CORRESPONDENCE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIII, Issue 204, 28 August 1902, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE STTTP/PING AND SEAMEN'S . BILL.

(To the E<}Sir, —In your issue -_ dday^ appears a report of a meeting of the shipowners of Auckland, whose vessels are trading in river limits. These gentlemen object strenuously to the manning schedule of the Shipping and Seamen's Act being applied to their vessels. It would be easy to understand the wail of the shipowners if this abolition of river limits made a sweeping change in the mannng of their boats. As a matter of fact, with the exception of one or two of these vessels, all of them are now manned beyond the requirements of the Shipping and Seamen's Act. This fact proves—(l) That even while they are outside the provisions of the Shipping Act, these vessels have to carry more men than the Act requires in order to work their vessels; (2) that if the abolition of the river limits were effected tie shipowners would not have to place more men on their vessels; (3) that the fact of these vessels being overmanned beyond the requirements of the Act, proves that they have to take on a larger numiber of "all sorts" to do the work that a lesser number of bona fide seamen could do. Under the present condition of things it is only necessary for a man to spend twelve months in Rotorua Lake as a rouseabout on a launch to entitle him to come to Auckland and get a river master's certificate. Armed i with this he could, if he found a shipowner fool enough to trust him, take charge of a vessel like the Mararoa, and trade between Auckland and Whangarei. Of course it would not matter whether the man's incompetence succeeded in drowning a thousand people or so who were ill-fated enough to be passengers on the vessel under his control (or rather supposed to be), the fact that he would not draw as much wages as a competent skipper, and that his crew of "all sorts" would work day and night without pay wouW help to swell the dividends of the company in whose employ he was. Let us consider vrttet accidents have taken place, within these "alleged" river limits within the last two or three years. On November 26, 1901, the "Star" contains a decision of the Magistrate, assisted by two practical assessors, on --it-lie collision between the Patiki and the Taniwha. The president is there reported to have said:—"lt was clear that the Taniwha was fully manned. As to the Patiki, he could not hold her so, as there was no one on board capable of taking the helm if anything happened to the master; but there was no statutory provision except that she must carry a master and an engineer." Here we have a case where a vessel is allowed to go to sea with only one man capable of handling the helm. If anything happened to him, well the Patiki could go on its own untroubled way until it bumped up against another vessel or some wandering obstacle. Then there might be a crash and a plunge, and perhaps a few more dead to be counted as the sea's victims. The s.s. Stella collided with and sank the Waitemata in river limits, the Royal Tar was also lost in river limits, after safely negotiating th« trip to South America several times. The Rose Casey bumped into the Kapanui in river limits. It is true that some of these vessels were manned by competent men, but others were not.

What kind of weather do these vessels with their overmanned crews of "all sorts'* encounter in river limits? The s.s. Waihora, an intercolonial boat, manned by competent men, has had to run back from Tiritiri for shelter. On April 14 last the "Star" reported the passage of the s.s. Wellington to Whangarei, when heavy seas swept over her, and dislodged the boats, and threatened the lives of the master and the man steering. On May 2 you reported that the same vessel had to run back to Whangarei Heads for shelter. The s.s. Stella has also had to run back to Whangarei for shelter, and so recently as tfie 11th of August the "Herald" reported several colliers weather-bound at Whangarei Heads, and could not face the tumultuous seas of these socalled smooth-water river limits'. Furthermore, I have heard sea-going" skippers report that the weather encountered between Auckland and Whangarei has been worse than that met with in the Tasman Sea. -The ship-owners, with an. admirable solicitude for their men, complain that the Act will be made retrospective, and will throw a lot of men out of employment. This concern of theirs is very touching, but I think that it might act as a balm to their feelings to know that Acts of this nature are not made retrospective, and that the abolition of river limits will not, in my opinion, throw any man out of work. The ship-owners' tears, shed on behalf of the country settlers, appear also to be a little of the crocodile type, for a vessel was laid up a few days ago, and on Tuesday last the settlerl of Opotiki and Whakatane were crying out for means of transport for their maize. The demands of the Seamen's Union are: First, all they ask is that all vessels carrying passengers in river limits be compelled to man their vessels with competent men, according to their passenger certificate, and we feel confident that the House of Representatives will do justice to the travelling public and those that earn their lwing by going down to the sea m ships.-I am etc., J. K. KNBBN.

Secretary Seamen's Union. ["Fair Play" and "A Reader" write in a similar strain, putting forward several of the arguments which are advanced by Mr. Kneen in the foregoing letter.—Ed E.S.]