C. CROUCHEE.j

I 9_

3

than fifty miles apart shall have at least one officer beside the master, such officer holding a certificate not lower than that of only mate in the case of a foreign-going vessel, or mate in the case of a home-trade vessel." 38. Briefly give your reasons ?—My reason for it is that most of the owners of vessels of over 50 tons are carrying certificated masters, and I think that all vessels of over 50 tons and running over fifty miles should have a certificated mate as well as the master, because they are at sea in the night-time and the moment the master leaves the bridge there is danger to navigation, and there should be two competent men on board, one to take charge of the deck when the other is resting. We feel that it is right that the law should compel owners to do this, because if they complied strictly with the Act we feel that there would be many more accidents than there are through having incompetent men on the vessel. Many of the owners have certificated mates as it is, although the law does not provide for it. I suggest that subsection (c), "If the ship is a foreign-going ship and carries more than one mate, then with at least the first and second mate duly certificated," be amended by leaving out the words " and carries more than one mate." There is no doubt that foreign-going intercolonial ships should be compelled to ca.rry two mates. The master may be required at any moment to be on deck for the safety of the ship. Therefore we think it only right that he should have the time off, so that he may be called at any emergency, and have the first and second mates keeping watch. Another suggestion is that subsection (d) be struck out altogether. This is necessary to be consistent with the principle as to the river limits. My association feels that these river limits should be restricted to the five miles or harbour entrances, because it is really ridiculous to note the way in which the limits are worked. A man may come down from the country who has never seen salt water and take a position as ticket-holder on a ferry-steamer, or he can hire a launch 10 ft. long, set the engines going, and after a year of that work, or ticket-taking, he can get a certificate, which will entitle him to take the " Gothic " from Cape Colville to Bream Head, a distance of eighty miles, so far as the law is concerned. We think the river limits at Auckland should be restricted to Bangitoto Beacon. These men do not know the rule of the road in many instances. Collisions have occurred by such incompetent men being left in charge of the deck. I shall be glad to supply the instances where these accidents have occurred. I know an instance where a man with a river certificate has gone outside of Auckland Harbour bound for Tiritiri, and brought up on the mainland, and when asked if he had a compass replied, " What is the use of having a compass if you cannot see Tiri ? " I have seen some of the most ridiculous things happen to men in harbour with river certificates. I saw a man the other day in Auckland Harbour who was not attending to the rules of the road—in fact, he knew nothing about it—and nearly ran another vessel down; and I know one man who is in charge of an Auckland ferry-boat who a year ago was driving a baker's cart. He had never been on sea before that. There is no doubt the river limits ought to be restricted, or the Act should apply to all vessels where trading within river limits. It is utterly ridiculous that a man with a river certificate should have the power to take charge of the " Gothic." I propose a new proviso to section 22 : " Provided that every holder of a second mate's foreign-going certificate should be entitled to serve as a mate of a home-trade vessel if he is of the age required for 'a home-trade mate." The reason is that the certificate is much higher, and we think that if he holds a higher qualification than that of a home-trade mate he should be entitled to take the position of a home-trade mate in a home-trade ship. I propose that section 52 be struck out to be consistent, as it applies to river limits. Section 121, subsection (b), I suggest be amended by inserting the words "mate and" after the word "each " in the first line. That would make it that the mate and engineer shall be provided each with a cabin to himself, or there might be an additional paragraph, "That all mates up to at least three shall have separate rooms, which shall be located away from water-closets, et cetera." There is no doubt that if one deck officer is entitled to a cabin the other should be also entitled. Where two officers are in a cabin belonging to both one cannot have the privilege of bringing his friends in, as the other is equally entitled to come in, no matter what you are doing. My association thinks that should apply to deck officers. We know there are cases where second cabins can be given, but the owners will not do it. Section 122 also applies to river limits. We desire that section 155 be struck out. 39. Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones.] For what reason ?—My association feels that an official log to be kept by the engineer is not required, seeing that the master keeps the official log in which all entries can be made concerning all departments of the ship; and if two heads are to be set up on the ship who are two distinct authorities there cannot be any discipline. We do not know that this provision would do this, but it might lead to it. We do not see why there should be any other official log on the ship than that of the master. 40. The Chairman.] Can the engineer now make an entry on the log ?—The captain can make the entry. 41. He can, but can he refuse to make it ?—I do not think so. Ido not think he can refuse to make any entry required by the head of the engine department. 42. Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones.] That would cause friction. The captain is master of the ship. The engineer only keeps the log so that it may be of use in official inquiries. We want ah official log which does not interfere with the captain's powers at all ?—We do not think it is right that the captain should have to go and see the engineer's log if he wants to. Supposing the engineer refused to show it to him ? 43. We should provide for that. The log is only to keep an authentic record of what takes place in the engine-room ?—My association objects to it because it is setting up two heads. We propose that sections 161 to 165 be struck out. With regard to yachts, we feel that yachts, the same as mission ships, should be in charge of competent men. They may be as large as 1,000 tons, and we do not think it is right that they should go about with incompetent men in charge.