INTERNATIONAL SHIPOWNERS’ CONFERENCE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18465, 28 January 1922, Page 6

INTERNATIONAL SHIPOWNERS’ CONFERENCE.

SAFETY AT SEA. APPROVAL OF THE HAGUE RULES. IFbox Ode Own Corbespondent.) . LONDON, November 30. At the International Shipowners’ Conference, held last week, representatives from Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Prance, Germany, Holland, Italy, Japan, Norway, Spain, Sweden, the United States of America, and Great Britain, took part. New Zealand was not officially represented, but Sir James Mills (Union Steam Ship Oo.) attended. The conference Was ' held under the auspices of the Chamber of Shipping of the United Kingdom, of which Sir Owen Philipps, M.P., is president. In _ welcoming the delegates, Sir Owen described the conference as the first of the kind ever held, and it had become inevit able. In recent years, and more especially during the last few years, as a result of the war. there had been a, growing tendency towards co-operative organisation, not only nationolly, but internationally. It was evident in the actual conduct of shipping business, as well aa in other great industries which had v the growth and strength of the organisation of labour, both national and international, had been particularly noticeable. Nations, like individuals, had shown a greater tendency to co-operate to mutual advantage. At no time in the history of world trade had it been more important to observe that, in provrding the sea-carrying services of the world, ’ they should be guided, not only by considerations of safety and efficiency, but also by considerations of economy. Each consideration was fundamental, and if they lost sight of any_ oqe of those objects they would fail to achieve - the others. [Discussing surplus shipping. Sir Owen declared that if Governments and peoples resolved to do away with even one-half of the present artificial restrictions on trade and commerce, there was no doubt there would be employment for a greater number of steamers than there was at present; and this would at onoe result in employment being given to an enormous number of men who were now waiting for work. Unfortunately one of the aftermaths of the war was go number of people appeared to think there was no neosasity to work anything like so hard as they did in days gone by. This was one of the after-war myths that must be cleared away before general prosperity and good times could return. THE HAGUE RULES. Speaking to a resolution moved by himself on The Hague rules, which affirmed that freedom of contract lay at the root of all successful tradlo and commerce, Sir N. Hill said it was the principle cm which all shipowners acted. They believed in freedom of contract, but they became convinced that if , restrictions were to be imposed on the “fPbwnecn it would be in the interests of all that those restrictions should be the same m all ports and in all trades. "I am satisfied,”_be said, “that The Hogue Rules arc a substantial improvement on the Harter and Dominions Acts, and that they are an improvement on any Act of Parliament that would have been prepared to carry into effect the report of the Imperial Shipping Committee. _ I am satisfied on these points, not merely in the interests of the shipowners themselves but in the interests of interna- , tional commerce as a whole.” If they did adopt The Hague Rules it must be on the footing of their not only taking but also giving the full benefit of each and all of those rules. Charge as they were able for the services they rendered, but in return for the freights they received they must- give ■to the very utmost the services that the rules imposed on them. That was the basis on*whioh the negotiations had proceeded from first to last with the cargo interests, end he was convinced that it was only on that basis that not only traders and- the shipowners, 1 _ but also the producers end consumers in the world would be able to reap the benefits that were to be derived from the settlement of a controversy which had lasted far too long. - FREEDOM OP CONTRACT. After speeches by other delegates on The Hogue" Rules, a resolution was passed that “the interests of trade and commerce arc best served by full freedom ,of contract, unfettered by State control, but that, in view of the almost unanimous desire manifested by merchants, bankers, and underwriters for tho adoption of The Hague Rules, this conference is prepared to recommend them for voluntary international application, and if and so far as may be necessary fer adoption by International Convention between the maritime countries, Italy and Japan reserving the right to raise questions on the ralo which prohibits the shipowner fixing a limit of liability below £IOO per package.” Sir A Sutherland moved and Mr WeetfalLarsen seconded a resolution on the carriage of deck cargoes, which was adopted. This stated that it was desirable that international rules governing the carrying of deck cargoes of wooden goods should be adopted, and that, for tho purpose of achieving this, a committee, consisting of shipowners belonging to the maritime nations concerned, to appointed to consider tho various systems now in force and to make a recommendation. Mr Walter Chambers moved, and Captain G, Okuyama (Japan) seconded, a motion, which was adopted:—“That the time ia opportune for tho introduction of international load line regulations,” and that “a committee be appointed to investigate and determine the form of regulations capable of international acceptance.” POLICY OF UNRESTRAINT. An important subject of discussion was tho subdivision of passenger vessels. Sir K. Anderson (past-president of the Chamber of Shipping) said that, if there was one thing moro than another which public policy required it was that owners and (builders should have tho utmost liberty in' tho development of the design which secured the maximum of safety compatible with commercial requirements. If maritime traffic, passenger as well as : cargo, was to be large and progressive it must be both cheap and immune from restraint. Ships being themselves a marketable commodity it would go far to paralyse their transfer from one flag to another if such transfer, owing to diversity of regulations, involved extensive structural alterations in the vessel sold. The case lor international uniformity was unassailable. Dealing with the Convention of 1914, he said that of all the signatories to the Convention not one after the lapse of sevenyears had yet finally ratified and given effect to its terms. There could be no question, therefore, as to the unfavourable light in which the Convention was regarded by the Governments which were its authors. As to regulations, Sir Kenneth said both the ' shipowner and the rest cf the- community desired safety, the maximum of facilities, and the minimum of cost, as the best avenue to increased intercourse and expansion of world trade. It was absolutely necessary that people ohon—travel, and the problem, therefore, was to provide tho maximum of safeguards at a cost which'the passenger could afford to pay. He moved that a committee be appointed to consider and report in duo course on the manner in which the (Convention should be modified. This was seconded by Mr Dan Brostom, Sweden, supported by Mr A. W Bibby, and finally carried. LIFE SAYING APPLIANCES. Tho Chairman initiated a discussion on life-saving appliances and radio-telegraphy at sea. He said the Convention of London originated out of the circumstances which ottended the inquiry into the Titanic disaster. Shipowners were anxious to co-opcrate in evolving a system of regulations which would not only be practicable but efficient, and in that task the British shipowners were prepared to do their share. Sir A. Anderson submitted a resolution, that the conference approved of certain principles, and named in the resolution, as the basis of any further consideration cf that part of the problem of safety of life at sea, which more particularly related to the life-saving appliances. Tho resolutions set out that safety of life at sea “depends upon the care of the navigator and upon the typo and design of the vessel much more than upon life-saving appliances.” In regulations providing for boats and other life-saving appliances, it was essential that the safety of the vessel itself should not be impaired and that her decks should not be unduly encumbered, and that prompt handling of those ■boats which were adequate for all but extrkdinary and exceptional disasters should not be hampered by the provision of additional boats. The resolution farther provided that ocean-going passenger vessels should carry life-saving appliances for all on board, which should consist of both boats and buoyancy apparatus, the number of boats to bs the greatest which could be carried under davits with dw regard, to the safety of the vessel and the prompt handling of such boats. WIRELESS IMPROVEMENTS, A* to wireless telegraphy, the resolution stated it was essential that a free market in installations should be maintained so long as merchant, ships wore compelled to ■ carry wireless, and that shipowners should be left complete freedom to deal with improvements or amplification of wireless installation?. The resolution further urged that, as it had already been proved that the attempt to maintain constant communication by tinman agency could not be made effective, an automatic alarm device should os socn as practicable be approved and permitted for -wireless operating to take tho place of tho human watchers, a a iwovidcd in Aikido 34 of Convention 1914, and. finally, that the legal obligation on ehips which, were compelled to carry wireless should be limited to the efficient operation of wireless for liieeavißC emergamoji that » limited kso*-

ledge of -wireless sufficient for these life-sav-ing duties should be a qualification for a certificate to be held by a member of such ship’s company. Sir Alan mentioned that in 19 years to 1911 there wore carried across the Atlantic 9,500,000 people, and 85 people lost their lives from marine lessee. That was as near complete immunity as they could safely get. Then came the loss of the Titanic, and they tried to build up a wall of regulations that there chould bo no “more drownings. After that, during four years of war, wo had more losses from drowning than the world had ever known in the same time before.