In the latter place, and sometimes in Novi-Becej, the cargo was transferred to a single barge. According to the report of the S. H. S. engineers, in 1923 and 1924, 900,000 dinars were expended. This was used principally for the protection of banks which were in danger of being washed away, in the placing of buoys and in surveys. In the Tisza we have again a reason for the reduction in traffic on the Danube due to the impossibility of using to anything like its capacity one of the most important tributaries. - 139 —

It is understood that a mixed commission similar to the one on the Drave is contemplated for handling the improvement and maintenance work. Present conditions would seem to indicate the necessity for its prompt organisation.

THE BEGA. This tributary of the Tisza, joining the larger river 11 km. above its confluence with the Danube, is especially important, as it serves a very highly developed agricultural region. The navigable section of this stream extends as far as Temesvar, the upper part having been canalised by means of six locks and dams. Of these, two lie in Roumania and four in the S. H. S. Kingdom. The feeder canal is entirely in Roumania. The width of the navigable canal varies from 20 to 30 meters, and its depth is now as little as 1.5 — according to navigation companies sometimes less. This condition is due to the fact that from the beginning of the world-war the canal has no longer been dredged. So far, no arrangement has been made between Roumania and the S. H. S. Kingdom for the maintenance of the channel. This accounts for some of the loss in Danube traffic. TH E SAVE. The next tributary of importance is the Save, which empties into the Danube at Belgrade. This river is the principal tributary of the Danube and now forms part of the territorial waters of the S.H.S. Kingdom. It is understood that the river has been improved to some extent by permanent works and by dredging. There is a bar of considerable dimensions a short distance above Belgrade which seriously interferes with navigation. Since the war, the S. H. S. Kingdom has undertaken a survey of the river, has established aids to navigation and has done conside­ rable dredging in it in an effort to keep it open for barges of the Danube type. This has not been altogether successful, and the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes are talking of adopting a new type of barge for the special service on this river. Full information on conditions here was not obtained.

TH E PRUTH. Moving downstream, the last navigable tributary of any importance which is encountered is the Pruth, which lies wholly within Roumania. This river is navigable from its mouth to Nemtzeni, located 370 km. above. From the mouth to Leova, 227 km. upstream, the river can be used by barges up to 500 tons capacity of not more than 1 y2 m. draught. From Leova to Nemtzeni, barges of not more than 300 tons can be used with a draught of not more than 60 cm. The width of the stream varies from 80 to 120 meters ; its depth is variable, sometimes dropping to as little as two or three feet. The course of the river is very sinuous, its total length to Nemtzeni being 50 % greater than the air-line distance. Going upstream, barges are hauled by special tow-boats or by oxen on the tow-path. Downstream the barges descend with the current, which varies from 0.4 to 0.6 meters per second. Ice is expected during the same months as for the Danube, i.e. from December 1st to March 1st (90 days). Low water generally occurs from July 1st to October 1st. The smallest radius of curvature is as little as 50 meters. The banks and bed are, in general, clay, rarely sand and gravel. Such improvement as has been undertaken has been done by means of dredging. Snags are sometimes found in the Pruth and are removed by the “ Service Hydrau­ lique ” of Roumania.

AIDS TO NAVIGATION.

Aids to navigation have been established throughout the course of the river. The number, type and efficiency varies greatly in the different countries and with the condition of the channel offered to navigation. In the upper sections, where navigation is most difficult, the aids are few, as there has been practically no movement at night. What the movement would be with suitable lights and signals is, of course, difficult to prophesy. 140 —

Germany. No signals have been installed in Germany except a temporary one at the Kachlet just above Passau. With the completion of the works at this point no doubt it will be removed. Above Gonyii, navigation at night is difficult on account of the lack of signals and is rarely attempted except with bright moonlight. It is understood that ships were equip ed during the war with searchlights and seemed to find little difficulty in proceeding at night with that assistance. The Bavarian Lloyd is making attempts to run its boats upstream at night on the German Danube.

Austria. No aids to navigation in the proper sense of the word exist in Austria. There are signals on the two bad curves above Vienna, a set of three just above Aschach and a set of two near Struden.

Czechoslovakia. No aids exist in this country. Some temporary assistance is furnished by a few bushes placed on the edges of shoals.

Hungary. The aids consist of range poles on shore, indicating the direction of the channel, and are supplemented during the low-water season by buoys installed by the M. F. T. R. No descrip­ tion of these buoys was furnished, nor were any of them seen during the trip, as the water was so high as to make them unnecessary.

S. H. S. According to most navigators, the system of marking the channel in the S. H. S. Kingdom is by far the best on the river. These signals are not of a very prominent character and require a good deal of attention and maintenance. However, they serve to show the navigator exactly where the channel is, and they accomplish the purpose for which they were designed in an entirely satisfactory manner. They consist of range poles on shore and of buoys. The lighted buoys consist of a small acetylene lantern on top of a wooden horse, which is fastened to two logs. The logs are not so long as those in the cataract sector, but nevertheless tend to place themselves in line with the current. In addition to the Danube, the S. H. S. engineers maintain signals on the Drave, the Tisza and the Save. Where these signals are not sufficient, in the minds of the S. H. S. Syndicate, to completely mark the channel, that company places temporary buoys. The situation as regards all the waterways in Serbia is shown by the following table : 1. Permanent Signals. Signals on the right b a n k ...... 28 „ „ l e f t ...... 39 „ „ junctions ...... ' 4 Floating signals — rig h t ...... 21 l e f t ...... 20 „ „ junctions ...... 3

115 signals, of which . . . 97 are lighted a n d ...... 18 not lighted. 2. Provisional Signals. Unlighted : 66. — 141 — Roumania. In this section of the Danube the channel is marked by buoys indicating the bars, obstacles and changes of direction. There are two kinds of these buoys -— one the simple can buoy, and the other a lighted buoy. In addition to these there are a number of spar buoys. The following table shows the exact situation as it exists at present :

No. Year Buoys Hound floating Lighted Simple buoys Total 1 . 1919 6 81 14 101 2. 1920 6 52 11 69 3. 1921 13 74 13 100 4. 1922 11 85 5 101 5. 1923 13 67 1 81 6. 1924 12 62 2 76 7. 1925 15 63 12 90 These buoys are a great help to navigation which is carried on during the night. They should be considerably increased, however, to make the channel safe. In the stretch from Turnu-Severin to Moldova, navigation is forbidden after dark. There are consequently no lighted buoys here. The type in use for navigation during the day consists of a round disc mounted on a log, which is fastened to an anchor by means of a chain. This system has some very marked advantages and also some very marked disadvantages. The log, of course, takes the direction of the current, and plainly shows the navigator just what he may expect in the way of current as well as the location of the channel. Navigators com­ plain, however, that the buoys are so placed that the logs, which are sometimes as much as 20/25 ft. long, extend into what is already a narrow channel. C. E. D. (European Danube Commission). At the mouth of the river all aids have been established by the European Danube Commis­ sion. The entrance to the Sulina mouth is marked by three lighthouses, by ranges, by five buoys — of which two are lighted — and by many spar buoys. “ Throughout the length of the river between Sulina and Braila the buoying of the channel is carried out by means of 42 buoys. Moreover, in the Sulina arm and Tulcea arm, range signals indicating the axis of the channel exist in different places. In the Sulina arm there are nine fixed lights between the 2nd and 8th mile posts. Lights likewise exist at the heads of the longitudinal dykes of Chatal St. George and Chatal d'lsmail, as well as on the rock of Tulcea, while five fixed acetylene lights are installed on the right bank of the river between Chatal d’lsmail and Braila ”. (Report of the Engineer, C. E. D.) Special dangers such as bars or other obstacles are promptly marked by the Commission. Painted white piles are driven at the heads of each of the spur dykes, which plainly mark these points during high water. The lighting system is still incomplete, making it dangerous for large ships to proceed from Sulina to Braila except in bright moonlight. The question of the installation of additional lights was discussed by the Commission at its last session, when it was decided not to instal them. To complete the system, 35 additional lights are necessary.

A d d i t i o n a l D a t a . In addition to the tables and charts previously referred to there are attached others giving some additional information on the physical side of the river’s problems. Table 1 gives a list of the winter ports. Table 2 gives a list of the bridges with vertical clearances. Table 3 gives a list of the floating plant for the improvement of the channel and ports as it was reported. In Annex III will be found a description of the port facilities used by the larger compa­ nies. Tables 20 to 26 give in a very condensed form the information concerning the Danube Ports as supplied by the Governments of the Riparian States. In many respects the data appears incomplete, but it is none the less suggestive of the type of arrangements existing along the river. — 142 —

T able 1 . — W i n t e r P o r t s .

Barges or tugs. G e r m a n y : (3 ports)...... able to shelter 125 Deggendorf...... » » 40 Raklau (upstream from Passau) ...... » » 80 245

A u s t r i a : Linz ...... able to shelter 200 Vienna, Freudenau...... » » 500 700

H u n g a r y ' : G yôr...... able to shelter 100 Estergom (Gran)...... » » 45 Budapest : (a) Ujpest ...... » » 480 (b) Obuda ...... » » 360 (c) Lagymanyos ...... » » 170 (d) Soroksar...... » » 1,000 Dunapentele...... » » 120 Gemencz (near Szekszard)...... » » 800 Sugovica (Baja) ...... » » ___50 3,125

Czechoslovakia : Bratislava (Pressburg)...... able to shelter 280 Komarno...... » » 100 380

K in g d o m o f t h e S e r b s , C r o a t s a n d S l o v e n e s : B ezdan...... able to shelter 105 Osek (Drave) ...... » » 37 Novi S a d ...... » » 72 Belgrade...... » » 425 P an csovo...... » » 180 819

Loaded Empty R o u m a n ia :

Turnu Severin able to shelter 2 5 30 Flamunda » 1 2 20 Giurgiu . » 7 15 M acin ...... » 2 4 40 B ra ila...... * 4 0 60 Galatz ...... » 3 0 60 1 3 8 225

Data furnished by riparian States and taken from Le Danube International by d e K v a s s a y . — 143 —

Table 2 . — B rid g e s

Vertical Clearance

Above Above Name of Bridge Location low high water water level level (meters) (meters)

Road Bridge Ratisbon 8.08 2.55 Road Bridge Ratisbon 6.96 1.43 Railway Bridge Schwabelweiss 8.75 3.22 Road Bridge Stauf 8.55 3.02 Road Bridge Straubing 3.74 8.85 L.W. corresponds to reading of Railway Bridge Bogen 8.30 3.19 + 0.10 m. on Vilshofen gauge Railway Bridge Deggendorf 7.98 3.16 and — 1.00 m. on Passau gauge. Road (Maximilian) Deggendorf 7.60 2.78 Road Bridge Vilshofen 8.13 2.15 Railway Bridge Steinbach 8.63 0.98 Road Bridge Passau 10.70 2.05 Suspension Bridge Passau 11.10 2.45 Railway Bridge Krautel stein 12.84 4.19 Road Bridge Linz 10.16 2.46 Road and Railway Bridge Linz 11.74 4.39 Railway Bridge Steyregg 10.96 4.10 Railway Bridge Mauthausen 10.58 3.00 Road Bridge Stein 11.79 4.43 Railway Bridge Krems 11.05 3.83 Low water of 1908 (0.2 m. below 1911 level). Railway and Road Bridge Tulin 11.99 5.64 West Railway Bridge Vienna 11 .83 4.46 Emperor Franz Josef Bridge Vienna 11.71 4.25 North Railway Bridge Emperor Ferdinand Vienna 11.71 4.35 Road Bridge Prince Adolph Vienna 11.60 4.24 Railway Bridge Stadlau 11.41 4.00 Road Bridge Bratislava 13.45 5.75 Railway Bridge Komarom 13.17 7.21 Road Bridge Komarom 13.75 7.79 Road Bridge Esztergom 13.84 7.53 Railway Bridge Ujpest 14.60 7.68 Margaret Bridge Budapest 17.04 10.12 Suspension Bridge Budapest 13.35 6.43 Low water of 1911. Elisabeth Bridge Budapest 14.72 7.80 Franz Josef Bridge Budapest 15.11 8.19 Railway Bridge Budapest 14.93 8.01 Railway Bridge Baja 13.40 6.50 Railway Bridge Gombos 12.46 6.77 Railway Bridge Novi Sad 13.76 7.83 Road and Railway Bridge Cernavoda 44.00 37.00 0.0 on Roumanian Gauge.

Authority : Report of Danube Conference, Budapest. 1916. — 144 —

T able 3. — Floating Plant for Improvement of W aterway

Country Number Plant (Type) Capacity Condition

G e r m a n y ...... 3 Dredges (ladder) Not reported, has removed Good. 1 Dredge (clamshell) at mouth of Isar 30,000 m3 pr. yr. of ; 10,000 m3 pr. yr. Attendant plant not repor­ ted. A u s t r i a 1. U p p er...... 2 Steamers 240 h.p. 120 h.p. Fair. 1 Small dredge (bucket) 1 Dredge (clamshell) 2. L ow er...... 2 Steamers (screw) 360 h.p. 150 h.p. 1 Dredge (bucket) 1 Dredge (clamshell) Some vessels for transpor­ ting stores. Private plant not reported

C zechoslovakia . . 1 Dredge 30 m3 per hour Recently over­ hauled. 2 Dredges each 300 m3 per hour Newly built. 1 Tug 180 h.p. 4 Steel elevator pontoons 1 Quarter boat 2 Scows 2 Scows for transport of stone —- each 100 tons 14 Small boats Private plant not reported

H u n g a r y . (State) ...... 1 Tug (paddle) 380 h.p. Built 1885 » ...... 1 Tug (screw) 240 h.p. » 1920. » ...... 3 Dredges (ladder) 2,000, 1,500, 2,000 m3 per » 1884. day » ...... 1 Elevator transporter 1,500 m3 per day » 1909. » ...... 5 Steel barges for transport of stone 670 tons each * ...... 3 Wooden barges for trans­ port of stone 350 tons each (Private) ...... 12 Dredges 9 Elevators Attendant plant not repor­ ted

S. H. S...... 5 Dredges (ladder and suc­ Total 720 m3 per hour Old. tion hopper) 4 Dredges Total 90 m3 per hour Poor. Attendant plant of tug, quarter boats, scows, launches, etc.

R o u m a n ia . Galatz...... 2 Tugs 100 and 230 h.p. Built 1893, 1904. 2 Floating docks » 1897. — 145 —

Table 3. — Floating Plant for Improvement of W aterway (continued)

Country Nnoher Capacity Condition

R o u m a n ia (contd.) Galatz (contd.) . . . 2 Dredges each 100 m3 per hour Built 1886 2 Elevators 120 and 100 tons per » 1905, 1904 hour 3 Barges 80 m3 each » 1890 1 Boat. 28 h.p. » 1910 Braila...... 1 Tug 100 h.p. » 1894 4 Floating elevators 80, 100, 100, 100 tons per hour » 1906-1908 1 Dredge 200 m3 per hour » 1895 3 Barges 100 m3 » 1884 1 Ferry-boat with two lines » 1885 of rails on bridge Service hydraul. 1 Dredge (ladder : backfilling) 600 m3 per hour Most of this plant 1 Dredge (ladder : backfilling) 100 m3 » in fair condition 1 Dredge (ladder) 120 m3 » 1 Dredge (ladder) 120 m3 » 1 Dredge (ladder) 110 m3 » 1 Dredge (ladder) 100 m3 » 1 Dredge (ladder) 80 m3 » 15 Barges Total : 1,253 m3 14 Tugs 2,525 h.p. Private plant not reported

B u l g a r ia 1 Dredge (ladder) 150 m3 per hour N ew. 3 Barges 100 m3 each 3 Tugs 320 h.p. each 1 Tug 200 h.p. 1 Launch 70 h.p. Private plant not reported

C.E.D...... 1 Survey boat 340 h.p. Built 1924. 2 Tugs (screw) 200 and 200 h.p. » 1919. 1 Steamer (screw) 30 h.p. » 1884. 6 Steam launches Total : 270 h.p. » 1886. 1 Dredge P. S. (ladder, self- 1,284 m3 i » 1894. propelled) 1 Dredge sal. (ladder, self- 2,861 m31 ») 1923. propelled) 1 Dredge D.S. (suction hop­ 2,258 m3 1 » 1908, per, self-propelled) 1 Dredge C. K. (suction hop­ 1,595 m3 1 » 1912. per, self-propelled) 2 Dredges (ladder) 500 and 495 h.p. » 1880-1881 2 Barges (self-propelled) » 1922. 1 Tender (wood) » 1866. . 2 Barges (wood) » 1921. 2 Pontoons 8 Barges 100 tons each » 1880-1887 21 Barges Total : 995 tons.

Condition : good. Data furnished by Governments and C.E.D.

1 Daily average in 1924. 10 147 — — 146

T able 4 . T h e D a n u b e . Tableau 4. — Le Danube. Tirant d’air des Courant Débit Rayon de courbe ponts aux hautes Kms à Long. Lit et berges eaux navigables Déclivité Largeur minimum Ouvrages d’amélioration Section partir en m /km Sulina kms Basses eaux Hautes eaux Basses eaux Hautes par.

Bridge clearances Current Min. radius navigable Kms Length Bed and Banks high water Slope W idth curvature Improvement No. Section Irom in m/km. Sulina Kms L. W . H. W. L. W. hor. vert.

Aucun ouvrage n’existe ni n’est prévu. Esti­ av 0.73 I. Ulm ----- 2,588 Aucune navigation importante mation d'avant-guerre du canal latéral ICehlheim 2,418 170 0.40 to No navigation of importance 83.000.000 marks-or. — None in existence 1.04 nor is any contemplated. Pre-war estimate for lateral canal 33,000,000 gold marks. , gravier, argile. — Sand, gravel, clay 400 m 47.3 m 3 .7 m Aucun ouvrage. Projet de régularisation des 2,418 38 basses eaux avec canal latéral à Ratis- II. K ehlheim ...... 0.27 to 35 m. to 1.0 to 1 .7 to 150 m! 1,300 tf I Katisbonne — Ratisbon .. 2,380 2 .5 m Is bonne. — None. Low-water regulation 0.33 550 m. 1.55 m /s with lateral canal at Ratisbon projected. gravier, quelques stratifications ro­ 200 m 36.7 m 4.0 m Régularisation des eaux moyennes. Digues 2,380 uses.— Sand, gravel, occasional ledge longitudinales et revêtement. Projet de HT. Rntisbonne — Ratisbon .. 10.12 to 60 m . to 0.70 to 1.1 to 210 m’ 2 ,70' Hofkirchen ...... 2,258 122 2 .2 m /s régularisation des basses eaux au moyen 0.31 80 m. 1.20 m /s d’épis. — Mean-water regulation. Lon­ gitudinal dikes and revetment. Lowwater regulation by spur dikes projected. L gravier, stratifications rocheuses.- 250 m 61.5 m 5.0 m Régularisation des eaux moyennes. Un tid,"gravel and ledge rock nouveau projet de canalisation actuelle­ IV. Hofkirchen ...... 2,258 0.24 to 42 m. 0 .6 to 2 .0 to Passau...... 31 3 .20 m /s 210 m1 ment en construction. — Mean-water 0.61 2 .3 m /s 2,700 if I regulation. New project provides for canalisation already under construction. ,;r, galets, stratifications rocheuses. - 350 m 46 m 5.15 m Régularisation des moyennes et basses eaux. 2,227 Evcl, boulders and ledge rock La dernière seulement en partie satisfaisan­ V. P assau. 0.21 to 60 m to 0 .6 to 2 .0 to Linz .. 2,136 91 2.5 m /s 650 m* yoo ml te. A Aschach, notamment, les résultats en­ 0.45 90 m. 1.75 m /s visagés n’ont pas été obtenus. — Mean and low water regulation. Latter partially suc­ cessful only. At Aschach especially results desired not secured. er. Quelques galets et stratifications 350 m 46 m 6.0 m Régularisation des moyennes et basses eaux. 2,136 Ileuses. — Gravel. Some boulders and La dernière seulement en partie satisfai­ VI. Linz ...... 0.34 to 90 m. to 1.0 m. to 2 .0 to D e v in ...... 1,880 256 3 .0 m Is 800 m1 woe ifl !ge rock. sante. A Struden, notamment les résultats 0.50 1.50 m. 1.68 m /s envisagés n’ont pas été obtenus. — Mean and low water regulation. Latter partially successful only. At Struden especially results desired not secured. et gravier. — Sand and gravel. 600 m 100 m 7.60 m Régularisation des moyennes et basses eaux 1,880 à l'aide de digues longitudinales et d’é­ VII. Devin 0.35 to 300 to 450 m. 1.0 to 3 .0 to 1,810 70 4.0 m s 850 m1 10,000 if I pis. Travaux inachevés. Sans résultats Szap . 0.40 (Chenal) 1.6 m /s satisfaisants. — Mean and low water (Channel) regulation bv longitudinal and spur dikes. 20 m . to Not complete. Not successful. 50 m. gravier et argile. — Sand, gravel and 450 m 73.5 m 6.60 m Régularisation intermittente aux moyen­ 1,810 nes et basses eaux. Travaux inachevés. V III. Szap ...... Banc à Fajz. — Intermittent mean and low Bouche de la Tisza. 0.034 to 450 to 900 m. 0.5 m Is 2 .0 m Is. 1,000 to Mouth of T is z a ...... 1,216 594 1,500 m1 12,50» « water regulation. Not complete. Shoal 0.15 (Chenal) at Fajz. moyenne (Channel) average 50 to 200 m 0.06 i et sable. Quelques graviers et stratifi­ 700 m 92 m 7.03 m Dragages et quelques travaux de régularisa­ 250 m. lo 0.65 m /s 1.22 m /s 1,500 m= 12,W l IX. Bouch e de la Tisza. - Mouth 1,216 0.041 to e s rocheuses. — Clay and sand. Some tion. Bancs à l’embouchure de la Tisza. el and occasional ledge rock. — Dredging with small amount of training of Tisza 0.062 1,200 m, Moidova ...... 1,049 167 works. Shoals at mouth of Tisza. | fications rocheuses recouvertes d’autres 700 m en raison du ras de pont Ouvrages de régularisation et canaux libres. nations géologiques. — Ledge rock No bridge 5.0 m Is 1,080 rrr 17,000 banc de Adakaleh. Résultats assez satisfaisants. — Training 1,049 0.039 to 60 m. 3.0 m /s 1 some overlying material. Rayon de courbe de works and open canals. Partially success­ X. M oldova...... (dans les ca­ Turnu-Severin...... 930 119 2.00 200 m environ. ful. naux) 7Q0 m. due to shoal at (in canals) Adakaleh. R of abt. 200 m exists there ncra] sable et argile ; quelques stratifi- 500 m 190 m 37 m Opérations de dragage couronnées de succès. ons rocheuses. — Generally sand and X I. Turnu-Severin...... 930 1.20 to 2,000 m! 20,000 a — Dredging successful. 171 759 0.021 to 250 to 0.30 to : occasional ledge rock. B r a ïla ...... 0.071 1,200 m. 0.75 m Is 2 .50 m . s (Canaux dragués) (Dredged channels) 50 to 80 m. A la tète du L--, ai' eIiargiIn Rochers à Toulcha — Sand 500 m. Pas de pont Dragages et ouvrages de régularisation. ™l cla>"- Rock at Toulcha Digues longitudinales, épis et jetées. XII. Braïla 171 0 .8 to 2.100 m’ I 21,000 «î No bridge 171 0.004 to (dans la rivière 0.2 to Moyenne annuelle Résultats assez satisfaisants. — Dredging Suline 300 pieds 0.5 m /s 1 0 m is 0.009 5,348 ms and training works, longitudinal and spur au-dessus de dikes and jetties. Partially successful. la barre) At head of delta 2.100 m» 21,OM”, 200 ft (in river 5,318 m3 yearly aï® 300 ft (overbar — 148 —

Tableau 5. — Profondeur des eaux. Table 5. — Depth of W ater Section Ratisbonne-Passau. — Sector Ratisbon-Passau. Dimensions en décimètres. — Measurements in Decimeters. £cy O ® 21 et De-From De-From lie-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-FromDe-FromDe-FromN ombre"de"jouN Année plus 20 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6

- nées navigables m Year 21 and à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to Shipping season more 20% 18% 17% 16% 15% 14% 13% 1?% 11% 10% 9% 8% 7% 6% (days)

1911 X l i 131 3 5 10 12 18 18 41 31 24 5 298 1915 l l i 219 15 8 15 16 15 11 6 1 306 1916 l l i 309 18 21 6 12 366 1917 148 20 22 15 24 47 9 19 2 306 1918 54 15 26 40 37 45 47 42 18 7 331 1919 190 10 10 12 6 10 11 42 25 7 323 1920 130 10 39 37 15 18 36 5 3 9 13 5 320 1921 21 5 8 ■ 11 24 28 27 33 16 54 41 28 36 28 5 365 1922 270 3 10 13 11 11 3 2 6 329 1923 191 9 13 23 15 17 27 14 8 11 18 14 5 365 1924 203 2 4 7 19 21 21 4 2 12 7 302

Tableau G. P ro fo n d eu r d es e a u x . Table G. — D e pth of W ater. Section Passau-Linz. — Sector Passau-Linz. Dimensions en décimètres. — Measurements in Decimeters.

21 et De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-FromDe-Fromlle-From Nombre de jour­ Année plus 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 nées navigables Year 21 and à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to Shipping season more 20% 19% 18% 17% 16% 15% 14 % 13 % 12% 11% 10% 9% 8% 7% 6% (days)

1911 l l l | 134 23 16 24 29 30 31 2 9 298 1915 1 1 l i 239 4 8 15 15 18 5 2 306 1916 1 1 l 304 15 16 17 10 3 1 366 1917 149 21 28 12 13 20 16 22 16 5 4 306 1918 99 7 25 11 19 22 36 25 22 32 19 8 6 331 1919 162 12 21 22 17 9 11 29 10 24 6 323 1920 216 6 16 26 13 12 4 3 1 5 6 13 7 38 366 1921 74 8 17 23 21 26 8 20 18 21 44 15 30 38 2 365 1922 284 8 13 12 1 4 1 3 3 329 1923 232 20 24 32 30 15 12 365 1924 206 2 7 4 9 35 17 9 2 3 6 2 302

Tableau 7. P ro fo n d eu r des e a u x . Table 7. — D epth of W ater. Section Linz-Vienne. Sector Linz-Vienna. Dimensions en décimètres. — Measurements in Decimeters.

21 et De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From )e-From De-FromDe-From De-FromNombre de jour­ Année plus 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 nées navigables Year 21 and à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to Shipping season more 20% 19% 18% 17 % 16% 15% 14% 13% 12% 11% 10% 9% 8% 7% 6% (days)

1911 1 l l 154 26 17 29 36 19 17 298 1915 1 l l 241 10 4 23 18 7 3 306 1916 l l l 343 7 9 7 366 1917 225 i l 8 12 18 21 6 1 4 306 1918 167 5 24 26 21 41 21 8 13 5 331 1919 240 3 7 14 11 11 13 19 1 3 i 323 1920 261 12 8 6 4 7 3 1 11 16 17 20 366 1921 103 14 24 31 37 38 34 31 21 15 5 10 2 365 1922 302 7 9 2 3 3 1 1 1 329 1923 229 16 33 29 23 17 8 8 2 365 1924 216 1 2 3 9 30 14 10 6 4 4 3 302 Renseignements fournis par la D. D. S. G. et vérifiés par la M. F. T. R. From data furnished by D.D.S.G. and checked by M.F.T.R.

Indique 18 décimètres ou plus. — Indicates 18 or more decimeters. — 149 —

Tableau 8. — P rofondeur des eaux. Table 8. — D epth of W ater Section Vienne-Gonyu. — Sector Vienna-Gônyu. Dimensions en décimètres. — Measurements in Decimeters.

21 et De-From De-From 1 De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-FromDe-From le-From le-From Nombre de jour­ Année plus 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 nées navigables Year 21 and à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to Shipping season more 20% 19% 18% 17% 163/4 15y* 143/4 13 3/4 123/4 11 % 10% 9% 8% 7% 6% (days)

l l l 142 24 35 36 3 9 17 5 298 1911 l 1 1915 l 245 29 23 23 9 306 l l 1916 l 361 5 366 1917 194 30 26 22 15 5 6 6 2 306 1918 134 24 38 38 29 3 7 19 10 2 331 1919 223 11 13 19 16 21 9 11 323 1920 244 11 24 6 4 12 5 11 28 12 9 366 1921 144 11 20 33 55 26 24 17 16 16 3 365 1922 296 7 9 12 3 2 329 1923 204 15 29 31 25 28 12 8 13 365 1924 196 4 3 6 8 30 21 6 13 12 2 1 302

Tableau 9. — P rofondeur des eaux. Table 9. — D epth of W ater, Section Gônyu-Budapest. — Sector Gônyu-Budapest. Dimensions en décimètres. — Measurements in Decimeters. 21 et De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From )e-FromDe-FromDe-FromDe-From Nombre de jour­ Année plus 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 nées navigables Year 21 and à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to Shipping season more 203/4 1934 18% 17% 163/4 15% 14% 13% 12% 11% 10% 93/4 8% 7% 63/4 (days)

1911 1 1 1 235 10 17 22 14 298 1915 1 1 1 306 306 1916 1 1 1 366 366 1917 253 7 7 8 9 3 4 11 4 306 1918 271 16 14 10 19 1 331 1919 282 8 13 12 8 323 1920 317 3 5 2 25 11 3 366 1921 243 6 16 17 22 13 27 10 6 5 365 1922 329 329 1923 326 9 14 12 4 365 1924 256 14 5 6 6 4 6 1 4 302

Tableau 10. — P rofondeur des eaux. Table 10. — D epth of W ater. Section Budapest-Moldovci. ■— Sector Budapest-Moldova. Dimensions en décimètres. — Measurements in Decimeters. 21 et De-From De-From De-Free De-Frm De-From De-FromDe-From De-FromDe-From De-From De-FromDe-FromDe-FromDe-From)e-FromNombre de jour­ Année plus 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 nées navigables Year 21 and à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to Shipping season more 20% 19% 18% 17% 16% 15% 14% 13% 12% 11% 10% 9% 8% 7% 6% (days)

1911 1 1 1 265 16 8 4 5 298 1915 1 1 1 306 306 1916 1 1 1 366 366 1917 265 9 9 6 7 5 4 "1 306 1918 266 13 9 23 11 2 2 2 3 331 1919 Les relevés manquent. — No record. 1920 307 2 7 27 12 10 1 366 1921 315 1 6 14 17 12 365 1922 326 1 1 1 329 1923 312 2 5 8 4 21 13 365 1924 247 10 13 10 8 9 5 302 Renseignements fournis par la D.D.S.G. et vérifiés par la M.F.T.R. From data furnished by D.D.S.G. and checked by M.F.T.R.

1 Indique 18 décimètres et plus. — Indicates 18 or more decimeters. — 150 —

Tableau 11. — T irant d ’eau autorisé d es Chalands.

Table 11. — P erm itted D raught of th e B arges. Secteur Moldova - Turnu-Severin. —- Sector Moldova - Turnu-Severin.

Dimensions en décimètres. — Measurements in Decimeters.

21 De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From De-From Nombre A nnée de journées et plus 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 navigables Y ear 21 an d à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to -à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to à-to Shipping m ore 2 0 -/. 193/i 1 8 ’/. 1 7 ’ /, 16»/, 15 »/. 14*/. 1 3 '/. 12»/. h */. 10»/. 9*/* 8 » /. 7»/. 6 »/. season (days)

1911 l l l 224 12 9 13 23 5 3 6 3 l 1 l 298 1915 306 306 l 1 1 1916 366 366 1917 221 4 12 14 21 7 4 7 3 3 6 4 306 1918 302 16 4 6 3 331 1919 Les relevés manquent. — No record. 1920 299 4 5 8 7 2 8 2 12 4 5 8 2 366 1921 203 16 7 8 7 10 11 21 11 9 21 10 • 4 8 8 11 365 1922 306 7 6 10 329 1923 294 5 11 6 15 9 10 6 5 4 365 1924 253 3 8 15 4 7 9 2 1 302

Renseignements fournis par la D.D.S.G. et vérifiés par la M.F.T.R. From data furnished by D.D.S.G. and checked by M.F.T.R.

1 Indique 18 décimètres ou plus. — The statistics show only 18 decimeters and more.

Table 12. — D epth of W a ter. Sector Braila- Turnu-Severin.

Minimum navigable No of days Kilometers Year depth In meters Dates

1910 more than 2.00 1911 1.80 1 22 September 710-714 1911 1.90 8 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,12 August 641-642 24, 25 September 710-714 5, 6, 13, 14, 15 Aug. 641-642 1911 2.00 16 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 September 451-454 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23 September 710-714 21 November 410-412 1912 more than 2.00 1913 2.00 3 13, 14, 15 November 610-611 1914 more than 2.00 1915 more than 2.00 1916 1917 Depths not recorded during war. 1918 1920 1.40 4 22, 23, 24, 25 November 459-461 1920 1.50 8 19, 20, 21 November 459-461 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 December 258 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 November 459-461 — 151 —

Table 12. — Depth of W ater ( continued). Sector Braila- Turnu-Severin.

Minumum navigable No of days Year depth in metres Dates Kilometers

1920 1.60 17 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 December 258 17, 18, 19 December 716 8, 9 November 339-341 1920 1.70 8 12, 13 November 459-461 30 November, 1, 2, 3 December 258 6, 7 November 339-341 1920 1.80 7 11 November 459-161 26, 27, 28, 29 November 258 1920 1.90 2 4, 5 November 339-341

1921 1.50 1 8 November 716 11 October 928 30, 31 October, 1, 6, 7, November 716 1921 1.60 7 31 October, 1 November 637-640 23 November 275-276 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 October 928 28, 29 October, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,18, 19, 20 November 637-640 28, 29 October 560 1921 1.70 24 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11,12,13,14,15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 November 569 2, 3, 4, 5 November 716 9 November 463-464 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 November 459-461 3, 4 October 928 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 October 560 1921 1.80 11 27 October, 21, 22 November 637-640 21, 22 November 463-464 21, 22 November 569 29, 30, 31 August, 1 September 463-464 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 September, 1, 2 October 928 1921 1.90 14 30 September, 1, 2, October 334-339 12, 13 October 637-640 24 November 275-276 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 19 September 334-339 24, 25 September 928 1921 2.00 14 14, 15, 16,17, 18, 19, 20 October 637-640 16, 17, 18, 19 October 463-464 20 October 560 1922 more than 2.00

1923 1.90 5 9 September 459-461 23, 24 September 722-725 5, 6 October 716-717 1923 2.00 14 7 September 338-341 13, 14, 15 September 459-461 22 September, 4 October 722-725 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 October 716-717 1924 more than 2.00

Data furnished by Roumanian Government. — 152 —

Table 13. — Depths of Water.

Braila- Tchatal St. George.

Depth ol less than 24 feet (English) Between Tchatal St. George’s Year and Tchatal d’Ismail Between Braila and Tchatal d*Ismail Remarks Days Days

1910 No particulars given in the protocol.

1911 41 m. below 22 ft. during 10 83 y2 M. Zeglina, depth less The particulars regarding days than 22 ft. for 21 days the depths unsuitable for 39 m. below 22 ft. during 11 navigation between Braila days and Tchatal St. George’s have been taken from the protocols of the C.E.D.

1912 Satisfactory depths 83 1 4 M. Zeglina, depth less than 24 ft. for 18 days

1913 Satisfactory depths Satisfactory depths (Reports of the resident engineers)

1914 Dredges were operating at Zeglina for 23 days

1915 No protocols printed on 1916 account of the war

1917

1918

1919

1920 39 m. During few days depth Zeglina : In July, August of 20 y2 ft. and October minimum depth was respectively 20, 21 and 22 V4 ft.

1921 39-40 and 41 m. Depth of Zeglina : Least depth 21 ft. less than 24 ft. during during August and Sep­ August and September. tember

1922 Satisfactory depths Zeglina : During few days depth of less than 24 ft.

1923 41 m. Depth 22 ft. during a Zeglina : During a few days few days depth of less than 24 ft.

1924 Satisfactory depths Satisfactory depths

Data furnished by C. E. D. Tableau 14. — P r o f o n d e u r d e s E a u x .

Table 14. — D e p t h o f W a t e r .

Bras de Sulina. — Sulina Arm. Dimensions en pieds anglais. — Measurements in English Feet.

Mois Mois 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 Month 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 Month

Janvier January Navigation du fleuve interrompue par suite des glaces. Février River generally ice-bound. February

Mars 24' 3" 23' 0" 22' 6" 20' 9" 23' 6" 24' 0" 21' 0" _1 __2 20' 0" 24' 0" 21 ' 3 " 23' 0" 24 ' 6 " 25' 0" March

Avril 23' 3" 23' 6" 23' 3" 22' 9" 23' 0" 24 ' 0 " 23 ' 6 " _1 22' 0" 20' 0" 24' 6" 20' 9" 24' 6" 25' 6" 25' 0" April

Mai 23' 3" 23' 0" 22' 6" 23' 9" 21' 6" 24' 6" 24' 6" _1 23' 0" 20' 6" 25' 3" 22' 0" 25' 0" 23' 0" 23' 6" May

Juin 23' 6" 22' 9" 22' 6" 23' 6" 22 ' 6 " 24' 6" 24 ' 6 " _1 22' 0" 20' 6" 25' 0" 24' 0" 24' 6" 24' 6" 22' 9" June

Juillet 21' 0" 22' 0" 23' 6" 22' 9" 22 ' 0 " 25' 0" 24 ' 6 " _1 23' 0" 22' 0" 24' 3" 23' 6" 24' 6" 25 ' 6 " 24' 0" July

Août 19' 0" 22' 3" 24' 6" 23' 0" 23' 0" 25 ' 0 " 21 ' 6 " 21' 0" 23' 6" 22' 0" 23' 6" 23' 0" 23' 6" 23' 0" 24 ' 0 " August

Septembre 22' 6" 22' 0" 24 ' 3 " 23' 0" 23' 0" 24 ' 0 " 21' 6" 20' 0" 23' 0" 22' 6" 22' 3" 23' 0" 23' 3" 24' 0" 24' 0" September

Octobre 22' 9" 21' 9" 23' 6" 21' 0" 23 ' 0 " 23' 0" 19' 6" 20' 0" 22' 6" 22' 0" 20' 9" 22' 3" 24' 0" 23' 6" 22' 6" October

Novembre 22' 9" 21' 9" 20 ' 0 " 22' 3" 23' 3" 24' 0" 20' 0" 20 ' 0 " 22' 6" 21' 0" 21' 3" 22' 9" 25' 0" 24' 0" 22' 0" November

Décembre 23 ' 3 " 22 ' 3 " 20' 9" 22' 6" 23' 0" 23' 0" — 1 21' 6" 22' 6" 21' 0" 21' 6" 23' 0" 22' 0" 25' 0" 22' 6" December

1 Aucun sondage n’a été effectué pendant la guerre. — No soundings during the war. 2 Les sondages ne sont pas indiqués dans les dossiers de la C. E. D. — Soundings not in G. E. D. files. Renseignements fournis par la C. E. D. — Data furnished by C. E. D. Tableau 15. — P ro fondeur d es E a u x . Table 15. — D epth of W a ter . Entrée de Sulina. — Sulina Entrance. Nombre de journées pendant lesquelles les profondeurs indiquées ont été atteintes. Number of days depths indicated were available. Dimensions en pieds. — Measurements in feet.

Année 13 Year 24 23% 23 22% 22 21 y, 2i % 21 20 %20% 20 19% 19 18% 18 17% 17 16% 16 15% 15

1910 363 _ 1 1911 361 — 4 1912 302 3 50 5 5 — — 1 — 1913 339 — 20 — 6 ———— 1914 359 — 3 — 3 — — — — 1915 31 — 37 139 145 — — 13 — 1916 — — 31 — 41 —— 39 186 — 69 — 1917 — — — . — 56 — 57 71 — — 122 — 4 — --- 24 8 8 — 15 — jours 1918 — —— 124 35 39 94 23 — 50 42 20' days 1919 — 40 42 52 110 37 — —— — 84 ————— — ——— — 13 » to o > — —— _ — _ 1920 90 45 5 188 38 10 » 21' Pendant les­ quels la glace a I 8 » 23' interrompu la 1921 83 70 52 8 38 100 10 4 2 » 21' navigation. 8 » 22%' I 2 » 22' Whilst naviga­ tion on the 1922 — 18 59 141 18 28 6 48 18 21 8 I 43 » 22' river was 1 23 ’ » 20' stopped on account of ice. 1923 24 17 73 — 68 — — — 16 — 71 21 18 — 24 — 31 — — — — 1924 — —— — 76 — — — — — 69 47 51 87 —— 7 — 11 —— 181 67 » 22'

1 13 pieds dans le chenal officiel pendant 18 jours après quoi il a été définitivement décidé d'abandonner ce chenal et d’utiliser le chenal provisoire du nord dont la profondeur est de 19 pieds. — 13 feet in official channel during 18 days before it was finally decided to abandon it in favour of the provisional north channel with a depth of 19 feet. Renseignements fournis par la C. E. D. — Data furnished by C. E. D. t

— 155 —

Table 16.

T a b l e s h o w i n g w h e n t h e R i v e r w a s f r o z e n o v e r : 1836-1924.

[Table in original text only.]

Table 17.

F a i r w a y i n t h e A u s t r i a n D a n u b e i n t h e Y e a r 1923.

[Table in original text only.]

Table 18.

F a i r w a y i n t h e A u s t r i a n D a n u b e i n t h e Y e a r 1924.

[Table in original text only.] — 156 —

Table 19.

Approximate Profile of I* the Danube | 5 Uj Çf vo S X ^ !<3i O V)

3 g P $ 5 àÇiK * sa < V)

X. Tableau 20. — I nstallations de ports. Table 20. — P ort F acilities. Allemagne. — Germany.

Lon­ Nombre gueur Voies de des des Outillage mécanique Nombre P ort garage en Superficie des magasins pontons quais mètres* en m* d’embar­ Nombre en Number P ort R. R. Warehouses : Floor space, quement mètres* Sidings, sq. meters Number Mechanical equipment. Quays, meters of loading Number meters pontoons

1 Ratisbonne .... 4,800 oui.— ves 11,550 20 grues fixes sur les quais (1,5 à R a tis b o n ...... 23 t.).— 20 shore cranes, 1.5 to 2 3 1. 2 Deggendorf .... 600 oui.— yes 2 magasins — Warehouses. 3 grues fixes sur les quais. — 3 shore cranes 3 P a s s a u ...... 1.439 oui.— yes 8,795 3 chèvres. — 3 derricks, 1.5 T. 3 élévateurs. — 3 elevators. 5 grues fixes sur les quais (2 à 4 t.) 5 shore cranes, 2 to 4 t. 3 grues flottantes (4 t.) — 3 Floating cranes 4 t. 20 grues fixes sur les quais (1.5 à 23 t.). — 20 shore cranes, 1.5 to 23 t.

Tableau 21. — Installations de port. Table 21. — P ort F acilities. Autriche. ■— Austria.

1 Engelhartzsell ... 290 1 magasin. — warehouse 2 Niederranna .... 130 1 3 W esen u fer...... 110 1 » » 1 4 Obermuhl ...... 160 1 1 5 N eu h au s...... 100 1 1 6 Aschach ...... 270 1 7 Brandstatt...... 80 1 » 1 8 Linz ...... 3,933 oui. — y es 6,367 6 4 grues (1.5 t.).— 4 cranes, 1.5 tons. 3 élévateurs de sacs. — 3 sack elevators. 1 convoyeur à courroie. — 1 belt conveyor. 2 grues. — 2 cranes. 9 W ilhering...... 80 1 magasin. — warehouse 1 10 Mauthhausen . .. 485 1 11 Wallsee ...... 500 1 1 12 Grein ...... 402 1 1 13 Y b b s...... 1,100 1 14 M arbach...... 130 1 15 Pochlarn ...... 950 2 » » 1 16 W eiten eg g ...... 350 1 1 17 M e lk ...... 80 2 » e 18 Aggsbachdorf . .. 80 1 1 19 S p itz ...... 1,250 1 1 20 Weissenkirchen .. 80 1 1 21 Durnstein ...... 80 1 22 S te in ...... 685 2 » » 23 K om eu b erg ...... 800 oui. — y es 3 » » 1 crane 24 N ussdorf...... 216 1 25 Vienne — Vienna 20,217 oui. — yes 1 grue flottante. — 1 floating crane. 6 élévateurs de grain 1. — 6 grain ele­ vators 1. 1 élévateur de sacs. — 1 sack elevator. 23 grues de types divers de 1,5 tonnes à 20 tonnes. — 23 cranes of various sorts from 1.5 tons to 20 tons. 1 wagonnet à bascule. — 1 car- tipple. 2 lessiveuses à charbon. — 2 coal- wading bridges. 26 H a in b u rg ...... 365 1 magasin. — warehouse 1

N o t e . — Exception faite de Vienne, Linz, Kornenberg, il s’agit en général de débarcadères aménagés sur une faible longueur de quais. N o t e . — With the exception of Vienna, Linz, Kornenberg, most of the above are merely landing-places with a short stretch of quay.

1 Ces renseignements sont donnés par 1r D. R. C. D ’après les chiffres fournis par les compagnies de navigation, il existe 40 grues et autres appareils analogues et quatre quais de garage. 1 This information is supplied by the Danube Regulation Commission. According to figures supplied by the shipping com­ panies, there are 40 cranes and other similar mechanical appliances and four sliding platforms. — 158 — *

Tableau 22. — Installations d e P o rt. — T chécoslovaquie.

Table 22. — P ort F a c il it ie s. — Czechoslovakia.

L on­ Nombre gueur Voies des de garage Superficie des magasins pontons Outillage mécanique Nombre P ort des en m* Nombre quais en en mètres d ’embar­ mètres R. R. quement Number P ort Warehouses : Floor space, Number Mechanical equipment. Sidings, sq. meters N umber Quays, meters of loading meters pontoons

1 D e v in ...... 300 1 2 grues sur pont roulant, force : 2-5.000 kg. — 2 bridge cranes 2-5,000 kg. capacity. 7 grues à arceau. Force : 2-4 tonnes. — 7 portal cranes : 2-4 tons. 1 élévateur de irrains. Type Foulton. — 1 Foulton grain elevator. Bratislava ...... 5,850 oui. — yes 23,150 11 2 élévateurs électriques de 2,5 tonnes. 11 magasins. — warehouses — 2 electric elevators of 2.5 tons. 1 élévateur électrique de 5 tonnes. — 1 electric elevator of 5 tons. 1 élévateur de sacs. — 1 sack ele­ vator. 1 élévateur à godets. — 1 bucket elevator. 1 glissière à sac. — 1 sack slide. 3 K o rtv ely es...... 150 1 magasin. — warehouse 4 B o s ...... 203 1 » « K olosnem a...... 1,300 1 6 K o m o rn o ...... 2,300 oui. — yes 2.221 5 1 grue flottante. Force 10 tonnes. — 3 magasins. — warehouses 1 floating crane, 10 tons capacity. Entrepôt franc des doua­ nes. 3.400 m* Customs free storage, 3,400 sq. meters 7 Kamenice ...... 600 oui. — yes 8 Parkan ...... 300 2 magasins. — warehouses

Tableau 23. — I nstallations d e P ort. — H o n g r ie.

Table 23. —- P ort F a c il it ie s. — H u ngary.

1 Gônyü ...... 400 1 magasin. - - warehouse 1 2 Jomarom-Ujiaros. 1,000 oui. — yes 2 1 élévateur — 1 elevator. 3 Duna Almas .... so oui. — yes 1 4 Nygeres-ujfalu . . . 180 oui. — yes 1 » 1 5 Est ergo m ...... 268 2 1 6 V a c z ...... 400 2 2 7 S zentendre...... 120 1 8 Budapest 1 ...... 21,500 31,250 7 grues mobiles. — 7 travelling cranes, 2 élévateurs de grains. — 2 grain elevators. 9 B u d a fo k ...... 200 oui. — yes 2 10 E re s i...... 120 2 11 Adony ...... 200 oui. — yes 1 12 Dunapentile . . . . 225 1 1 13 D un av ecse...... 200 1 » 1 14 D unafoldvar...... 600 1 1 15 H a r t a ...... 80 1 » 1 16 Ordas ...... 120 2 3 17 P a k s ...... 400 3 2 18 Kaloesa ...... 200 2 2 19 Fadd T o ln a ...... 150 3 20 B a g a ...... 900 oui. — yes 5 » 4 21 M ohacs...... 600 2 5

1 En construction : quai vertical, 600 m. de longueur, 3.200 m* de magasins. 6 grues électriques de 3 à 1,5 tonnes desservies par routes et voies ferrées. 2 Renseignements fournis parle Ministère de V Agriculture hongrois. — D’après les renseignements émanant des principales com­ pagnies de navigation, il existe 16 grues de types différents. 3 La gare de chemins de fer est située au-dessus du port et reliée à la mine de la D. D. S. G. de Paks. 1 Now under construction — vertical quai 600 m. long, 3,200 sq. m. of warehouse. 6 electric cranes from 3 to 1.5 tons to be served bv both roadway and railroad. * Information furnished by Hungarian Ministry of Agriculture. According to information received from principal shipping companies there are 16 cranes of various kinds. 3 Railway station is above the port and is connected with D. D. S. G. mine at Pak«. T a b le a u 2-4. Installations d e port. —- Table . Port Facilities. Royaume S. H. S. — S. H. S. State. Superficie ...... 1 Norn- tics m aga­ Nombre des pontons Outillage mécanique OO Longueur des 1 bre Voies de garage en mètres sins en m2 d’embarquement Nombre Observations Num- quais en mètres Quays, meters R.R Sidings, meters Warehouse Number of loading Mechanical Equipment. Remarks ber floor space, pontoons Number sq. meters

1 Bosdan ...... oui. — yes 2 Canal de jonction avec Novisad. — Canal con­ 2 Vukovar .... 1,500 oui. — yes 400 Plusieurs. — Several necting with 3 B eecsin ...... oui. — yes 1 Novisad. 4 Novisad .... 1,500 oui. — yes 200 Plusieurs. — Several Canal de jonction avec Bezdan. 5 Zamun ...... oui. — yes oui. — yes Plusieurs. — Several — Canal con­ necting with < Bezdan. 6 Belgrade .... 8,000 oui. — yes 8,000 » » 3 grues Belgrade-Save — 3 cranes Belgrade Save. 7 Panesovo . . . 5,000 oui. — yes 200 '> » 1 grue Belgrade-Da- 8 Smederevo . . oui. — yes oui. — yes » » nube. — 1 crane 9 Dubrociva . . Voie étroite. — Narrow gauge 1 Belgrade-Danube 10 Kostolae ... Chemin de fer industriel.— 1 Industrial railway 11 V. Gradiste. . oui. — yes » » 1 12 D. Milanovae » » 1 13 Prehovo .... oui. — ves 1 14 O selc...... oui. — y e s oui. — yes 1 15 Belistjo...... Voie étroite.— Narrow gauge 1 16 Sostilovae . . » » 1 17 Titel ...... Chemin de fer en construc­ 1 tion. — Railway in con­ struction 18 Steri Bocoj. . 1 Canal. Gare de che­ mins de fer à quelque distan­ ce du port. — Canal. Railway station at some distance from port.

O bservation. —- Il existe, clans cet Etat, 51 débarcadères ; la liste ci-dessus indique seulement ceux qui servent à un transport annuel de marchandises supérieur à 25.000 tonnes. Ils sont classés par ordre d’importance. Les données disponibles sur ces ports sont très rares, mais les espaces laissés en blanc sur le tableau ne signifient pas que l’outillage en question soit inexistant. On peut toutefois déclarer que les ports S. H. S . sont rarement pourvus de tous les perfectionnements d’outillage moderne. N o t e . ■— There are some 51 landing-places in S. H. S. State, of which only those with an annual traffic of over 25,000 tons are listed above. They are arranged in the order of their importance. The data available for these ports are very meagre and the blank spaces do not mean an absence of the facility in question. It can be said, however, that S. H. S. ports have extremely few modern improvements. Tableau 25. — Installations de P ort.

Tabic 25. — P ort F acilities.

Bulgarie. — Bulgaria.

Plateformes d’em­ barquement et de Nombre des Longueur en pontons Longueur des débarquement le Voies de garage Superficie des Nombre Port mètres des routes long des berges en en mètres magasins en m! (rem bar­ Outillage mécanique. Nombre quais en longeant les quais quement mètres mètres* Num ber Port Platforms used R.R. Sidings, Warehouse floor Num ber of Mechanical equipment. Number Roads along for loading and meters space, sq. meters Quays, meters quay, meters loading unloading along pontoons bank, sq. meters

1 Vidin ...... 800 1,000 10,000 oui. — yes 900 2 2 Lorn...... 1,000 1,200 5,655 oui. — yes 1,996 4 1 grue à main. — 1 hand crane. 3 Orehovo . . . non. — no 2 4 Somovit ... 200 oui. — yes 2 5 Nicopol . . . 200 non. — no 1 6 S isto v ...... 800 1,000 13,650 oui. — yes 1,054 2 7 Rustchuk .. 2,500 2,000 21,800 oui. — yes 5,450 4 1 grue fixe à quai 1-10 T. 1-10 t . shore crane. 1 grue à main, 1-15 t. — 1-15 t. hand crane. Tableau 26. — Installations de Port. Table 2G. — Port Facilities.

Roumanie. — Roumania.

Plateformes d ’em b a r­ des berges Superfic. pour rembar­ quement et de d éb a r­ des Nombre des longueur quement el le pontons q u em en t le Voies do m a g a ­ des quais (léliiirqiiement sins en long des garage en d'embar­ II Port des marchan­ quement. berges M* m ètres m ètres 2 Observations écan. Nombre dises. Mètres equip. Number 0 1 Port P latform s Q uays, Hank arranged R.R. W a re - Number of E â R em ark s m eters used for Sidings, house loading 4 ) O (or landing, loading and loading and m eters floor pontoons ! | unloading space, sq. unloading of along bank, vessels,meters m eters sq. m eters o è

1 Bazias...... 800 6,000 2,300 i _ 2 Moldova-Veche...... — 100 3,000 — i — 3 D rencova...... 170 50 750 —— i — 4 Orsnva I Orsova-Ville ----- 730 _____ 500 — 72 2 — Ursova | orsova-Coroana. . 670 20,000 2,000 1,690 1 2 1 grue de 3 tonnes en service, 1 grue de 1 % tonne en construction. Dépôt de charbon M.F.T.R., 3,625 m2. Dépôt de charbon M.F.T.R., 3.780 m2.— 1 crane of 3 tons functioning, 1 crane of 1 % ton in course of construction. M. F. T. R. Coal Depot, 3,625 sq. meters. M.F.T.R. Coal Depot, 3,780 sq. meters. 5 Turnu-Sevcrin...... 560 __ 10,000 500 1,280 1 — 6 Gruia ...... 33 400 26,000 ____ 66 1 — 7 C etatea...... 800 ____ 40,480 — 160 1 — 8 C alafat...... 825 — 32,480 3,000 427 1 — 9 Bistrctz ...... 33 700 30,400 ____ ------1 — 10 Bechet ...... 650 ____ 46,410 ____ ------1 — 11 Corabia ...... 1,135 500 81,400 5,000 1,215 1 — 12 Turnu Magurele ...... 940 — 61,500 4,000 1,920 1 — 13 Zimnicca...... 118 1,000 79,000 500 140 1 — 14 Giurgiu : R am adan...... 2,041 — 128,000 7,600 2,040 3 2 1 de 2 tonnes en service ; 1 de 2 tonnes en réparation. — 1 of 2 tons functioning : 1 of Sf.-Gheorghe ...... 1,120 300 74.000 3,600 2 tons in course of reparation. 15 Oltenita ...... 636 1,500 71.000 6,000 780 3 ____ 16 Turtucaia...... — 550 27,500 _____ 1 — 17 Silistra...... — 700 23,000 — 144 2 — Magasins de 116 m2 en construction. — Warehouse 116 sq. m. in course of con­ struction. Tableau 26. — Installations de Port (suite).

Table 26. — Port Facilities ( continued).

Roumanie. — Roumania.

Aménagement Plateformes d'em bar­ ■Q A des berges Superfic. a a pour rembar­ quement et O 3 de débar­ des Nombre des longueur quement et le Voies de maga­ pontons z z débarquement quem ent le P ort des quais long des garage en sins en d'embar­ C 1 1 en m. des marchan­ mètres mètres 1 quement. s i dises. Mètres berges M* l l Observations O 3 P ort Platforms z z Quays, Bank arranged R.R. W are­ Number of s -a Remarks meters used for Sidings, house loading

18 Calarasi ...... 520 300 44,000 1,450 270 i 19 Ostrov ...... — 770 30,000 — 100 i — 20 O ltina...... 34 290 22,000 — 150 i — 21 Cernavoda ...... 180 380 32,500 2,400 430 i ___ 22 H arsova...... 600 30 25,600 — 400 i — 23 Cura-Ialomitei ...... — 550 60,000 — — i 24 Braila (en dehors des docks — outside the docks) . . . 2,300 1,850 360,000 13,300 1,576 15 Outre les 1.576 m2 de magasins d’Etat, il • existe en dehors du port 70,850 m2 d'entre­ pôts spéciaux pour les céréales. — In addi­ tion to 1,576 sq. m. of warehouses belonging to the State, there are 70,850 sq. m. outside the port of special warehouses for grain. 25 M acin ...... 33 — 5,760 —— 1 — 26 Galatz : Le Port situé en dehors des Docks. — The Port out­ side the d ock s...... 2,100 1,000 60,000 3,700 4,400 15 — Nouveau bassin. — New Basin ...... 1,260 1,470 295,000 6,420 —— 27 R e n i...... 480 825 31,000 960 4,850 1 28 Isaccea ...... 60 40 1,200 •— — 1 — 29 Tulcea ...... 1,000 — 23,000 —— 2 — 30 Ism ail...... 475 — 12,000 — 1,000 2 — 31 Chilia-Noua...... 170 250 5,000 — 1,500 1 — 32 Chilia-Veche ...... 60 30 ______1 ___ 33 Valcov...... 60 ______— 1 34 Commission Européenne du D anube. — European | Danube Commission .... 5 Vi milles marins. — nautical miles. 1 petite grue — small crane. / — 163 —

Annex VI.

CUSTOMS, POLICE, ETC. DUES.

Germany. Customs fees : Outside hours 1.20 marks per hour per man (two men generally).

Austria.

1. Overtime" fees : Per Customs official per ho u r ...... 6,000 crowns (daytime) ” ” » » » ...... 9,000 » (night-time) » » watch » » ...... 5,400 |» (daytime) 8 ” ” » » ...... 8,100 » (night-time) 2. Examination outside Customs zone : Per Customs official ...... 40,500 crowns » » watch 30,500 » 50 per cent extra at night (10 p.m. to 6 a.m.). 3. Personal cost allowances (outside Customs zone in official hours) : Per Customs official per h o u r ...... 20,000 crowns » » » per day 140,000 » » » watch per hour ...... 15,000 ,» » » » per day 110,000 » 4. Ship convoys : Fees in accordance with official subsistence allowance regulations,

Czechoslovakia. No Customs fees. No convoy.

Hungary (applied at each frontier). I. Customs examination : (1) For tug alone or with one to three barges . . 80,000 crowns (2) For tug with four or more b a r g e s ...... 160,000 » (3) For rowing-boat, motor-boat or raft...... 80,000 »

II. Police control : (1) For tug alone or with one to three barges . . 80,000 crowns (2) [For tug with four or more barges ...... 160,000 » (3) Rafts pay no fees. III. Veterinary control : (1) For consignment less than 200 kilos .... 50 crowns per kilo (2) For consignment of 200 kilos and more . . . 64,000 » (3) For barge loads ...... 193,800 » per barge — 164

I. Convoy by Customs officials : For goods steamers : Per sub-official : 81,600 crowns per day (including return railway fare). For passenger steamers : Per one official and two sub-officials (for all three) per day or part 200,000 c r o w n s For examination on shore when river forms frontier...... 60,000 » II. Convoy by river police : (1) Official and two guards (for all three) per day or p a r t ...... 120,000 crowns (2) Each further official per day or p a rt...... 60,000 » (3) Each further guard per day or p art ...... 30,000 » (Second official required for passenger steamers where passengers exceed 200, and third official where passengers exceed 600.) III. For sanitary control : (1) Issue of bill of h e a l t h ...... 50,000 crowns (2) Counter-signature of bill of health ...... 25,000 »

S. H. S. Customs examination \ During office hours : No charge. Outside office hours : To the official : 30 dinars ; to the employee and to the agent : 15 dinars. For examinations at more than two kilometers from the Customs office, the cost of the journey is paid. For sealing : 10 centimes Swiss (gold) per seal. Convoys : 60 dinars per day, including return journey. Sanitary Fees 2. Bill of health, obligatory for each vessel entering S. H. S., 27jiinars.

PORT DUES.

The port dues were not reported in such detail as were those for Customs examination. In Germany it is understood that a small amount is charged as port dues, two or three marks per barge. The information furnished for Austria is incomplete. At Bratislava it is reported that no charges are made for boats stopping in transit. This seems to be borne out by an examination of the figures for typical trips. In Budapest the harbour dues are the following :

Harbour dues. Paper Crowns. Self-propelled boats over 50 meters in length ...... 10,000 per day » » 30 to 50 meters in length ...... 8,000 » » » » under 30 meters in length ...... 6,000 » » Cargo boats 30 meters or m o re ...... 8,000 » » » » less than 30 meters in le n g th ...... 4,000 » » These amounts, though small, appear to be collected whether the boat is in transit or not.

1 Information from S. H. S. M inister of Communications. 2 From steamship companies. — 165 —

In the S. H. S. State the dues are as follows : P ort Dues. Dr. Steamers : First and second journeys ...... 650 (average) Third and further journeys ...... 400 » Barges : First and second journeys ...... 600 « Third and further jo u rn e y s ...... 250 » Above is doubled for vessels going into territorial waters. In Roumania a" tax of % per cent of the value of the cargo exported is levied on each vessel. In Bulgaria the charges are as follows : Vessels of 400 t o n s ...... 357.50 leva » » 600 » ...... 450.— » » » 1,000 » 560.50 » It is understood that a reduction of 50 per cent is made for boats flying the Bulgarian flag. In Hungary, the S. H. S. State, Bulgaria and Roumania small fees appear to be collected, sometimes in the form of stamps on the reports which are required on the arrival and departure of the vessel.

* — 166 —

Annex VII.

DELAYS AT FRONTIERS.

It has been difficult to get an accurate statement as to the exact time lost by the various vessels at the different frontiers. This has been made all the more so a§ even in the reports received which give time of arrival and of departure of specific vessels at the various frontiers it will be indicated, for example, that the boat remained at the station for two to three hours although the Customs examination will be stated to have taken only one-half to one hour. Under such circumstances, it is not possible to decide whether the remainder of the time lost is due to waiting for the examination, such causes as purchase of supplies, etc., or to the convenience of the crews. On the basis of the available data, however, the various shipping companies have supplied information as to what they consider to be an average time lost at each frontier. This informa­ tion has been consolidated, and appears in the form of a table at the end of the Annex. From this it will be seen that the time lost at the S. H. S. frontiers is greater than that at any of the others. The Hungarian formalities seem to consume more time than any of the others, with the exception of those at the S. H. S. frontiers, and are practically as burdensome as the latter. The following report, made by an official of one of the navigation companies about two years ago, is suggestive of the frontier delays which may occur. This report is in the form of a log, viz. : “ October 27th. “ 11.30 a.m. — Joined tug A at Budapest, picked up two lighters (one being in transit from Ratisbon) and a tug (not under steam). “ 1.30 p.m. — Proceeded, weather cloudy, making for dark night, and under circumstances, i.e., towing downstream, low-lying banks, not suitable for night navigation. “ 6.0 p.m. — Dark, banks obscured, anchored at Dunapentele. This after hav­ ing steamed 63 kilometers in 4 % hours, making average speed of 14 kilometers per hour. “ October 28th. “ 5.0 a.m. — Proceeded. “ 1.30 to 2.30 p.m. — A t Baja. “ 4.30 p.m. — Arrived Mohacs. Hungarian frontier Customs examination sta­ tion, the frontier between Hungary and Serbia being about 20 kilometers further down stream, there being no station or village. This region is swampy for many kilometers on either bank of the river. “ The Hungarian Customs officials were not here to pass the convoy. I think the local agents should have had all arrangements made and so got the convoy away at daybreak in the morning if not in the night. “ October 29th. “ (Sunday) At Mohacs, no cargo to handle. “ 8.30 a.m. to 10.30. — Hungarian Customs examination. “ 10.30 a.m. — Proceeded. “ 11.15 a.m. — Crossed Hungaro-Serbian frontier. “ 12.0 a.m. — Arrived Batina (Serbian frontier Customs examination station). No cargo to handle. The Customs offices are situated on the left bank, so we had first to leave our lighters at the right bank and then go to the left bank for Customs officials ; it being dinner-time we did not get them until 3 p.m. and their examination extended until a little after 8.30 p.m. It being now too dark to proceed, we remained at Batina for the night. — 167

“ This day, on account of Customs examination services, we had only steamed for 1 y2 hours, making 23 kilometers. “ The Customs officials looked at everything, even opening cases, also requiring a copy of the manifests (in Serbian), upon each sheet of which stamps had to be affixed. All Serbian officials engaged on the examination, including woman searcher, had to be paid. A Serbian soldier was placed on board and remained until we had left Serbian sphere of influence, namely, that part of the river both banks of which belong to Serbia. “ October 30th. “ 5.40 a.m. — Proceeded. “ 11.30 a.m. — Vukovar. “ 5.30 p.m. — Arrived Novisad, anchored 2 kilometers above town. “ This day steamed 12 hours, making 167 kilometers, average speed 14 kilometers per hour. “ October 31s#. “ 6.0 a.m. — Proceeded to the Customs pontoon in order to discharge cargo. Had to lie off until Serbian passenger steamer had called, which it did at 9.0 a.m. “ 10.0 a.m. — Commenced to discharge. “ 11.30 a.m.—- Local agent came aboard ; said Customs official had ordered him to stop discharging and to let his lighter drop astern in order to allow S. H. S. lighter alongside to discharge about 70 tons cargo. This would have meant not finishing our discharging this day. Went ashore, spoke to Customs official (not the one who had given the order) and got permission to finish discharging, which we did. “ 1.0 p.m. — Proceeded. “ 6.0 p.m. — Arrived Zemun. “ This day steamed five hours, making 85 kilometers, average speed 15 kilometers per hour. “ November 1st. “ At Zemun. At this place we dropped our lighter and the tug and at 10.30 a.m. were about to proceed when the Serbian soldier whom we had taken on board at Batina as guard objected, saying his orders were to take the convoy first to Belgrade and then Gradiste. Explanations were of no avail, so we again made fast alongside. Our manipulant saw the Chief of Customs, who did not even prepare to act ; however, after much argument, he consented to place a Customs guard on the lighter remaining, and the other lighter with its soldier guard was then able to proceed at 1.20 p.m., arriving at Gradiste at 6.30 p.m. “ This day steamed five hours, making 116 kilometers, average speed 23.1 kilometers per hour, all the morning having been wasted by the Customs lack of efficiency. “ November 2nd. “ At Gradiste. Serbian Customs examination station. No cargo to handle. “ 7.30 a.m. to 10.30 a.m. — Manipulant ashore going through manifest and other formalities at Customs. “ 10.30 a.m. — Manipulant and six Customs officials came on board. Lighter and tug thoroughly searched. Crew checked and quarters thoroughly searched. Inside my boots and all papers scrutinised. I would point out that the crew, tug and barge had been thoroughly searched entering the Serbian Danube, manifest, etc., gone through, hatches sealed. “ 11.0 a.m. — Examination finished. Proceeded. “ 1.15 p.m. to 2.40 p.m. — Called at Drinkova for orders. “ 4.0 p.m. — Arrived Szynoze, at which place tug A turned over its lighter to tug B. . “ This day steamed 5 % hours, making 64 kilometers. — 168 —

“ November 3rd. “ Tug B engaged in helping tug A to assemble a convoy bound upstream, after which proceeded to Orsova. “ 12.30 p.m. — Arrived Orsova, making lighter fast to the Customs wharf. Lighter had half-ton of cargo to discharge and the tug to coal. On account of thé I slowness of work, and no one appearing to consider time of any value, it w as not ' until the next evening that we were ready to proceed, of course too dark th e n , so we remained until the following morning. “ November 4th. “ At Orsova. “ November 5th. “ Tug assembled a convoy ; did various odd jobs, finally landing me at Turnu- Severin at 2.0 p.m. Tug returning upstream. “ 4.0 p.m. -—■ Tug C and three lighters arrived. Repaired on board and arranged passage to Vidin. Tug had 20 tons to discharge, which was only completed a t 8.30 a.m., two days later. The captain informed me that it always takes him half a day to get the Customs formalities gone through ; in this case he was the whole of the first morning with the Customs officials before he got permission to commence unload­ ing the 20 tons. “ November 1th. “ Tug C finished discharging. “ 9.0 a.m. — Proceeded. “ 11.0 a.m. to 6 p.m. — Anchored convoy and proceeded.” That conditions are not far different to-day may be seen from the following : “ On January 11th, 1925, the S.S. A, in express goods traffic with urgent goods barges, arrived at 11.30 a.m. at the Serb-Croat-Slovene frontier station of Bezdan going downstream, and as it was Sunday could only be examined by the Customs on Monday morning, January 12th, in spite of three times the charges being offered to the Customs authorities by the company’s agency at Bezdan. The steamer was thereby delayed 24 hours. “ On March 23rd, 1925, the self-propelled barge B, of the same line, with two urgent maize barges, arrived at Bezdan at 9 a.m. going upstream. The Customs revision was completed by payment of the fees to the Customs authorities at 1 p.m., but the barge was obliged to wait for the police inspection. The police authorities were not available, as it was time for the mid-day meal and the departure was delayed until 3 p.m. “ The barge C of the same line, which was despatched with 3 % truck-loads of goods from Vienna to Temesvar, had to pay the following taxes in the Serb-Croat-Slovene section : Dinara. Customs taxes in the Serb-Croat-Slovene section : Customs escort from Bezdan to the Bega frontier...... 8 4 0 - Customs charges in Beckerek for inspection of the barge . . . 75.— Customs papers and s t a m p s ...... 32.50 Harbour report papers and stamps in Beckerek...... 85.75 1,033.25

“ Thus the barge, which did not load or discharge any goods in the S. H. S. King­ dom, had to pay about 3 dinara per 100 kilos in Customs and port dues alone. These costs are a charge on the freight, which is payable in lei. On an average, the freight from Vienna to Temesvar is 150 lei, and about 10 lei is due solely to Serb-Croat-Slovene Customs import dues. — 169 —

“ The self-propelled barge D of this line arrived at Bezdan going downstream on June 17th,1925, with 7% truck-loads of goods for various Serb-Croat-Slovene stations. In Bezdan 1 % truck-loads were discharged, for which the D had to pay the port tax, amounting to 220 dinars. In addition, 16 dinars were paid for the port report papers and stamps. In order that the barge might be cleared quickly, extraordinary charges of 60 dollars were paid to the Customs officials in Bezdan. The next station at which the D arrived was Osijek, on June 18th at 10 o’clock, but was only able to discharge a small part of the goods for Osijek on the same day because another barge which had arrived earlier had to pass the Customs. It was only on the next day that the total quantity of goods for Osijek could be discharged, and after a delay of over thirty hours the barge was able to proceed to the next station - Vukovar. On account of this delay, the D arrived at Zemun, instead of Friday evening, June 19th, as it should have done in accordance with the schedule and the contract for the delivery of goods, only on Saturday afternoon, at a time when the Customs office was no longer working. Ex­ traordinary charges had again to be paid to the Customs officials in order that the clearance might take place on Saturday evening and the D could at any rate start its return journey on Sunday morning. If the D had also had goods for Belgrade Save, the port tax paid in Bezdan would have had to be paid again because the port tax is doubled for territorial waters. ”

DELAYS AT EACH FRONTIER.

Czech o- Authority Germany Austria slova kia Hungary S . H . S.

Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours

Bavarian Lloyd . ... 1-2 1-2 1-2 2-6 3-36 D. D. S. G...... 1 i - i y2 1-2 2 each, Szob and Mohacs 3 each, Bezdan and Gra­ (waiting up to 12 hours.) diste (waiting up to 20 hours.) Erdex : downstream 0.1 6.4 4.8 „ upstream ... 0.1 5.4 8.5 Czechoslovakia Co___ y2-i y2-i y2-i 2 y 2- 5 10—15 M. F. T. R ...... 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 each, Szob-Mohacs 2—4 each, Bezdan and Gradiste S. H. S...... 2 2 5 14 5 N. F. R ...... 8 10 Annex VIII.

DELAYS IN OPERATING VESSELS.

Some indication of the methods of operation and the utilisation of cargo space and tractive power can be obtained from an examination of the following quotations made in a report of an inspector of one of the steamship companies. Although this inspection was made four years ago, examinations of the books of a steamship company and calculations based on the actual performance of the tugs and barges tend to show his report to be suggestive of present conditions, though there has doubtless been improvement.

“ B a r g e A.

“ March 17th to May 26th, 1921 — 70 days.

“ Loaded with 400 tons maize from Bezdan to Linz — 442 English miles upstream.

Days. Per cent waiting for t u g ...... 33.7 47.9 at the frontier (Customs and police examinations). 11.8 16.9 under w a y ...... 8.9 12.7 loading and unloading ...... 5 .- 7.2 anchored during night ...... 4.6 6.6 passing through the locks in channel Bezdan- Zomber-Bezdan ...... 4 .- 5.8 on Easter holidays ...... 2 .- 2.9 T o ta l...... 70.- 100.-

“ B a r g e B .

“ April 14th to June 4th, 1921 — 51 days.

“ 290 tons posts from Komarno to Ujpest — 69 miles downstream.

Days. Per cent. “ Time spent waiting em p ty ...... 25.6 50.- waiting loaded for the tug 8.1 16.- in loading and unloading 7.5 14.8 on Easter holidays . ... 3 .- 5.9 under repair ...... 2 .- 3.9 under w a y ...... 2.6 5.1 moored during night. 1.2 2.4 at the frontier (Customs and police examinations) 1 - 1.9 T o ta l...... 1...... 5 1 - 100.- — 171 —

“ B a r g e C.

“ March 26th to June 4th, 1921 — 98 days.

44 tons planks from Linz to Budapest — 304 miles downstream.

Days. Per cent. Time spent waiting loaded on account of low water 46.- j 60.7 waiting for tug...... 13.5 waiting empty for cargo 19.- 19.4 loading and unloading 11.- 11.3 on holidays...... 3 .- 3.05 under w a y ...... 3.- 3.05 moored during night. 1.5 1.5 at the frontier (Customs and police examinations) 1.- 1.- Total ...... 98.- 1 0 0 - “ There were visited a further nine barges. Their work per barge on the average during the four months from February 1st until June 1st was :

Days. Per cent. “ Time spent waiting loaded ...... 58.6 48.9 ,, under way and moored during night ... 28.5 23.8 „ loading and unloading ...... 9.8 8 .- „ waiting empty ...... 20.3 16.9 „ on holidays...... 2.8 2.4 T o ta l...... !...... 120.- 100.- “ The above-mentioned data are taken without exception from the barge- helmsmen’s official diaries. Therefore it can be stated that the barges were waiting 60 to 70 per cent of the time, partly empty, partly loaded — that is to say, they were not employed in a profitable manner. “ Only 30 to 40 per cent of the time is used for loading and unloading, for the voyage itself and stoppages during the same, on the frontier and repairs. “ The reason for long waiting of loaded barges is mostly low water, and in a lesser degree is due to lack of towing power. It must be noted that some barges were loaded down to such a depth as precluded their being towed for weeks and months. In such cases there is undertaken only exceptionally an unloading of the cargo for the purpose of despatching goods and setting free cargo space ; hereby is explained the enormously long time taken in sailing from S.H.S. State to Bavaria. The barge ‘A’ took 70 days from Bezdan to Linz, and the barge * X ’ was waiting fully laden 101 days out of 120 days. The data of barge ‘ X ’ previous to these 120 days we could not examine personally as the diaries were already handed back. According to information furnished by the helmsman, the barge ‘ X ’ was waiting laden from November 1920 till May 1921. “ It must be pointed out that these bad conditions with regard to cargo space also exist in other companies and in a worse degree. We were told that laden barges belonging to other companies were taking six, seven and eight months to sail from Pancsova, Zemun and Novisad to Ratisbon. ” The case, as far as tow-boats is concerned, is just as striking. The average time run before the war, when the companies were supposed to be operating efficiently, for one of the best companies, was about 1,700 hours per year. This, it will be seen for a year when the navigation season lasts for 300 days, is 5 2/3 hours per day. According to the system of entering running time in the logs of the tow-boats, an hour must be deducted from this sum to allow for such manœuvres as making up a tow, landing, anchoring for the night, and so on. The report pre­ viously mentioned gives the running time of tugs at a little higher figure. The inspector’s — 172 — exact ideas on the subject can, however, be obtained from a consideration of the following extracts : ► “ In the year 1921 the daily working, or rather travelling, of a tug is on the average seven to eight hours, according to official diaries seen by us. It must be added that this small capacity cannot be considered at all as actual travelling time. On the one hand, each movement of the tug will be counted — for instance, manoeuvres which waste time and are not always nautically sound ; on the other, the lengthy assembling of convoys, the daily anchoring, mooring and local service, all of which is counted as ‘ voyage time’. This time is still further rounded off in the diaries in favour of the crews. Calculating very cautiously, there can be deducted one hour of the official journey time as not being of any ton-kilometer effect, so that there remain six to seven hours’ effective average daily travelling. In the winter months, the figure is lower, in the summer months higher, but the average of both is six to seven hours. “ This small capacity is the result of four chief and numerous minor factors. The four chief factors are : the existing system of wages, which offer scarcely any attraction to good work, defective orders, the physical impossibility of sailing on dark nights and uneconomical division of the river stretches. The minor facts are : abuses, Customs and frontier chicanery, faulty technical equipment of steamers, insufficient coal, food, etc. “ Tug-Captain Doe, known as a most energetic captain, travelled with the tug ‘ A ’ in May 1921 altogether 227% hours ; therefore, on a daily average, 7.3 hours. But his diary indicates on nine (certainly selected) days of the same month 143 hours — that is a very high daily average of 15.9 hours journey time. Against that, the steamer, for lack of orders, was obliged to stay inactive at Zemun from May 14th till 21st (156 hours). Bringing this not rare circumstance into connection with the waiting time of barges discussed above, my statement that it is not only the crew’s fault when the cargo space is not used in a profitable way is true. “ The nautically almost undivided line Ratisbon-Gônyü is divided into three, often also into four, stretches. This means that a barge which has to be towed from Ratisbon to the middle or the lower Danube will not be towed by one tug, but that in Linz and Vienna, frequently also in Passau, tugs are changed. The uneconomical results of a too-frequent changing of tugs will be seen distinctly in the following case : from March 1st till May 25th, 1921, 65 barges passed Linz upstream and down­ stream without loading or unloading there. Their stay at Linz was exclusively occa­ sioned by changing of tugs. Of the 65 barges only two were towed on the day of their arrival, and only three after a day’s delay, but the average waiting time for all 65 barges was 7.6 days. “ The following information from another company gives another idea : from January 1st to June 16th, 1921, 91 barges passed Vienna up and down stream, without loading or unloading there. Waiting time caused by changing tugs was, on the average, 14.2 days. “ Due to lack of orders other delays result. Some concrete cases are : tug ‘ B arrived in Vienna on May 15th at 9 p.m., found orders to undertake two hours’ local service, and got further directions — for further local service and to proceed to Budapest -—■ only on May 17th at 12 noon, therefore 39 hours after arrival. The ‘ B ’ had five boats of the 1 Z ’ Company, two ‘ Y ’ barges and barge ‘ X ’ tow from Vienna to Budapest. I cannot believe that the necessity of conveying these vessels from Vienna to Budapest was known only on May 17th. “ On May 19th at 6 p.m. the tug ‘ B ’ arrived in Budapest. Also there the tug found no fresh orders for the next course, but only directions for a two hours’ local service. Sixteen hours after arrival, the tug ‘ B ’ got the order to meet the ‘ C ’ coming upstream from Baja. The ‘ B ’ left in Budapest the vessels of the ‘ Z ’ Company destined for Belgrade, and sailed without barges to Dunafôldvarand there took only half of the tug ‘ C ’s ’ convoy. “ On June 6th at 2 p.m. the ‘ D ’ arrived in Zemun with two barges destined for Roumania. At this time the tug ‘ E ’ was already in Zemun. Sixty-four — 173 —

hours later, at 6 a.m. on June 9th, the * A ’ arrived at Zemun from Turnu Severin with seven tanks and the tug ‘ F ’ in tow. Accordingly, on June 9th, there were four tugs at Zemun without any orders whatsoever. At the same time, there were lying there six laden tanks destined for Ratisbon and two laden barges for Roumania. On the same day at 5 p.m. there arrived, indeed, a telegraphic order that ‘ A ’ would sail to Budapest, but the definite order arrived only 36 hours after the ‘ A’s ’ arrival at 6 p.m. on June 10th. For the other three tugs no orders arrived during the five days of my stay — that is, up to the forenoon of June 11th. “ Oil May 23rd the laden barges ‘ M ’ and 1 0 ’ were at Ordas. Captain Doe, who was passing by, said that these barges were destined for Belgrade as well as the rest of his convoy, but that he had no order to pick them up. Indeed, these two barges were towed downstream by the tug ‘ C ’ eight days later, on May 31st. ” The tugs of the company which he visited seem to have been run in a very haphazard fashion. According to his report, however, they were handled better than those of others, and consequently the following can probably be taken as typical : “ The captain’s wife travelled on the tug ‘ G ’ from Stein to Passau and from there to Linz. At the same time the wives of two helmsmen were on board too. Travelling of women seems to be usual, especially on the tug ‘ G ’. “ On tug 1 C ’ and tug ‘ S ’ during our presence two firemen were allowed by the captain to go home. During their absence one fireman of the tug 1 S ’ became ill and the voyage had to be interrupted until a new fireman was found. “ Interruptions of the voyage for the sake of buying food and taking in water are quite normal, but tug 1 G ’ stopped even for the purchase of a newspaper or wine or for the embarkment of one or other of the women mentioned. To show the very patriarchal manner of travelling, the details of the voyage of the tug 1 C ’ from Ersekc- sanad to Budapest may be given : 27th, 3.15 p.m. Departure from Ersekcsanad. 8 p.m. Stopped at Fadd-Tolna in order that the wives of the barge helmsmen might make visits on shore and the cook might buy wine. 28th, 0.10 a.m. Departure from Fadd-Tolna. 6.30 a.m. Stopped at Paks to buy wine as this could not be got at Fadd-Tolna. 7.20 a.m. Departure from Paks. 8.30 a.m. Stopped at Ordas that a tank helmsman might disembark his pigs. 9 a.m. Departure from Ordas. 3.15 p.m. Stopped at Dunafôldvar to send telegrams to the head office at ‘ R ’, and to the wives of the captain and the machinists announcing arrival at ‘ R ’. 4 p.m. Departure from Dunafôldvar. 9.45 p.m. Stopped at Dunapentele on account of darkness. 29th, 0.10 a.m. Departure from Dunapentele. 0.15 p.m. Stopped at Nagyteteny in order that the wives of some barge helmsmen might go on shore. 1.15 p.m. Departure from Nagyteteny. 4 p.m. Three tanks of the convoy anchored at the winter harbour Lagymanyos near Budapest. 5.15 p.m. Arrival in Budapest. “ Of course, the stoppages at Paks, Ordas, Dunafôldvar and Nagyteteny were written in the diary as travelling time. — 174

Annex IX.

INTERNATIONAL DANUBE COMMISSION.

F irst Sessio n, J une 1920.

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 1. Organisation of the Commission ...... Decision taken 2. Chairmanship ...... Decision taken 3. S e c r e ta r ia t...... Decision taken 4. A g e n t s ...... Decision taken 5. B u d g e t...... Decision taken 6. W ork s...... Postponed 7. Fixing date of thenext meeting, the place and the programme Decision taken

Second Sessio n, September 1920.

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 1. Internal regulations : (a) Commission ...... Decision taken ( b) C h airm an sh ip ...... Decision taken (c) Executive Committee ...... Decision taken (d) S e c r e ta r ia t...... Decision taken 2. Iron Gates : (a) F u n c tio n s...... Decision taken (b) P erso n n el...... Decision taken (c) Salaries ...... Decision taken (d) T a x e s...... Decision taken (e) Rules for passage of the IronGa t e s ...... Decision taken (f) Material ...... Decision taken (g) Book-keeping ...... Decision taken (h) W o r k s...... Decision taken 3. N avigation and Police regulations ...... Decision taken 4. B udget ...... Decision taken

T hird Sessio n, D ecember 1920.

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 1. Reading of the report on the operations of the Secretaqat-General from A ugust 20th to December 15th, 1920 ...... Decision taken 2. Discussion and Approval of the Budget plan for 1924 : (a) Budget of the Secretariat-General ...... Decision taken (b) Special budget of Orsova ...... Decision taken 3. Establishment of provisional statute forthe civil employees of the C.I.D. Decision taken 4. Appointm ent of employees ...... Decision taken 5. Discussion and transfer of the navigation regulation project drawn up by the Sub-Commission ...... Postponed 6. Regulation of the Financial Statute of the coaling service...... Postponed — 175 —

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 7, Various : (a) Hydrometric service ...... (b) State of communications at Orsova ...... (c) Towage railway of the Iron Gates ...... Questions (d) Establishment of statistical service ...... adjourned for (e) Rate at which late payments should be made Accounts in a later meeting crowns ...... (f) Utilisation of hydraulic power ......

Fourth Session, August 1921.

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 1. Approval of operations of the Executive Committee from November 20th, 1920, to July 1st, 1921 ...... Decision taken 2. Closing the Budget for 1920 ...... Decision taken 3. Discussion for adopting the navigation regulation project ...... Postponed 4. Study of a project of telegraphic organisation to facilitate the relations of ships with their base ...... Postponed 5. Study of a uniform organisation of the statistics regarding navigation Postponed 6. Presentation and discussion of the report of the Sub-Commission for taxes (decision of September 1920) ...... Postponed 7. Study of methods suitable for reducing the time taken for transports on the Danube ...... Postponed 8. Appointment of em ployees...... Decision taken 9. Study and approval of the programmes of maintenance works sub­ mitted by certain riparian States ...... Decision taken 10. Decision to be taken regarding the work of the hydrometric service ... Postponed 11. Advisability of having a systematic study made by the Institute for Scientific Research at Vienna as to the means for increasing the power of propulsion of river vessels ...... Decision taken 12. Permanent visas of the passports of the members and the personnel of the Com m ission...... Decision taken 13. Service of Orsova ...... Decision taken 14. Seat of the Commission and of the Secretariat-General...... Decision taken

Fifth Session, November 1921.

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 1. Study of the Bavarian project regarding the Kachlet ...... Decision taken 2. Approval of the operations of the Executive Committee from July 1st to November 1st, 1921 ...... Decision taken 3. Appointment of German delegations...... Postponed 4. Passage of the Cataracts by barges transformed into tanks ...... Decision taken 5. Navigation rules ...... Postponed 6. Telegraphic organisation ...... Postponed 7. Uniform statistics for Danube navigation ...... Postponed 8. Duration of transport on the Danube ...... Postponed 9. Treatment of bunker coal on steamers ...... Decision taken 10. Installation of the C. I.D. at Bratislava ...... Decision taken 11. Provision for the practical application of certain regulations of the Convention regarding the Danube statute ...... Postponed 12. Addition to the internal regulation of the Commission (Chairmanship) Postponed — 176 —

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 13. Navigation dues ...... Postponed 14. Hydrometric service. Project of service for giving information to steamers ...... Postponed 15. Principles for uniform buoying proposed for adoption on the inter­ nationalised system ...... Postponed 16. Proposals regarding the uniform kilométrage of the Danube ...... Postponed 17. Study regarding indications of hydrometric scales ...... Postponed 18. Proposals regarding the sanitary regulation of navigation on the Danube Postponed 19. Coaling service...... Decision taken 20. Budget proposal of the Secretariat-General for 1922 ...... Decision taken 21. Budget proposal of the Iron Gates for 1922 ...... Decision taken 22. Next meeting ...... Decision taken

Sixth Session, J une 1922.

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 1. Approval of the operation of the Executive Committee from November 1st, 1921, to May 15th, 1922 ...... Decision taken (a) Report on the discussions of the Executive Committee...... Decision taken ( b) Report of the Secretariat-General ...... Decision taken (c) Transfer of the seat of the Commission ...... Decision taken 2. Report of the Technical Sub-Commission on the principles for establishing a general programme for the important improvement works on the Danube ...... Postponed 3. Report of the Technical Sub-Commission on the proposals : (a) For service giving information to steamers ...... Decision taken (b) Principles for uniform buoying...... Decision taken (c) Single and uniform kilom étrage...... Decision taken 4. Tonnage regulation...... Postponed 5. Conclusions of the Telegraphic Conference at Bucharest...... Decision taken 6. (a) Navigation r u l e s ...... Postponed (b) Means suitable for decreasing the time taken for Danube trans­ ports ...... Postponed 7. Navigation dues : fa) Iron Gates dues ...... Decision taken ( b) Delays in the payments of navigation dues at the Iron Gates ... Decision taken (c) Dues payable by vessels undertaking police or supervision work Decision taken (d) Dues at present paid for vessels in transit ...... Postponed 8. Position of the C. I. D. with regard to the League of Nations in respect of navigable ways and transit ...... Decision taken 9. Suggestions of the Director of the International Labour Office regarding co-operation with river commissions for regulating the work of the personnel on vessels...... "...... Decision taken 10. Appointment of delegations of the German riparian States and their representation on the Executive Committee ...... Postponen 11. Legal position of the personnel of the delegations and employees of the C .I.D ...... Decision taken 12. The application of provisions of the Danube Statute ...... Decision taken 13. Possible resources of the C. I. D ...... Postponed 14. Project for damming the waters of the L e c h ...... Decision taken 15. Position of the personnel with regard to the transfer of the Commission the Bratislava ...... Decision taken — 177 —

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 16 Position of M. Ganssloser, third-class assistant to the Navigation Section Postponed yi\ Hydrometric bulletin ...... Decision taken 18 Journal of the Commission ...... Postponed ig' iron Gates service : (a) Changes in the personnel (retirements, appointments, etc.)...... Decision taken (b) Appointment of pilot apprentices ...... Postponed (c) Construction material (property of the material of the Freund enterprise) ...... Decision taken 20. Drawing up reports of the plenary sessions and the meetings of the Executive Committee ...... Decision taken

Seventh Session, November 1922. Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 1. Report of the operations from June 1st to October 15th, 1922...... Decision taken 2. Works : (a) Classification of the regulation of the Danube at Kaposztasmegyer as maintenance or improvement w o rk ...... Postponed (b) Preliminary work for the construction of a port projected by the Czechoslovakian Government near Zahon-Cop on the Upper Tisza ...... Decision taken 3. Navigation and Police regulation...... Postponed 4. International Telegraphic Conference at Bucarest : (a) Establishment of the Convention Postponed (b) Putting into operation...... Postponed 5. Measures taken for communicating information contained in the Hydro- metric Bulletin after it has been discontinued Decision taken 6. Treatment of navigation in transit : (a) Vessels in transit. Goods in transit on the river. Definitions in the various riparian States ...... Postponed (b) Treatment at present applied. Various taxes or dues. Goods of which the transport is subject to regulations. Monopoly goods, transit permits ...... Postponed (c) Application of the provisions of Article 23 of the Danube Statute ... Postponed 7. Means suitable for decreasing the time taken for transport on the Danube Postponed 8. The application of provisions of the Danube Statute ; (a) General provisions. Works, taxes, etc., already examined by the Special Committee of delegates ...... Postponed (b) Internal regulation of the Commission (representation of German riparian S ta te s)...... Decision taken (c) Organisation and working of the central services of the Commission : Functions. Rôle. Statute regarding employees...... Decision taken (d) Agents appointed by the riparian States. Functions, etc...... Postponed (e) Resources of the C.I.D. in order to meet its expenses ...... Postponed (f) Organisation of special services for the Iron G ates...... Postponed 9. Journal of the Commission ...... Decision taken 10. Statistics ...... Postponed 11. Current questions^regarding rthe |Iron Gates : (a) Questions of personnel. Appointments, retirements, etc...... Decision taken (b) Requests for exemption from taxes for certain categories of vessels (pontoons, floating workshops, etc.)...... Decision taken (c) Utilisation of the Tug V a sk a p u ...... Decision taken 12 — 178 —

Questions submitted for discussion : Result. 12. Budget for 1923 : (a) Budget of the Central Service ...... Decision taken (b) Budget of the Service of the Iron G a te s ...... Decision taken

E ighth Se ssio n , J u n e 1923.

Questions submitted for discussion : Result. 1. Approval of operations of the Executive Committee. Financial position on December 31st, 1922 ...... Decision taken 2. Regulation of the Danube near Kaposztasmegyer ...... Decision taken Classification of work ...... Postponed Definition of the normal state of the navigable channel...... Postponed 3. Examination of the annual programme of maintenance or improvement work and the work provided for by Article 14 of the Statute...... Decision taken 4. Delimitation of the internationalised system ...... Postponed 5. Navigation and police r u l e s ...... Postponed 6. Tonnage rules. Ships’ papers, etc...... Decision taken 7. (a) Treatment of navigation in transit ...... Postponed (b) Means suitable for decreasing the time taken for transport on the Danube ...... Postponed 8. Navigation statistics ...... Postponed 9. Appointment of German delegations ...... Postponed 10. Rules establishing the order of work of the Commission. Second reading of the reserved articles ...... Postponed 11. Application of provisions of the Danube Statute ...... Postponed 12. Resources of the C.I.D. in order to meet its expenditure...... Postponed 13. Monetary basis for drawing up the budget ...... Postponed 14. Statute of the employees of the C.I.D...... Postponed 15. Rent of building. Rent of apartments for the employees ...... Decision taken 16. Settlement of invoices for articles bought from the fund of 40,000 francs placed at the disposal of the Commission by the Czechoslovak G overnm ent...... Decision taken 17. Representation of the Commission at the Thirteenth Navigation Congress in London ...... Decision taken 18. Year-Book of the International Danube Commission...... Postponed 19. Questions regarding the service of the Iron Gates : (a) Revision of the drafting of the provisional rules for the navigation service...... Decision taken ( b) Revision of taxes for the Vaskapu ...... Postponed (c) Transformation of money reserves ...... Postponed 20. Fixing the date and place of the Ninth Session ...... Decision taken

N inth Se ssio n , N ovem ber-D ecem ber 1923.

Questions submitted for discussion Result. 1. Approval of the operations of the Executive Committee...... Decision taken 2. Statute for the personnel of the C.I.D...... Postponed 3. Internal rules of the C.I.D. : (a) Interpretation of Articles 11, 13, 1 7 ...... Postponed (b) Second reading of the reserved articles ...... Postponed (c) Position of the secretaries of the delegations of the Executive C o m m itttee...... Postponed — 179 —

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 4. Budget of the Secretary-G eneral...... Decision taken Money basis for his department ...... Postponed 5. Rent for the building of the C.I.D. and apartments rented to employees ...... Decision taken 6. Service of the Iron Gates. (a) [ Freund stone m a te ria l...... Decision taken (b) Expulsion of an em p lo y ee...... Decision taken (c) Pension for the pilot Szigeti ...... Decision taken (d) Indemnity to employees for increased cost of living ...... Decision taken 7. Budget of the Iron Gates ...... Decision taken Money basis of the Budget ...... Postponed Transformation of reserves ...... Postponed 8. Fixing the place and date of the next plenary session ...... Decision taken

Tenth Session, J une 1924. Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 1. Approval of the operations of the Executive C om m ittee...... Decision taken 2. Navigation and police rules : (a) Second reading of the headings : II. Papers necessary for permission to navigate ...... Postponed IV. Provisions applicable to rafts ...... Decision taken V. Provisions regarding vessels transporting explosive and in­ flammable materials ...... Decision taken VI. Contraventions ...... Decision taken (b) Proposals for insertion under heading VII. Special provisions. Text and form of publication of this heading ...... Postponed (c) Improvement of text of the entire rules by a drafting committee. Postponed 3. Treatment of navigation in transit : (a) Rules by which it may be decided whether the general police regu­ lations do not affect freedom of navigation in transit and the validity of any claims that may be made ...... Postponed (b) Measures regarding sanitary and veterinary protection with regard to navigation in transit ...... Postponed (c) Examination of the Serb-Croat-SIovene rules regarding Customs treatment in t r a n s i t ...... Postponed 4. Examination of the Hungarian rules regarding the control of river traffic Postponed 5. Works : (a) Classification of the w o r k s ...... Postponed (b) Form of presentation of annual programme of work...... Decision taken (c) Examination of works programmes for 1924 ...... Postponed 6. Questions concerning the Iron Gates. (a) Legal situation of Iron Gates services ...... Postponed (b) New organisation of Iron Gates ...... Postponed (c) Loan formerly issued by Hungary regarding Iron Gates 3 per cent gold 1895 and the right of administration of the Iron Gates sector of the cataracts ...... Postponed (d) Appointment or pensioning of pilots Decision taken (e) Towage service ...... Postponed (f) Transformation of reserves...... Postponed (g) Administrative questions ...... Postponed (h) Freund material ...... Postponed — 180 —

Questions submitted jor discussion. Result. 7. Appointment of German delegations ...... Postponed 8. Internal rules of the C. I. D...... Postponed 9. Rules for the personnel ...... Postponed 10. Transmission of daily observations to States below Bratislava from the service for giving information to vessels at Passau ...... Postponed 11. Fixing the place and date of the next plenary session ...... Decision taken

E leventh Session, N ovember 1924. Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 1. Approval of the operations of the Executive C om m ittee...... Decision taken 2. Financial and budget questions : (a) Budget of the Secretariat-General for 1925 ...... Decision taken (b) Budget of the Iron Gates for 1925 ...... Decision taken Indemnity for increased cost of living ...... Postponed (c) Various financial questions : Monetary basis of budget ; transformation of reserves...... Decision taken 3. Rules for the personnel of the C. I. D. (a) Organisation of the personnel, Statute ...... Postponed (b) Appointment of head of navigation service ...... Postponed 4. Navigation and Police rules : Introduction. General and final provisions ...... Decision taken II. Conditions required for navigating ...... Postponed VII. Special provisions on certain sections, including provisional rules for navigation in the Iron Gates section ...... Decision taken 5. Transmission of hydrometric information ...... Decision taken 6. Transit : (a) Directions ...... Decision taken (b) Customs rules applicable to navigation in transit in the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes ...... Postponed (c) Sanitary and veterinary measures ...... Postponed 7. Regulations for the control of river traffic in Hungary ...... Postponed 8. Special taxes imposed in Austria, Roumania and in the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes ...... Postponed Iron Gates Service. 9. (a) Legal position of the services...... Postponed (b) New organisation of the services ...... Postponed 10. (a) Accounts ...... Postponed (b) Loan formerly issued by Hungary 3 per cent bonds of the Iron Gates ...... Decision taken 11. Freund material ...... Postponed 12. Navigation accidents : (a) Sanctions to be pronounced ...... Decision taken (b) Rules of procedure in case of accidents ...... Postponed (c) Rules applicable to pilots ...... Postponed 13. Towage at the Iron Gates (a) Towage dues ...... Decision taken (b) Use of Vaskapu ...... Postponed (c) Exemption from dues ...... Postponed 14. Position of the International Commission and the navigation service at the Iron Gates from the point of view of the payment of Customs dues demanded by the Roumanian administration ...... Postponed — 181 —

T w e l ft h Session held at Strbske P leso, J u n e-J uly 1925.

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 1. Approval of operations of Executive Committee from October 15th, 1924, to May 15th, 1925 ...... Action taken 2. Method of drawing up Minutes of plenary sessions ...... Action taken 3. Method of drawing up Minutes of the meetings of the Executive Committee ...... Action taken 4. Dues: (a) On registration of bills of lading in Roumania (1 per cent tax on freight bill) ...... Postponed (b) On a Roumanian Shipping Company in A u stria ...... Postponed (c) On interior transports in the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes ...... Postponed 5. S.H. S. decree prohibiting foreign shipping companies from employing foreign staffs in their agencies in S. H. S. territory...... Postponed g. Payment to the Commission’s telegraphists and telephonists ...... Action taken 7. Insurance of {auxiliary staff of Secretariat-General : 1. Case of Madame Strejcek ...... Action taken 2. Other auxiliary employees ...... Postponed 8. Organisation of staff of C .I.D ...... Postponed 9. Invitation from Council of League of Nations to attend Conference of European States on measurements of inland navigation vessels ... Action taken 10. Veterinary protection in relation to navigation in S. H. S. Kingdom Postponed 11. Rules for control of river traffic in Hungary ...... Postponed 12. Examination of maintenance programmes for 1925-1926 : (a) Approval of programmes for 1925-1926 ...... Action taken (b) Date for examination of annual program m es...... Postponed (c) Proposition of S.H.S. as to form of presentation of annual pro­ grammes ...... Postponed 13. Form of presentation of projects for general programmes of large works of improvement ...... ? 14. Principles governing the establishment of aids to navigation ... ? 15. Appointment of pilot apprentices ...... Action taken 16. Translation of documents connected with the Iron Gates service Action taken 17. Towing service at Iron Gates : (a) Study of various methods of traction ...... Action taken (b) Decision to maintain temporarily present mode of traction Action taken (c) Decision to test cable at present in use ...... Action taken (d) Purchase of new cable for Vaskapu...... Postponed 18. Advice of arrival of barges in the Cataract Section ...... Postponed 19. Increase in Iron Gates dues ...... Postponed 20. Prohibition for S. S. Anghet Saligny to use Cataract Section Action taken 21. New organisation of Iron Gates Services by Roumania and S. H Postponed 22. Administrative matters relating to staff at Iron Gates ... Action taken 23. Salary of Chief Accountant in Iron Gates Service ...... Action taken 24. Supplementary credits in Iron Gates Budget ...... Action taken 25. Co-efficient index applied to salaries of staff at Iron Gates Postponed 26. Insurance of auxiliary staff ...... Postponed 27. Internal rules of C. I. D...... Postponed 28. Designation of German delegates Postponed 29. Resources of C. I. D ...... Postponed 30. Quotas, interest on delayed payments Postponed — 182 —

Questions submitted for discussion. Result. 31. Control of river traffic in Hungary ...... Postponed 32. Request of Dr. Hajnal ...... Postponed 33. Customs duties at Iron Gates ...... Postponed 34. Salaries of assistant engineers ...... Postponed 35. Rules for pilots ...... Postponed 36. Rules of procedure governing inquiries ...... Postponed 37. Arandjelovitch and similar q u e stio n s...... Postponed 38. Increase in rates of interest on delayed payment of navigation dues at Iron Gates ...... Postponed 39. Pensions and rewards to staff at Iron Gates ...... Postponed 40. Effect of difference between index figure and the rate of exchange in the S. H. S. Kingdom ...... Postponed 41. Revision of resolution relating to information given to navigators...... Postponed 42. Study of questions in su sp e n se ...... Po tponed 43. Date and place of next plenary session ...... Action taken 44. Conditions for depositing with Société des Banques Suisses the surplus funds obtained from receipts of Iron Gates Service ...... Postponed 45. Methods of applying Provisional Rules of Navigation at Iron Gates, raised by complaints against pilots Michel and Fabian ...... Postponed 46. Absence of pilot Herold from Service on account of illness from December 7th, 1924, to end of June, 1925 ...... Action taken 47. Method of replacing Head of Service of Iron Gates in case of illness ... Action taken 48. Revision of resolution relating to information supplied to navigators ... Postponed 49. Navigation Police Rules : Special provisions regarding navigation on the various sections of the river s y s te m ...... Postponed — 183 —

Annex X.

SUMMARY OF REPORT.

At the instance of the League’s Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit, this enquiry has been conducted by Mr. Walker D. H in e s , with the aid of Major Brehon Som ervell, of the United States Army. The report is based upon Major Somervell’s trips on the Danube from Ratisbon to Sulina and his investigations covering a period of five months, and upon Mr. Hines’ trip, accompanied by Major Somervell, on the Danube from Vienna to Sulina and return in July, and the conferences and other investigations made in the course of their visit at that time to all the Danube countries.

TRAFFIC.

There are no comprehensive traffic or other statistics for the Danube, but the investigation indicates that the Danube freight traffic in 1923 and 1924 is only about 56 per cent of the normal pre-war traffic. The first six months of 1925 show an increase of about 50 per cent over the corresponding six months of 1924, being due to a special movement of S.H.S. maize to the sea. No complete comparison could be made as to the amount of passenger travel pre-war and post-wrar, but the amount of passenger service available for travellers is greater for Austria, Czechoslovakia and Hungary than before the wrar, somewrhat less in the S.H.S. State, very much less in Roumania, and somewhat greater in Bulgaria. There has never been any regular passenger service on the Danube in Germany.

THE NAVIGATION COMPANIES AND THEIR FLEETS.

Before the war the Austrian and Hungarian navigation companies carried most of the Danube traffic, except that a part of the traffic below7 the Iron Gates was carried by Roumanian and Greek interests. This has been greatly changed. Now the traffic is divided among German, Austrian, Czechoslovak, Hungarian, S.H.S., Roumanian, French and Dutch navigation companies, and the Roumanian companies have been operating above the Iron Gates more than formerly. This makes the river far more international in its actual utilisation than ever before. The Greek boats, on account of their draught, still confine themselves almost wholly to operations below the Iron Gates. The Danube fleets as a whole are about 25 per cent more than pre-war, although the Austrian and Hungarian fleets have diminished considerably, due to parts of them having become the property of Czechoslovak, S.H.S., Roumanian and French interests as a result of the war. The port and shop facilities are in general as great as, or greater than, before the war, while the traffic is still much less. An important development is the growing use of self-propelled barges for certain sorts of goods. Already there are evidences of co-operation. The up-river companies are in a cartel to stabilise rates. The Bavarian Lloyd and Czechoslovak Company have arrangements for joint towing, joint operation ofJself-propelledibarges_and common use of some’terminals.

THE INFLUENCE OF ECONOMIC CONDITIONS GENERALLY AND PARTICULARLY IN ROUMANIA.

The post-war diminution of traffic has been largely due to the economic depression charac­ teristic of Europe, but intensified in the Danube countries by the breaking up of the wide free trade area which’ existed in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. At present this former free — 184 — trade area is cut across by the tariff barriers of seven different States, and this has seriously diminished commerce among them and promises to do so to a great extent, except so far as the situation may be ameliorated by commercial treaties among them. The making of such commercial treaties would be of distinct value to Danube navigation. Since Old Roumania normally produced cereals enabling it to supply one-third of the total traffic moving on the Danube, the ability of the New Roumania to produce and export cereals is of first importance to that traffic. But this outlook is unfavourable, because the post­ war readjustments in the enlarged Kingdom seem to have cut down production while enlarging domestic consumption, leaving for Danube transport much less than before the war.

CABOTAGE AND TERRITORIAL WATERS.

A new practice since the war is that the S.H.S. State and Roumania now exclude all foreign navigation companies from handling any internal traffic or “ cabotage ” on the Danube in their respective countries, and also from handling any traffic on certain important tribu­ taries of the Danube, such as the Save and the Bega, which are now treated as territorial instead of international waters. This throws to their navigation interests large volumes of traffic enj oyed before the war by the Austrian and Hungarian companies. The latter also criticise the new practice as diminishing the total traffic through affording less satisfactory service. The questions of right involved are partly conceded and partly disputed, and such disputes can be settled only in such way as may be found in the conventions among the States. But, apart from questions of principle, it is a practical question as to how far Roumania and the S.H.S. State may not find it in their interest to grant limited permissions to foreign companies to participate in this traffic from time to time upon carefully guarded conditions. This might considerably improve local transportation service. Bulgaria enjoys for a long distance eight times as much passenger service as Roumania on account of the latter’s cabotage policy. Already, as a matter of convenience, and without waiver of its rights, Roumania has granted foreign companies access to its ports on the Bega.

CONDITIONS OF RIVER CHANNEL.

The general conception of a minimum depth of two meters at low water frequently fails of realisation, at times for substantial proportions of the navigable season, because of obstacles which should be removed. Such removal above Vienna would be so costly that it probably could not be done except in connection with the development of hydro-electric projects. Improvements of this character would correct the present difficulties of navigation and probably be advantageous to the general economic condition of Austria. Such a project is now nearing completion at Passau in Germany and will greatly improve the condition of the river for a considerable distance. An important stretch of the river, where it is the frontier between Czechoslovakia and Hungary, can and should be improved. It is hoped that the two States can promptly co-operate to that end, because this stretch now constitutes the limiting factor in navigation between Vienna, Bratislava and Budapest. Between Budapest and Belgrade there are two points, one in Hungary and one in the S.H.S. State, at both of which correction of the existing conditions is desirable. s The most difficult stretch on the river is the Iron Gates section. The necessary depth of water is frequently not obtainable. Operation through this section is especially difficult, even with ample water, because the current prevents the handling of more than one or two barges at a time through the swifter portions. Elimination of these difficulties calls for a comprehensive study of various alternatives which are set forth in the Report. The amounts of money which would be involved are so large that the co-operation of all the riparian States would probably be necessary. This should be promptly entered upon. Complaints as to inadequate channel at Sulina, the mouth of the river, are now being corrected. The channel between the newly extended jetties was opened on July 25th, with a — 185 — depth of 20 feet, with the prospect that the depth would be restored to the old figure of 24 feet. On July 31st a depth of 22 feet had been already obtained. It is highly desirable, in the interest of all the Danube countries, for the International Danube Commission to take prompt steps to draw up a general programme for the compre­ hensive improvement of the river. This involves a determination as to how far the prospective traffic will justify the cost of any particular programme. Such an investigation will take a long time and will call for the services of competent engineers.

FRONTIER FORMALITIES.

Navigation could be substantially promoted by cutting down the amount of frontier formalities and the time required for them and by providing more adequate port facilities. The frontier formalities now involve a large economic waste, requiring tug-boats and barges to remain idle for long periods, estimated to be about 6,000 barge-days per year ; with corre­ sponding loss of time for tugs. These delays are almost entirely post-war burdens, because before the war the Danube crossed no frontier between Passau and Orsova, a distance of 1,272 kilo­ meters. In this same section there are now four frontiers and six frontier examinations. Hungary and the S.H.S. State now maintain separate stations at their common frontier involving double delay, sometimes amounting to an entire day. Both States have indicated they have no objection in principle to combining their stations, and this report urges that they come to an agreement upon the necessary details to accomplish that result. Much of the delay at the various frontiers is due to the attitude of the local functionaries. The report suggests that the riparian States would be justified in concerning themselves very actively with this situation so as to stimulate greater expedition. In these matters river shipping appears to be subjected to burdens, delays and expense which have no counterpart on the railways that compete with the river. PORT FACILITIES.

As to port facilities, numerous specific situations are discussed. One involves the diffi­ culty of the Czechoslovak Company in getting a satisfactory terminal in Vienna. This is closely connected with the Austrian difficulty in getting satisfactory assurance as to its terminal in Bratislava. The two questions should be considered together and a fair compromise arrived at. The Austrian and Hungarian companies are denied the right to use many of the port facili­ ties which before the war they owned in the S.H.S. State and Roumania. This grows out of the policy of these two States that all port facilities should be owned and operated by the State ; hence their reluctance to permit private companies to establish their own facilities. Nevertheless, there is at present a great shortage of State pontoons in Roumania and a great shortage of State pontoons and other port facilities in the S.H.S. State. Until the State can itself supply ample facilities to carry out its policy, it is suggested that provisional arrangements should be made whereby private companies could provide their own pontoons and other facili­ ties. Roumania has already indicated that it has no objection to making arrangements to let the private companies use their own pontoons, subject to eventual transfer to the State. Acting upon a general law designed to protect domestic labour, certain navigation com­ panies have been notified by the S.H.S. State that they must replace their agents and other employees with S.H.S. nationals. This law is not directed against navigation, and there is also provision in it for making exceptions. It is hoped the necessary exceptions can be made, to avoid an unfortunate precedent which might create similar hindrances in other States also. Belgrade’s port authorities subject foreign vessels to double taxation, and exclude them from certain forms of international traffic because the landing facilities are on the Save, a territorial river, and not on the Danube. The great and growing business interests of Belgrade cannot afford to have their city thus advertised as a city which has not the same freedom of access to the Danube as is enjoyed by Vienna and Budapest. The future of Belgrade is too important to admit of such a limitation^ especially since the State appears to feel that little if anything is gained as a result of the action of the port authorities. — 186 —

STATISTICS.

It is recommended that adequate statistics of Danube traffic should be provided. These will be valuable to the States and the navigation companies and will be almost indispensable in reaching a sound conclusion as to how much money can be justifiably spent in carrying out anv comprehensive programme of river improvement.

DANUBE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION.

The Report discusses the wrork of the Danube International Commission, the organ admi­ nistering the Danube Statute (which has been instituted by a convention among the States), for all the river except the maritime part below Braila. Considering the great difficulties which confronted the Commission’s work in the early years, it has accomplished substantial results. But the Commission has not yet been able to dispose of many of the most important problems which have been entrusted to its jurisdiction, and it is suggested that the practice of repeated postponements of important questions should give way to the practice of taking a definite vote upon them. The Commission must decide by a two-thirds majority, but there are probably very few questions wrhere it is not possible for two-thirds of the delegates to agree upon the broad principles, and, if so, then upon details as well.

DANUBE EUROPEAN COMMISSION.

The European Commission, which has jurisdiction over the maritime Danube from Braila to Sulina, was established in 1856. Before the war it was slow to act to prevent the formation of shoals in the channel, and, by the time it could be reorganised after the war, the shoals had seriously interfered with navigation. The Commission then proceeded with reasonable dili­ gence and has just been able to announce that the jetties have been extended in accordance with its plan, and the channel opened provides a depth of 22 feet. Roumania has complained that the shallow7ness of the channel has greatly interfered with the export and import business of Braila and Galatz. At least as much diminution of business is observable at Constanza, another Roumanian port on the Black Sea. Hence the fundamental causes cannot be connected wTith the Sulina channel, but are probably the general economic difficulties in Roumania, lessened exportable surplus of cereals, its heavy export tax on cereals and the difficulties of its railways in moving traffic. Complaint has also been made by Roumania as to the heavy dues imposed by the European Commission. The Commission has found it necessary to impose these dues, which are admittedly heavy, in order to pay for the improvement of "the channel, and there seems to be no practical alternative to this plan. Some suggestions are made as to possible economies that the Commission might be justified in taking into consideration.

EFFICIENCY OF OPERATION.

It is highly desirable, in view of the extremely difficult situation of Danube navigation, for the navigation companies to do everything in their power to improve their own efficiency. The question is raised whether they cannot secure more efficient performance of their barges and tugs than is now observable. Reference is made to the extraordinary results which have been accomplished in the United States by analogous efforts on the part of the railways. There may be room for important economies in this direction. More efficient operation would be promoted by providing special telegraph facilities along all of the navigable river. The companies should also seek to co-operate more and utilise facilities in common, such as port facilities, shop facilities and also tug-boats, so as to avoid the w'aste of capital and labour involved in needless duplication. In Austria and Hungary, especially, the existing port and — 187 — shop facilities seem much in excess of the needs of their own companies. Many of the tug­ boats probably should be replaced by modern and more economical types. The question is raised whether there is not a great field for the building up of a profitable tourist passenger traffic.

MORE CO-OPERATION ON THE PART OF STATE RAILWAYS.

The Danube, like any other transportation system, needs adequate feeders. In large part these feeders should be the railways, and therefore there ought to be rail-and-river through rates and bills of lading. A State making through rates with foreign railways loses all bene­ fits from the traffic at the frontier. When it makes through railway and river rates, the likeli­ hood is that the bulk of the traffic will move in domestic boats to final destination and the State and its nationals will enjoy the entire profits of transportation. At present, in many instances, the railways seem to work against the Danube by establishing extremely low rates via other routes. More sympathetic attention to the just needs of the river should be given by the States and should be urged by the navigation companies.

EFFECT OF DANUBE POLICY UPON GENERAL CREDIT OF THE RIPARIAN STATES.

The need of the riparian States for capital for public and private purposes is evident. It is extremely difficult to get this capital at reasonable rates. An important factor in this condition is the misgiving on the part of capitalists in other countries as to wThether a satisfac­ tory state of international tranquillity exists and wrill continue in these Danube States. The Danube conditions themselves constitute an indication one way or the other in this matter. If the States succeed in removing causes of friction on the Danube, that condition will be a favourable argument to encourage foreign capital. To the extent that friction continues in Danube matters, the condition wrill be an indication in the wrong direction.