reater
progress in this period than the ancient city on the Scheldt. The
following figures for the years 1904 and 1905 show that its trade is
still rapidly increasing:--

+------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
| | Exports. | Imports |
| Year.+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+
| | Tonnage. | Value. | Tonnage. | Value. |
+------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+
| 1904 | 6,578,558 | L71,349,678 | 8,427,894 | L79,539,100 |
| 1905 | 7,153,655 | L80,032,355 | 9,061,781 | L91,194,517 |
+------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+

The growth of its commerce in recent times may be measured by a
comparison of the following figures. In 1888, 4272 ships entered the
port and 4302 sailed from it. In 1905, 6095 entered the port and 6065
sailed from it--an increase of nearly 50%. In 1888 the total tonnage was
7,800,000; in 1905 it had risen to 19,662,000. These figures explain how
and why Antwerp has outgrown its dock accommodation. The eight principal
basins or docks already existing in 1908 were (1) the Little or
Bonaparte dock; (2) the Great dock, also constructed in Napoleon's time;
(3) the Kattendijk, built in 1860 and enlarged in 1881; (4) the Wood
dock; (5) the Campine dock, used especially for minerals; (6) the Asia
dock, which is in direct communication with the Meuse by a canal as well
as with the Scheldt; (7) the Lefebvre dock; and (8) the America dock,
which was only opened in 1905. Two new docks, called "intercalary"
because they would fit into whatever scheme might be adopted for the
rectification of the course of the Scheldt, were still to be
constructed, leading out of the Lefebvre dock and covering 70 acres.
With the completion of the new maritime lock, ships drawing 30 ft. of
water would be able to enter these new docks and also the Lefebvre and
America docks. In connexion with the projected _grande coupure_ (that
is, a cutting through the neck of the loop in the river Scheldt
immediately below Antwerp), the importance of these four docks would be
greatly increased because they would then flank the new main channel of
the river. When the Belgian Chambers voted in February 1906 the sums
necessary for the improvement of the harbour of Antwerp no definite
scheme was sanctioned, the question being referred to a special mixed
commission. The improvements at Antwerp are not con