MR. GIBSON BOWLESOn behalf of my noble Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Viscount Bury), I beg to ask the Attorney General whether compliance by British shipowners with the Order in Council recently issued as to the screening of ships' side-lights will expose such shipowners to the risk of being found to blame and mulcted in damages in any suit brought against them in the Courts of foreign countries parties to the International Regulations for preventing collisions at sea, when the question of side-lights is involved?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir C. RUSSELL, Hackney, S.)The naval advisers of the Board of Trade are of opinion that the Order in Council referred to is explanatory merely, and makes no alteration in the International Regulations for preventing collisions at sea.
MR. GIBSON BOWLESOn behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for the Kirkdale Division of Liverpool (Sir G. Baden-Powell), I beg to ask the Attorney General, in regard to the screening of sidelights by sea-going vessels, whether foreign vessels are at present legally bound by the International Regulations to screen their side lights so that the rays shall not cross the line of the ship's keel projected ahead of the slings; whether British vessels are at present legally bound by the new Order in Council to screen their side-lights so that the rays shall cross the line of the ship's keel projected ahead of the slings; and in the event of collision between a British and foreign vessel in which the question of side-lights was involved, which of the two Codes of Regulations would be held to prevail in British and Foreign Courts respectively?
§ SIR CHARLES RUSSELLTo the first question the answer is, No; to the second question the answer (subject to my previous reply given just now) is, Yes; to the third question the answer is that there are not two Codes of Regulations.