§ 68. Mr. HOUSTONasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller whether the Shipping Controller is aware of the requisitioning by the Admiralty of the steamers belonging to or chartered by the firm of Messrs. John Holt and Company of Liverpool, West African merchants and shipowners, whereby injury has been inflicted upon this firm; whether he is aware that this firm complained to the Shipping Controller in August last of the treatment they had received and the undue consideration shown to rival firms and competitors, and that their West African business was practically ruined; whether he is aware that the ss. "Thomas Holt" was requisitioned by the Admiralty in 1915 and is still under requisition; that the ss. "Johnathan Holt" was lost, and the ss. "Ussa," bought by this firm 20th June, 1916, at a high price, was requisitioned by the Admiralty on the following day and subsequently sunk off Cherbourg on 3rd May, 1917, whereby loss was inflicted upon Messrs. John Holt and Company; that the ss. "Aquarius," under time charter to Messrs. John Holt and Company, was requisitioned under the Liner Requisition Scheme when it came into force, but that Messrs. John Holt and Company were allowed to run this steamer in their West African trade until 1st June, 1918, when she was taken away from them by the Ministry and handed over to another firm; that the ss. "Balmore" also came under the Liner Requisition Scheme, but in May last was taken away from Messrs. John Holt and Company and diverted into another trade; and, in view of the injury done to Messrs. John Holt and Company, whether he will consider the position of this firm with a view to more considerate 607 treatment, so that they may not be driven out of their trade to the benefit of their rivals and competitors?
§ Sir L. CHIOZZA MONEYThe statements made in this question as to the requisitioning of vessels belonging to or chartered by Messrs. John Holt and Company are substantially correct, except as regards the ss. "Aquarius." In this case the vessel was transferred in June, 1918, from liner service in the West African trade for employment on full Government service, and was not handed over to another firm to operate. As regards the "Balmore," this steamer was diverted from the West African trade in May, 1918, in consequence of representations made by the Admiralty that the vessel could not maintain the sea speed necessary to meet convoy requirements in the West African trade. It is recognised that the trading position of Messrs. John Holt and Company has been prejudiced, in common with many other interests, owing to the removal of their vessels from their ordinary services, but the action taken by the Shipping Controller has been unavoidable. I think I ought to add that there has not been in any respect unfair discrimination against the firm.
§ Mr. HOUSTONIs the hon. Gentleman not aware that more recent comers into the African trade than Messrs. John Holt have received much more favourable treatment?
§ Sir L. CHIOZZA MONEYNo. The Shipping Controller has had the advantage of an interview with Mr. Holt this morning, at which I was present, and it is certainly not the case that Mr. John Holt as a shipowner has been discriminated against in any way unfairly. I think he himself recognises it.
§ Mr. HOUSTONI also have seen Mr. Holt. Did he not inform the hon. Gentleman and the Shipping Controller that his shipowning business had been practically ruined by the withdrawal of all these hips, though it had not affected his merchant business?
§ Sir L. CHIOZZA MONEYMr. John Holt, like other shipowners, has suffered by the loss of his ships in this War. As the hon. Member knows, the Shipping Controller is incapable of unfair discrimination in matters of this kind. He has made Mr. Holt a promise, which will be faithfully observed at the earliest possible moment.
§ Mr. HOUSTONBut the fact remains that other people have received more favourable treatment.
§ Sir L. CHIOZZA MONEYNo; as I have said twice, it is not the case that this firm has been unfairy discriminated against.