not good, that it would necessitate raising | be inseparable from any measure on the the roadway at Constitution Hill, and subject. The first of the three clauses the making of a deep cutting, while it which he had to lay before the House would besides interfere to some extent provided that every British ship regiswith the use of the Park for pedestrians. tered after the 1st of January, 1876, Now, it was, he thought, possible to hit should be conspicuously marked with upon some scheme which would not be lines of not less than 12 inches in length open to all those objections, and he and one inch in breadth painted longitrusted, therefore, his noble Friend tudinally on each side, so as to show the would act upon his suggestion. position of every deck above water. LORD HENRY LENNOX said, he This clause was not to apply to ships was very much obliged to his right hon. employed in the coasting trade, or in Friend for the kind assistance he had fishing, or to yachts. There were in the given him in the matter, and could as- 2nd clause provisions with regard to the sure him he would do nothing with re- marking of a load line, a statement of spect to it without the most careful the position of which would be required consideration. The Vote under discus- from the owner of every British ship sion was intended to obtain from the before entering his ship outward on any House of Commons its sanction for voyage, showing the distance in feet some steps to be taken before next year and inches between the load line and to remove the block which was created the deck next above it, while he would by the traffic at Hyde Park Corner, and also be bound to enter a copy of the the great object he had in view was the statement in the articles of agreement separation at that point of the business with the crew and in the official logfrom the pleasure traffic, which at pre- book. There were, he might add, cersent caused great inconvenience. He tain Amendments which he proposed to had obtained the assistance of two noble make in the clauses as they stood on the Lords in the other House of Parliament, Paper. In compliance with the wish who had consented to act with him as a of the hon. and learned Member for sort of Committee to look into the sub- Durham (Mr. Herschell), he had altered ject, and he hoped his right hon. Friend the date at which the Bill was to come would join them and give them the ad- into operation to November, 1875, invantage of his advice. In that way he stead of January, 1876. The right hon. hoped to be able next year to carry out Gentleman concluded by moving the satisfactorily the object which they both following clause:had in view. Resolution agreed to. Subsequent Resolutions agreed to. UNSEAWORTHY SHIPS BILL-[BILL 274.] (Sir Charles Adderley, Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.) CONSIDERATION. (Marking of deck lines.) "A. Every British ship registered on or after November one thousand eight hundred and seventy-five shall before registry, and every British ship registered before that day shall, on or before that day, be permanently and conspicuously marked with lines of not less than twelve inches in length and one inch in breadth, painted longitudinally on each side amidships, or as near thereto as is practicable, and indicating the position of each deck which is above water. "The upper edge of each of these lines shall be level with the upper side of the deck plank next the waterway at the place of marking. "The lines shall be white or yellow on a dark ground, or black on a light ground. “Provided, That— "(1.) This section shall not apply to ships employed in the coasting trade or in fishing; and 66 Bill, as amended, considered. SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY said, he had to propose the insertion of clauses in the Bill which had been suggested in Committee, and which seemed to have met with general acceptance. They were clauses relating to loading and deck lines taken from the first Go-within a British port of registry at any time (2.) If a registered British ship is not vernment measure, which, unhappily, before the date named, she shall be marked had to be withdrawn ; but, although they as by this section required within one month had been placed on the Paper only after her next return to a British port of registry within 48 hours, a number of Amend- subsequent to that date." ments already accumulated around them, and, indeed, the tendency to become smothered with Amendments seemed to MR. MAC IVER said, that although an Amendment stood on the Paper in his name, which was substantially a new clause dealing with the whole question of load line, he was actuated by no spirit of hostility to the proposals of the Government, and could, he thought, dispose of his Amendment in a very words. He had listened with most respectful attention to the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister, the other evening, in regard to load line, and with every word of the right hon. Gentleman he (Mr. Mac Iver) heartily and entirely concurred. In expressing that concurrence, he believed he expressed the views of those who had the best facilities for becoming practically acquainted with the subject, and who had given these questions serious attention. The way to prevent overloading was to compel the shipowner to declare plainly and distinctly what he intended to do, and to indicate such intended load line upon the ship in such manner as to afford reliable and visible evidence in regard to the actual facts. He asked, however, if the Board of Trade clauses under discussion carried out this view? He (Mr. Mac Iver) ventured to say they did not; but that they would permit the alteration of a load line with too great facility, and in such manner as to confuse and destroy-so far as ordinary witnesses were concerned-all readily available evidence in regard to depth of loading. This might suit some people; but it would not suit those shipowners who meant right by this question, and he had received letters and telegrams on the subject, with an extract from only one of which he would trouble the House. It was from a shipowner of high standing, and was as follows: : He (Mr. Mac Iver) was quite sure this was not the intention either of the Prime Minister or of the President of the Board of Trade. He had no desire to press the particular words of his own Amendment upon the Government; but that he thought he had pointed out a real defect in the Board of Trade clauses, which the right hon. Gentleman who had charge of the Bill would, he hoped, see his way to remove. He believed his brother shipowners in the House of Commons VOL. CCXXVI. [THIRD SERIES.] were equally desirous with himself that there should be an honest solution of the load line question; but he thought it was only in regard to steamers that there existed any necessity in regard to such legislation. The loading of sailing vessels was more generally understood; but, as regarded steam vessels, there was so much diversity of model, quality, and general arrangements, that he (Mr. Mac Iver) thought there was a real necessity for dealing with steam vessels upon the principles so well explained the other evening by the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister. There was another objection to the Board of Trade clauses, also one of detail, but on which he wished to say a few words. Was it worth while, he asked in a Bill which was tentative-brought forward to be in operation only for one year-to provide expressly that British vessels should be disfigured with discs and lines in the particular form set down? All that appeared to him (Mr. Mac Iver) to be necessary was that the marking should be intelligible; and he thought it might be well to leave to the Board of Trade and the shipowners some discretion on the subject. He thought the prescribed manner of marking would, in some instances, result unsatisfactorily, and in others be a needless disfigurement. MR. NORWOOD said, he did not wish to examine the Government's clauses hypercritically; but it was his duty to point out that they differed materially from his own, which the Government had substantially accepted. The Government had not given sufficient consideration to the difference between the density of fresh water and that of salt at about 23 per cent; and this was rather water, and this difference was estimated a serious margin, considering the competition there was between British and foreign shipowners, and among British shipowners themselves. The clause and his own both provided for a disc; the clause proposed a larger disc than he did; but this clause omitted the scale of feet and inches which would enable surveyors and managers to make allowance for the difference between fresh water and salt water, and in the absence of which there would be continual disputes between master, seamen, and surveyors. In his Bill the power of changing load lines was carefully guarded; it was necessary it should be, U because the load line formed the basis of agreement between the merchants, the insurers, and all the parties interested; and the omission of the provision would render it necessary that the articles of agreement should lapse if the load line were changed. In his clause the mark could not be altered during a voyage, nor during the existence of articles, and in that way full protection was afforded to seamen. His scheme was devised in the interest of the seamen rather than in that of the shipowner. The Government had omitted that clause in his Bill which provided that the seaman's liability to fine or forfeiture should lapse if the load line were altered, and this would have been a great safeguard. As the Government had accepted his proposals so partially, he could not be responsible if they did not work satisfactorily. MR. EVELYN ASHLEY, whose name was on the back of the Bill of the hon. Member for Hull (Mr. Norwood), objected to the facility which the Government's clauses afforded for the changing of the load line without the sanction or even the knowledge of the seamen, and said that the Government, by the way in which they had resisted proposals relating to load lines, deck cargoes, and grain cargoes, and by the way in which they had emasculated the provisions they had accepted, seemed determined to sail as close to the wind as they could. SIR JOHN HAY begged to thank the President of the Board of Trade for his concessions on the subject of the load line. MR. GOURLEY was of opinion that there ought to be two fixed load linesone for immersion in salt water and the other for fresh water. The weight of a cargo in a ship sailing in each made a very perceptible difference. As a matter of fact, however, seamen did not like vessels being marked in this way. SIR ANDREW LUSK said, that unless care was taken in making these arrangements foreigners would obtain such an advantage over us that we should gradually lose the shipping trade of the country. He should like to know why coasting vessels were to be exempt from this clause, and why they should not be required to have a load line? Half the losses and disasters occurred in the coasting trade. LORD ESLINGTON said, the load line would be part and parcel of the contract between the owner and his seamen. The next clause, however, said that if the owner or his agent wished to alter the maximum load line, they might do so. It would be in the power of an agent in a foreign port, therefore, to contract his owner, so to speak, out of the Bill. MR. SHAW LEFEVRE regretted that the clause had not been proposed in Committee, and he thought that as it had only just now been introduced MR. E. J. REED said, there was no the whole responsibility of it should be doubt that the scale of feet and inches thrown upon the Government. He would proposed by the hon. Member for Hull | therefore advise his hon. Friend the would afford a ready means of making a Member for Hull not to endeavour to comparison between a salt water and a amend it. He further thought, however, fresh water load line. It was rather that the point as to an agent abroad alstrange that the House should present tering the load line should be considered the spectacle of shipowners pleading for by the Board of Trade. greater protection to seamen than the Government seemed willing to give. Surely this could be nothing more than an oversight? He hoped the Government would make such additions to the clause as would give seamen the protection they desired. He could not sit down without thanking the President of the Board of Trade for the courteous manner in which he had endeavoured to meet their wishes in reference to a load line. SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY thought that he should be able to meet the views of the hon. Member for Hull. MR. MUNTZ said, the measure was only of one year's duration, and the House would see by experience how it worked. He could not see why vessels plying between Newcastle and the Thames should not have a load line, as well as vessels plying from London and Hull to Hamburg, seeing that the voyage was quite as dangerous. MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK said, that if hon. Members would consult the Register they would find that the losses in the coasting trade were exceedingly small as compared with the foreign and colonial trade. Clause, as amended, agreed to, and added to the Bill. SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY, in moving the next clause, said, the object of sub-section 7 was to enable the shipowner when his ship started from a foreign port to alter the load line. The season, the and the circumstances cargo, of the voyage were very often entirely different when the ship left a foreign port on her homeward voyage. right hon. Gentleman then moved the following clause: (Statement of load line.) The "B. With respect to the marking of a load line on British ships, the following provisions shall have effect: "(1.) The owner of every British ship shall, before entering his ship outwards upon any voyage for which he is required so to enter her, mark upon each of her sides amidships, or as near thereto as is practicable, in white or yellow on a dark ground, or in black on a light ground, a circular disc, twelve inches in diameter, with a horizontal line eighteen inches in length, drawn through its centre; "(2.) The centre of this disc shall indicate the maximum load line in salt water to which the owner intends to load the ship for that voyage; (3.) He shall also, upon so entering her, insert in the form of entry delivered to the collector or other principal officer of customs, a statement in writing of the distance in feet and inches between the centre of this disc and the upper edge of each of the lines indicating the position of the ship's decks which is above that centre; "(4.) If default is made in delivering this statement in the case of any ship, any officer of customs may refuse to enter the ship outwards; 66 (5.) The master of the ship shall enter a copy of this statement in the agreement with the crew, before it is signed by any member of the crew, and no superintendent of any mercantile marine office shall proceed with the engagement of the crew until this entry is made; "(6.) The master of the ship shall also enter a copy of this statement in the official log-book; (7.) When a ship has been marked as by this section required, she shall, unless the marks are altered as hereinafter provided, be kept so marked until her next return to a port of discharge in the United Kingdom. If the owner of a ship or his agent wishes to alter the maximum load line to which he intends to load the ship at any port out of the United Kingdom, he may do so at any time before any cargo is taken on board at that port by causing similar marks to those by this section required to be made at a higher or lower level on the ship's sides. In the event of any such alteration being made the master of the ship shall forthwith enter in the official log-book a statement with respect to the new marks corresponding to the statement by this section required with respect to the original marks, and deliver a copy of this statement, if the port is in a British possession, to the principal officer of customs at the port, and if the port is a foreign port, to the British consular officer at the port, and if he makes default in such delivery, shall incur a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds: of any ship until she has been marked, as by "(8.) This section shall not apply in the case this Act required, with the lines indicating the position of her decks." MR. SHAW LEFEVRE thought the Amendment was a very practical one. MR. D. JENKINS objected entirely to the load line being altered during the voyage, because this would destroy the value of the load line altogether. Great pressure would often be put upon a captain abroad to alter the load line. A captain ought not to be exposed to this pressure. MR. BATES recommended that the power to the owner's agent abroad to alter the load line should be altogether omitted from the clause, because he did not think that a captain when abroad should be allowed to alter the load line. The provision as to the owner or his agent altering the load line abroad was negatived. Clause, as amended, agreed to, and added to the Bill. SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY moved the following clause :— (Penalty for offences in relation to marks on ships.) "C. Any owner or master of a British ship who neglects to cause his ship to be marked as by this Act required, or to keep her so marked, and any person who conceals, removes, alters, defaces, or obliterates, or suffers any person under his control to conceal, remove, alter, deface, or obliterate any of the said marks, except in the event of the particulars thereby denoted being lawfully altered, or except for the purpose of escaping capture by an enemy, shall for each offence incur a penalty not exceeding one hundred pounds. "If any of the marks required by this Act is in any respects inaccurate, so as to be likely to mislead, the owner of the ship shall incur a penalty not exceeding one hundred pounds." Clause agreed to, and added to the Bill. MR. GOURLEY moved to leave out Clause 3, and insert the following clause: : (Cargo of grain, &c.) "From and after the first day of October one thousand eight hundred and seventy-five all British vessels over two hundred tons register, when laden with grain, corn, rice paddy, pulse, seeds, nuts, or nut kernels, shall carry at least one-third of the cargo in bags, sacks, or barrels, and placed on the top of the bulk cargo, or have the cargo stowed with shifting boards, bulkheads, or otherwise. "When laden with less than two-thirds of the aforesaid descriptions of cargo, then the same shall be secured in the same manner as if laden with a full cargo, unless the vessel have her cargo completed with wool, hemp, cotton, wood, or other cargo. "The master of any British ship who shall knowingly allow any cargo or part of a cargo to be shipped therein for carriage contrary to the provisions of this section, shall for every such offence incur a penalty not exceeding two hundred pounds." SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY suggested certain verbal alterations which would then render the Amendment unnecessary. The hon. Member said, the clause was substantially the same as one in the original Bill of the Government. MR. RATHBONE thought the seamen ought to have the same right of action in respect of unseaworthiness as the owner of the merchandize. MR. NORWOOD was of opinion that the relations between the shipowner and the seaman ought not to be dealt with in this piecemeal manner. SIR ANDREW LUSK hoped the Government would not embark on this subject at present. MR. E. J. REED believed the insertion of the clause would add very much to the satisfaction with which the Bill was received by the seafaring community. LORD ESLINGTON was afraid the House would be much disappointed with the effect of Clause 3 in preventing the loss of life at sea, in grain-laden British ships. From information he had obtained ŠIR CHARLES ADDERLEY thought to-day, he found that of 48 grain-laden the feeling of the House generally was ships in British ports of call yesterday in favour of the clause, and, as it was morning only 14 were British. No other copied from his own original Bill, the European States regulated the loading Government, of course, regarded it as a of its ships by law, neither did America, and he was afraid that by this legislation we should be giving a tremendous impetus to foreign trade without in any way securing the lives of the seamen. MR. EVELYN ASHLEY observed, that the very important and interesting figures laid before the House by the noble Lord would be treasured up for use in another Session in the event of the House being then told that this legislation had driven British ships out of the grain-carrying trade. Clause negatived. MR. SHAW LEFEVRE moved the insertion of the following clause : (Liability of shipowner to crew.) "In every contract of service, express or implied, between the owner of a ship and the master or any seaman thereof, and in every instrument of apprenticeship whereby any person is bound to serve as an apprentice on board any ship, there shall be implied, notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary, an obligation on the part of the owner of the ship to the master, seaman, or apprentice, that the owner of the ship, his agents and servants, shall use all reasonable efforts to insure the seaworthiness of the ship for the voyage at the commencement thereof, and to keep her in a seaworthy condition during the voyage. "Provided that nothing in this section shall make the owner of a ship liable for the death of or any injury to a master, seaman, or apprentice belonging to any ship when caused by the wrongful act, neglect, or default of a seaman or apprentice belonging to the same ship, in any case where he would not otherwise be so liable." fit and proper provision. The effect of it would simply be to bring seamen within Lord Campbell's Act. In a recent case it had been decided that the shipowner was not bound, in relation to the though he was under a statutory obligaseaman, to keep the ship seaworthy, tion to provide him with medicine. This He thanked the hon. Member for movwas an unsatisfactory state of things. ing the clause, and hoped it would be agreed to. MR. GOURLEY was understood to remark that it might be impossible at sea to keep the vessel quite seaworthy. SIR HENRY HOLLAND pointed out that all the clause required in that case was reasonable efforts. Clause agreed to and added to the Bill. MR. MAC IVER moved an Amendment on Clause 1, with the view of limiting the number of additional surVeyors to be appointed by the Board of Trade to three. He wanted to see the general working of the Act placed in competent hands, and objected to an indefinite number of new surveyors of unknown qualifications with absolute powers. He thought additional powers were less necessary than that the Board of Trade should be enabled judiciously to exercise the powers they had; and that this could best be done by strengthening the Department in London. A few |