MARITIME CONFERENCE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 6177, 8 April 1907, Page 5

MARITIME CONFERENCE

A LONG SITTING SEAMEN'S QUARTERS. DISCUSSION ON AUSTRALIAN REQUIREMENTS. OPINIONS DIVIDED. By Tolegraph-Preas Association-CoDyright. LONDON, April 5. At tho Navigation Conference, Sir William Lyne, Federal Minister for Trade and Customs, contended that it was necessary to reserve tho absolute rmlit of Australasian Governments to make a survey of a vessel if they think it necessary. . ... Then, was a long discussion relative to whether any regulation regarding accommodation should be retrospcctivo. Sir William Lyne and Mr V. M. Hughes, for Australia, were very emphatic on the necessity of bringing British vessels up to Australian renuirements. * Mr Hughes said tho proposed Australian Dill provided that if a slnx>1 vrhdit’s and a surveyor’s certificates showed that tho required structural alterations were too costly, or vere impracticable, an accommodation of only 7‘2 cubic feet per seaman might be accepted, provided ventilation and sanitation were otherwise satisfactory. Sir Joseph Ward, Premier of New Zealand, did net agree to a regulation regarding accommodation being retrospective. ASir William Lyne and Mr Belcher (penmen’s representative from New Zealand) agreed that it was better that such regulation should bo retrospect live. Sir Joseph Ward made a suggestion that if it was impossible to make the alterations reasonably, tho Minister should decide what should be done, subject to right of appeal to tho law courts.. Sir William Lyne said Australia was not going, without a big struggle, to surrender her right to deal with this matter. Mr James Mills (Now Zealand delegate, and chairman of directors of tho Union Company) advised that tho Minister should exercise discretion where structural alterations were impossible. Mr Dugald Thomson (Australia) believed tho Australian Parliament would meet shipowners reasonably in the matter. THE MANNING SCALE. COLONIAL REQUIREMENTS AND FOREIGN SHIPS. r (Received April 7, 5.39 p.m.) LONDON, April 6. At yesterday’s sitting of the Conference, Sir William Lyne, with a view to preventing crimping, moved that no seaman bo permitted to engage as an able seaman on board any British ship who could not show ho. was entitled to that rating. The motion was amended by-the addition of words to tho effect that the period of sea service be three years. This was carried. Referring to the adoption of tho manning scale for seamen and firemen, Mr Hill (member of the P. and O. directorate) explained that, owing to the enormous increase’ of laboursaving appliances, .a- manning scale based on tonnage, coal consumption, and horse-power would prove a delusion, and act as a serious check on tho introduction of labour-saving appliances. He opposed the manning scale . for officers and deck-hands, though Australia’s right to make a manning scale for colonial ships was not. questioned. Sir William Lyne’s motion also provided that officers must lie British subjects. Tho Imperial delegates abstained from voting on tho motion. Mr Hughes contended that the Conference ought to approve of tho principle of a manning scale for all British ships, and ho gave notice of a motion approving of the adoption of a manning scale for all British ships, thus raising the question of the scope of tho Conference’s powers. Sir William Lyne proposed that no person should be employed as an officer on board any British ship registered in Australia or engaged in coastal trade who is not thoroughly conversant with tho English language. Tho motion wa=. carried, though Mr Hughes asked that a vote be not taken until tho Conference had decided his motion regarding the powers? of tho Conference. Mr H. L. Smith, of the Board of Trade, who was chairman, ruled that the Conference was not empowered to discuss what tho British mercantile marine should do. Mr Hughes interjected: How, then, is it possible to secure uniform legislation!' Mr Hughes characterised as amazing the declaration by Mr Lloyd* George that there was no prospect of any alteration in British navigation laws for another twelve or twenty years.

Mr Smith asked that the- awkward question be postponed. He contended that it Mas absolutely impossible, ■with the United Kingdom’s population, to maintain the present mercantile marine without foreigners and lascars. Owners were often ignorant as to the ports their ships would visit, and thus wore unable to comply with the divergent standards and requirements which must act as toll-bars to the British marine and as a bounty to foreigners if some disabilities were not imposed upon them. It wes doubtful if the proposed wages obligation would bo advantageous to as higher charges for oversea traffic would be inevitable if oversea ships were compelled to abandon the Australian coastal traffic. It also would be impossible to frame a uniform bill of lading.

Respecting the retrospective character of the regulation, regarding accommodation. ventilation, and conveniences, Sir Joseph Ward moved that the colonial limit for accommodation should apply to existing vessels except in those £ascs in which the Minister was satisfied that structural alterations were unreasonable, the shipowner having the right in all cases to appeal,to the law.

After a long discussion, a motion by Mr Norman Hill, representing the shipowners, was substituted, and carried, providing that the Australasian Governments, instead of imposing now conditions involving structural alterations in vessels built prior to the Enactment of such conditions, should re'quire only that existing vessels which tho local authorities consider unhealthy should be brought into a sanitary and healthful condition to tho satisfaction of the authorities. Mr W. M. Hughes argued that tho law ought to apply to all ships, but if

structural alterations were practically impossible, tho Minister might grant exemption -ogarding cubic space, provided tho sanitary arrangements and ventilation complied with the new regulations. If necessary. Parliament would probably allow old ships two years in which to comply with tho requirements of the law. On a division being taken, Messrs Hughes, Havelock, and Wilson dissented from Mr Hill’s motion.

NEWSPAPER OPINION.

SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS WITH AUSTRALASIA. LONDON, April o. Tho ‘Morning Post” says that sine© it is impossible for the mercantile marine, competing as it is with foreigners throughout the world, to generally adopt Australasian standards, the only solution seems to bo to mako < special arrangements for tho Australasian portion of tho voyage and for Australasian coastal trade. Britishers would find ample compensation in tho promised preference, which is thus the basis of colonial policy, domestic and Imperial. ME J, A. MILLAR'S VIEWS. AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND TO WORK TOGETHER. CHRISTCHURCH, April 6. Tho long cable message sent from London in regard to the Navigation Conference was read with great interest by the Minister for Marine, Mr J. A. Millar. When ho read Sir William Lyno’s remarks he said, "I would very much like to see Australia following on Now Zealand lines- Our coast-wise Trading Bill applies to our own coasts, but it will not apply to other vessels until the other colonies reciprocate/' Sir William Lyne, in a memorandum ho read at the Conference, said that Australian requirements make it necessary that foreign ships should be subjected to all the, requirements of British ships, and that the proportion of British seamen ought to be increased until the foreigners are reduced or entirely eliminated. Sir William also suggested that the Australian coasting trade should b© restricted to vessels complying with Australian conditions, preference being given as far as possible to British ships engaged in tde coastal trade, and that the shipping laws and shipping requirements should bo uniform throughout the Empire. “There is no doubt that this is the only effective way of increasing British trade generally, and protecting our own trade/' Mr Millar said. “It is only a matter of some years when a fairly large percentage of the people of this colony will have to follow the sea. This fact is not very apparent at present, while our industries are increasing and arc able to absorb a large portion of tho rising generation, and while land settlement is doing its share; but when those means of absorption have reached their maximum the sea will claim a percentage of our boys. We should, therefore, take steps to increase the percentage of Britishers in both our homo and coastal Vessels. It is a more serious question than most people seem to realise. While there is a demand for a better defence of tho Empire, the Empire's vessels, even in the navy, are compelled to carry a largo proportion of other than British-born subjects. Anyone can see what the effect of this may be on the nation that carries about three-quarters of the world's trade. X think "that Sir William Lyne is right. Australia and New Zealand will work well together, as the proposed Australian Navigation Bill is similar to New Zealand's Slipping and ‘Seamen's Act. Both are the- result of conditions which have arisen on our coasts, and which prevent the growth of locally-owned shipping and the employment of our own men."