§ MR. HAVELOCK WILSON (Middlesbrough)I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that a delegate of the Shipping Federation, Limited, at Cardiff, has been convicted for demanding remuneration from Greek and Turkish seamen who had been shipped on board of vessels at a lower rate of wages and in place of English seamen who had refused to serve at such low rate; if he is aware that the same practice is carried out at the ports of Liverpool, Shields, London, and other places whore the Shipping Federation have offices established; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that this con-duct inflicts serious hardships on married resident seamen in the ports; whether it is consistent with the provisions of Section 146, Sub-sections 1, 2, and 3, of "The Merchant Shipping Act, 1854," for persons to supply seamen who are not in the constant employ of the owners of the vessel; and whether steps will be taken by the Board of Trade with a view of commencing proceedings against the agents of the Shipping Federation aforesaid for supplying men to vessels in contravention of the sections of the Act before mentioned?
§ MR. MUNDELLAAn agent of the Shipping Federation was convicted on the 4th instant at Cardiff for demanding, contrary to the provisions of Section 148 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854, remuneration from two Arab seamen for providing them with employment. I am not aware that the same practice is carried out at other ports, but if any instance is brought under my notice I will deal with it. It is a legal question whether agents of the Shipping Federation are, or are not, within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act, persons in the constant employ of the owners, members of the said Federation. But the Board of Trade have not considered it their duty to institute prosecutions when seamen have been supplied by men acting bonâ fide as such agents, nor 1813 would they institute proceedings against bonâfide agents of the Seamen's Union. The fact that the Board of Trade have adopted this principle does not preclude the Seamen's and Firemen's Union from instituting proceedings under the Act.
MR. J. H. WILSONI should like to ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is not aware that it is a fact that an agent of the Shipping Federation was convicted in Glasgow in 1890 and fined £20 for supplying seamen, and whether it is not also a fact that an agent of the Shipping Federation has been convicted at Hartlepool for demanding payment of seamen?
§ MR. MUNDELLAI am not aware that these things have occurred, but if any person demands payment of seamen for providing employment for them he comes under the section of the Act.
MR. J. H. WILSONNot being satisfied with the answer of the right hon. Gentleman, I shall take the opportunity after question time of moving the Adjournment of the House.