HL Deb 11 February 1904 vol 129 cc1005-7
LORD MUSKERRY

My Lords, I rise to again call the attention of His Majesty's Government to the Board of Trade Circular Instructions to the Superintendents of Mercantile Marine Offices relative to the loading-port clause in the articles of merchant ships; to point out further cases where this circular has caused shipowners and shipmasters great expense and inconvenience; and to ask whether they have yet received the opinion of the law officers of the Crown, to whom this matter was submitted over eight months ago. This is a subject which I introduced to your notice in the early part of May last year I would not trouble you further upon it, but for the serious fact that, although eight months have elapsed, nothing whatever appears to have been done towards removing a prolific source of trouble and expense to shipowners.

Perhaps to some of your Lordships this loading-port clause in ship's articles may be unfamiliar; therefore I may say that it is simply a clause whereby the crew of a ship in their agreement with the master agree to remain on board the ship until her arrival at the port in the United Kingdom where she may load. For instance, a ship may perhaps be bound to Hull to discharge her cargo, proceeding then to, say, Cardiff, to load, this being generally assumed as the completion of the voyage. The Board of Trade, however, voluntarily issued circular, instructions to their superintendents to the effect that if the crew demand to be paid off at the port at which the ship discharges her cargo, they cannot be legally compelled to carry out their own agreement in the shape of remaining by the ship until she arrives at her loading port. This has given ships' crews an opportunity to harass shipowners and shipmasters, and to cause them great and needless expense.

In my remarks last year I quoted a case occurring in the Thames Police Court, where the legal decision was given directly against the terms of the Board of Trade circular. Since that case happened there have been several of an identical character. One decision, I believe, has been given in favour of the men, but this only shows the unsatisfactory nature of the whole position. With the exception of this one case the legal decisions have been all the other way. The action of six seamen against the captain of the steamer "Concord" at Aberdeen was dismissed by Mr. Sheriff Begg, the defendant being allowed £1 1s. expenses. At Salford a seaman sued the captain of the steamer "Alfalfa," but the stipendiary said he had little doubt about the merits of the case, and the summons was dismissed. At Birkenhead a seaman of the "Petunia" sued the master of the vessel, but the justices described the loading-port clause as "an old and accepted form of agreement," and, in adopting what they called a "common-sense view," dismissed the case. Commonsense seems to be absent from some of the Board of Trade circulars. There is also the case of a fireman of the steamer "Lobelia," who at Londonderry sued the master in a similar manner, and this summons also was dismissed.

I think I have shown to your Lordships sufficient to indicate the mischievous results which have accrued from the official circular issued by the Board of Trade. Not only is it an unwarrantable interference with our shipping interests, but it is throwing dust in the eyes of seamen, who, very mistakenly, thinking they can place absolute reliance on the pronouncements of the Board of Trade, take action in a Court of law against their superior officers. In every case but one this has subjected them to expenses and costs which they can ill afford to bear. I hope to hear that the opinion of the law officers of the Crown on the subject has now been received—it is quite time it was—and that it will result in the withdrawal of the circular which has been so emphatically condemned by shipping interests. I would also draw your Lordships' attention to the extraordinary action of the Board of Trade in issuing this circular without having first asked the opinion of the law officers of the Crown.

LORD WOLVERTON

My Lords, the Board of Trade have not been unmindful of this important matter, and on the advice of the law officers decided to take steps to obtain, by proceedings to which the Board of Trade would be a party, an authoritative decision on the validity of the Loading-Port Clause referred to in the circular instructions of the Board. After careful consideration, they decided that a friendly test case would be the best course, and, with that object in view, they invited representatives of the Shipping Federation to attend a conference. The Board of Trade are perfectly aware of the decisions quoted by the noble Lord, but, having regard to the great importance of the matter, desired a decision of the High Court. The Shipping Federation have, however, recently notified the Board that the clause in question has been altered, and the clause as altered is under the consideration of the Board.

House adjourned at twenty-five minutes past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.