§ (3) Where a person lands in the United Kingdom in contravention of this Act, the master of the ship or the pilot or commander of the aircraft from which he lands shall, unless he proves to the contrary, be deemed to have aided and abetted the offence.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI beg to move, to leave out Sub-section (3).
It is rather contrary to our legal practice to conclude that a person is guilty of an offence unless he is proved innocent. You have to prove his guilt; otherwise he is considered to be innocent. This is going directly contrary to that. You now suggest that where a person lands in the United Kingdom the master of the ship or the commander of the aircraft shall be deemed to have aided and abetted the offence, which I consider is a very unfair Clause to put in an Act of Parliament. There are certain penalties for breaking this new law already, and it is quite competent for the Home Secretary to proceed against the unfortunate captain of a steamer or pilot of an aircraft who has unwittingly carried over an alien who had not got permission to land. Here 570 you say that where a stowaway lands, at once the master of the ship can be haled up and proceeded against for aiding and abetting. During the War the number of rules and regulations hampering the unfortunate captain of a merchant ship have been increased out of all reason. Every Act that comes on the Statute Book now has something hampering and harassing the unfortunate seafarer, and here is yet one more. Take the case of the master of a ship who is just going to leave Rotterdam or Copenhagen for a British port. All his work is cut out with his clearance, his health ticket and seeing to his ship being ready, and so on. He has to see the Custom House officers and the police officers, his time is fully taken up, and his officers are busy getting passengers' luggage, securing everything for sea, and so on. It is a big ship carrying perhaps 1,000 souls, and amongst them are one or two people who have no permission to land. This unfortunate master is guilty of aiding and abetting. The whole spirit behind this is absurd. I do not know whether this is a brain wave of the Government or one of its aiders and abettors below the Gangway.
§ Sir H. NIELDIt is in the Order in Council.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYIt is a brain wave of the Government. I am not surprised, for many of these Orders in. Council, are hurriedly put together and contain very questionable provisos. Then, of course, we are legislating for the commander of the aircraft as well. Apparently, he also is going to be made a criminal because someone lands from his airship. About that I should not like to express any opinion, but about the master of a ship, this is a hampering, pin-pricking, unnecessary Clause. I do not think anyone here is going to accuse the captains of British ships of having any desire to introduce undesirables into this country. I hope the Clause, which is contrary to British ideas of jurisprudence and justice, will be left out. and that, at any rate, shipmasters will be relieved from further anxiety under this Bill.
§ Mr. SHORTTThis Sub-section is not in the least contrary to the practice or the spirit of British jurisprudence. There are many precedents for provisions of this description.
§ Mr. SHORTTNo, in ordinary normal times. It is not the case that a man has to prove himself innocent of a charge made against him. What is proved is the fact that someone has landed who had no business to land. It is proved as a fact that he came from a certain ship, of which the defendant was the master. Such provisions are constantly put into Bills. We have them in many Acts. It is very necessary and perfectly fair, and it does not in any way go contrary to the spirit of our criminal jurisprudence.
§ Amendment negatived.