LORD MUSKERRYMy Lords, I rise to put the Question standing in my name, viz., whether a deputation consisting of representatives of the General Council of the Bar, the International Law Association, the Committee of Lloyd's, the Chamber of Shipping of the United Kingdom, the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce, the Liverpool Steamship Owners' Association, the North of England Steamship Owners' Association, the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce, the Glasgow Shipowners' Association, and the Hull Chamber of Commerce and Shipping, has urged upon the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the necessity of His Majesty's Government being represented at the forthcoming Interna- 928 tional Maritime Conference at Brussels, in order to, among other things, promote greater uniformity in the maritime law of different nations; whether His Majesty's Government have declined to accede to the proposal, and, if so, for what reasons; also, whether, in view of the weight of public opinion on the subject, and its great importance to British shipping, His Majesty's Government propose to assist in any way in promoting uniformity in the maritime law of different nations.
Before dealing with this question I should like to give notice that I propose to ask the noble Marquess what protection the British flag is supposed to confer on its subjects, or others who are on board a vessel flying the British flag. My reason for doing this is that I have always been under the impression that though Custom House officers are allowed—
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The Earl of HALSBURY)I would point out to the noble Lord that he is now transgressing the Rules of Order.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThe noble Lord has given notice of a Question which he proposes to ask on a future day, and is beginning to give arguments upon it. That is clearly out of order.
LORD MUSKERRYThen I will proceed with the Question standing in my name on the Paper. When putting this notice down I had not seen the reply sent by the noble Marquess to the International Law Association. It is a refusal to be represented at this International Maritime Congress, and I quite acknowledge that there may be very good reasons for the noble Marquess's decision, but I would ask him to consider one point in the matter. As you know, whenever I have brought anything before your Lordships' House in the shape of precautions for safeguarding lives of men at sea I have always been met with the argument—and I suppose I shall continue to be until things are altered—that to adopt them would be placing our 929 shipowners in an unfair position in competition with foreign nations who do not adopt them. I do not know what your Lordships think of that argument, but, in my opinion, it is extraordinary that because other nations do not take precautions for the safety of the lives of their subjects we in England should not do so, but should wait until they have joined in taking those precautions. It seems to me that there may be a possibility in this Maritime Congress, and in other similar congresses, of the British Government approaching other nations purely from a humanitarian point of view, and seeing if they will not join in an international arrangement for remedying what has not been denied is a great risk, not only to our own seamen but to the seamen of every other country on the high seas.
§ THE MARQUESS OP LANSDOWNEMy Lords, it is the case that I had the honour of receiving some few weeks ago a deputation representing the important public bodies enumerated in the noble Lord's Question, and that the object of that deputation was to urge upon His Majesty's Government the necessity of their being represented at the forthcoming International Maritime Conference at Brussels. It is also the case that after consideration and inquiry I felt it my duty to inform the members of that deputation that His Majesty's Government did not propose to take part in the proceedings of that Conference. The reason which led us to that decision was this: in view of the great magnitude of British shipping interests we did not consider that it was desirable that this country should take such a part in a conference of the kind proposed as might have the effect of in any way committing us to measures adopted by other countries whose interest is infinitely smaller than ours, but whose representation upon such a conference would be equal to our own. That is a consideration which, I believe, has, on previous occasions, induced the Government of the day to abstain from taking part in similar inquiries. While I say that, I readily admit that we recognise the great importance of endeavouring to arrive, as far as possible, at uniformity in the maritime law of nations. In such matters, for example, as the law 930 in regard to collisions, the salvage of ships, or pilotage, it is clearly desirable that the laws of different countries should, as nearly as may be, correspond; and, therefore, if it should result from the discussions of this conference that any proposals are made with that most laudable object, the noble Lord may rest assured that we shall be prepared to examine those proposals in the most friendly and considerate spirit.