GENERAL.

PORT OF LONDON.-(LIMITS OF PORT).-We, the undersigned, Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, do hereby, under the authority of "The Customs Consolidation Act, 1876," appoint London to continue and be a port in that part of the United Kingdom called England, and do hereby declare that the limits of the said port of London shall commence at high watermark in the River Thames at Teddington Lock, in the county of Surrey, and extend down both sides of the River Thames to an imaginary straight line drawn from the north-eastern extremity of the Isle of Grain, in the county of Kent, to the pilot mark at the entrance of Havengore Creek, in the county of Essex, and shall include the islands in Havengore Creek, called Potton and Rushly Islands, and so much of the said creek and the watercourse that extends from it to the town of Rochford, and also all other islands, rivers, streams, creeks, waters, watercourses, channels, harbours, docks, and places within the before-mentioned limits contained. And we, the said Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury, do hereby annul all former limits of the port of London.—Whitehall, Treasury Chambers.-Dated this 23rd day of October, 1882.CHARLES C. COTES, HERBERT J. GLADSTONE.

PORT OF ROCHESTER. (LIMITS OF PORT).-We, the undersigned, Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, do hereby, under the authority of the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876, appoint Rochester to continue and to be a port in that part of the United Kingdom called England, and do hereby declare the limits of the said port of Rochester shall commence at an imaginary straight line drawn from the north-eastern extremity of the Isle of Grain, in the county of Kent, to the pilot mark at the entrance to Havengore Creek, in the county of Essex, and shall extend from the said north-eastern extremity of the said Isle of Grain in an easterly direction across the entrance to the River Medway, and along the coast of the Isle of Sheppy to the Lands End, in the parish of

Warden (being the boundary at the port of Faversham), and shall extend seawardly from the coast within the aforesaid limits, to a distance of three miles from low watermark, and shall include the River Medway and also the water called the West Swale, as far as an imaginary line drawn from the Elmley chapel, in the aforesaid Isle of Sheppy, to Swale church on the mainland of the county of Kent, the said line being also the boundary line of the port of Faversham, and shall include all islands, waters, watercourses, rivers, streams, creeks, harbours, and places within the said limits contained. And we, the said Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury, do hereby annul all former limits of the port of Rochester.-Whitehall, Treasury Chambers.-Dated this 23rd day of October, 1882.-CHARLES C. COTES, HERBERT J. GLADSTONE.

PORT OF COLCHESTER.-(LIMITS OF PORT).-PORT OF MALDON ANNULLED.-We, the undersigned, Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, do hereby, under the authority of the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876, appoint Colchester to continue and be a port in that part of the United Kingdom called England, and do hereby declare the limits of the said port of Colchester shall commence at the Naze Point, in the county of Essex (being the southern limit of the Port of Harwich), and shall extend from thence along the coast of the county of Essex to an imaginary straight line drawn from the pilot mark at the entrance to Havengore Creek, in the said county of Essex, to the north-eastern extremity of the Isle of Grain, in the county of Kent, and shall extend seawardly from the coast within the aforesaid limits to a distance of three miles from low watermark, and shall include all bays, channels, roads, bars, islands, harbours, havens, rivers, streams, creeks, and places within the said limits contained, except the islands in Havengore Creek, called Potton and Rushly Islands, and so much of the said creek and the watercourse that extends from it to the town of Rochford, and which are in the Port of London. And we, the said Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury, do hereby annul all former limits of the Port of Colchester, and all former limits of the Port of Maldon, and declare Maldon to be no longer a port for Customs purposes.-Whitehall, Treasury Chambers, dated this

23rd day of October, 1882.-CHARLES C. COTES, HERBERT J. GLADSTONE.

Casks

CARGO IN WATER-TIGHT PACKAGES.-Mr. R. B. Forbes, of Boston, U.S., advocates the employment of water-tight packages for certain classes of valuable goods on board ship. He says:-"Supposing that all goods were packed in water-tight bales, boxes or casks, and that every package would float if left to itself, the amount of water which could under such conditions be found in the cargo spaces would at the worst only bring the ship down a foot or two; but suppose the system which I advocate should be completely arranged and all goods be packed in square or nearly square boxes or bales, the amount of water coming in would be very much less than if the goods were packed in casks. Still I should, as a general rule, prefer casks, because they would have nearly their original value when unpacked, whereas bales and boxes would not. would be available for return goods. In the days of the East India Co., all the goods sent to China were in water-tight bales; and valuable goods were sent to the Phillipine Islands packed in copper cases; or, I should say, in wooden boxes lined with copper carefully soldered. At first sight, it would seem that this was costly; but it was not so, for the reason that the copper paid no duty and was worth more than it cost. I assume that if we can afford to import Bordeaux wine, costing from 60 dollars to one hundred dollars a cask, we certainly can afford to put goods of from two to ten times those values into the same sort of packages. I assume that insurers would be glad to take risks free from claims for partial loss on goods packed as I suggest for very much less than when packed as is now the custom and subject to a claim for partial loss. This saving to the merchant would pay for the better packing ten times over. It would be easy to cite statistics to show that the large amount of valuable goods coming from Europe to this country and to other countries would warrant packing in watertight packages. The theory of water-tight packages is well illustrated in China where every chest of tea is lined with lead; the object being to preserve the flavour of the precious herb; but, not one chest in ten is really tight; raw silk and silk piece goods are packed in bales and boxes quite pervious to water."