Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Navigation - Bill - Royal Commission - Final Report of

Download PDF Download PDF

19 0 7.








Presented by Command; o1·dered by the Senate to be printed, 4th Septembe1·, 1907.

(Co.t bj Paper-Preparation, not given; 950 copies; appl'Oxintate cost of printing' anrl puhilshing, £36.J

Printed and Published for the Govnnnrwr of the of AusTRALIA I'! J. :l't:lla, Acting Government Printer for the State of Victoria.

No. 114.-F.l0492,


C) :<

" ;:;:. <> 1::: :< ;;· " ;,. ... .. '


Commonwtaltk of Australia.

EDWARD, by the Grace of God, of the Utzited Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and of tke Britisk Dominions beyond the Seas, King, Defender of the Faith, Emperor of India.

TO our trusty and well-beloved The Honorable vVILLIAM MoRRIS HUGHES, our Minister of State jot External Affairs; The Honorable DUGALD THOMSON, Member of the House oj Representatives; The Honorable WILLIAM KNox, Member of tlze House of Represen­ tatives; The Honorable LITTLETON ERNEST GROOM, ;}!ember of the House of Represen­ tatives; RoBERT STORRIE GUTHRIE, Esquire, Member oj ' the Senate; Tlze Honorable

HUGH DE LARGIE, Member of the Senate; Tlze Honorable JAMES MACFARLANE, Member

of the Senate; The Honorable GEORGE BERTRAi'

KNOW ye that we do, by these our Letters Patent, appoint you to be Commissioners to the Bill for a)!.

Act relating to Navigation and Shipping, introduced into the Senate, and to inquire into and report upon its

provisions, and any matter incidental thereto; and we appoint you the said vVn.LIHr MoRRIS HUGHES to be the Chairman of the said Commissioners; and we direct that at any meeting of the said Commissioners three Commis· sioners shall be sufficient to constitute a quorum, and may proceed with tlze inquiry intrusted to you under these our Letters Patent notwithstanding the absence of the other Commissioners; and we further direct that in tlze

event of the absence of the Chairman from any meeting of the said Commissioners, the Commissioners present may appoint one of their number to act as Chairman during such absence; and we further direct that in the event of the votes given on any .question at any meeting of the said Commissioners being equal, the Clzairma11, if present, and if the Chairman is not present, then the Commissioner appointed to act as Chairman in his absena,

shall have a second or casting vote: And we require you, with as little delay as possible, to report to our

Governor-General in and over our said Commonwealth the result of your inquiries into the matters intrusted to you by these our Letters Patent.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF we have caused these our Letters to be made Patent, and tht stal of our said Commonwealth to be thereunto affixed.


WITNESS our right trusty and well-beloved HE:-iRY STAFFORD BARON NoRTHCOTE, Knight Grand Cross· of the Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint Knight Grand Commander of our Most Eminent Order of the Indian Co'mpanion of our Most Honorable Order of the Bath, Governor-General and Com­

mander-in-Chief in and over our Commonwealth of Australia, at Melbourne, this twenty-ninth day of June, One thousand 11iJu hundred and jour, and in fourtle year oj our rtign.


By His Excellency's Command,




Report of the Royal Commission on the Navigation Bill 7

Minority Report; re Manning and Coastal Trade and M.S.L. Conference Resolution 9 ... 39

Minority Report re 44

Minority Report re M.S.L. Conference Resolutions 1 and6 44

Appendh A . . . 45





B ...

c ...

D ...

E ...

F ...









To His Excellenc'lj the Right Honombfe HENRY STAFFORD, BARON NoRTHCOTE, Knight Grand G_ross of the Most Distinguished OTde1· rif Saint Michael and Saint Georf(e, Knip:ltt Gmnd Commande1· of the lllvst Eminent Order of the Indian Empire, Companion oj the

Most Honorable Order cifthe Bath, Governor- Geneml and ComJnander­ in- Chief of the Commonwealth of Australi(L.

MAY IT PLEASE YouR ExcELLENCY-We, your Commissioners, appointed on the twenty-ninth day of June, One thousand nine hundred and four, "to examine the Bill for an Act relating to Navigation and Shipping," and to "inquire into and report upon its provisions, and any matter incidental thereto," having presented to Your Excellency in our Interim Heport our recommendation in respect thereto, and having now also duly considered the Report of the Merchant Shipping Legislation Conference, held in London on

26th March, 190 7, and subsequent dates, and having heard the matters therein set forth, explained by the Chairman, the Honorable W. M. Hughes, and the Honorable Dugald Thomson, two Members of the Commission and Delegates to that Conference, beg to present this-our Final Report.

Your Commissioners cannot refrain from expressing the satisfaction they feel nt the general indorsement of the recommendations embodied in their Interim Report by the Conference; and also at the fact that so me of the chief of these have been incorporated in the recent Merchant Shipping Act Amending Act of 1906.

Your Commissioners, therefore, lay before Your Excellency, as their Final Report, their Interim Report, together with such modifications, additions, and observa­ tions, as seem to them, from the Heport of the Conference in London, to be desirable. In the course of the inquiry, your Commissioners visited Melbourne, Sydney, K ewcastle, Adelaide, Brisbane, Fremant1e, Perth, Albany, Hobart, and Launceston, and personally made such inspection of vessels as seemed likely to assist in their labours. The number of witnesses examined was 163. Of these, the official

witnesses numbered 33; representatives of employers, 22; representatives of employes, 41; representatives of commerce, 3:.!; others, 35. The number of sittings for the purpose of taking evidence was 80, and a considerable amount of time was devoted to the preparation and consideration of this Report.

Your Commissioners endeavoured, as far as possible, throughout the inquiry to follow the arrangement of subjects adopted in the Navigation Bill. The evidence tendered not only covered all the matters dealt with in the Bill, but also questions not there touched upon. In most cases, however, the witnesses confined themselves to a few subjects with which they were particularly acquainted.

Your Commissioners, after mature consideration, decided to accept only evidence given orally before the Commission, which could be tested by such cross­ examination as seemed necessary. Valuable information received in other ways has, however, not been ignored, and in cases of special interest is included in the

Appendices. ·

Owing to the very wide range of inquiry, and the number of sug-gested altera­ tions and additions to the Bill made by various witnesses, which it has been found impossible to deal with in this Report, your Commissioners have deemed it advisable to re-draft the Bill. Your Commissioners had hoped to have dealt with the Bill

mentioned in their Interim HPport drafted by the Chairman, based upon evidence given before the Commission-a copy of which is forwarged for Your Excellency's perusal --hut this they regret they have not found it possible to do. In respect to the Resolutions passed at the Merchant Shipping Legislation

Conference, the recommendation of your Commissioners is that Resolutions 1-24 be adopted (vide Appendix F). From certain of their Resolutions some of ·your Com­ missioners have dissented. Particulars of their dissent, and also observations on the Resolutions, are set forth in Appendix F.



In regard to those matters which were recommended in their Interim Report as suitable for consideration at the l\lerchant Shipping Legislation youe

Commissioners desire to point out that, with respect to the desirableness of extending preference to ship-owners awl British producers (to which reference is made in Section 18 of our Intel'im Report, and agaiu in Section 20, Clause 45a ), this matter was brought up at the Conference by the Chairman of our Commission, the Honorable

'V. M. Hughes, but it was held by the President of the Conference to be more par­ ticularly a subject \vithin the scope of the Imperial Conferenee, then sitting in Londo1:, nnd your Commissioners understand that the Imperifll Conf(·rence did sub­ sequently deal with the matter.

In regard to extending the benefits of the "\Vorkmen's Compensation Acts to seamen (to which rcfercllce is made in Section I, Sub-section (b), Clause I 0, of our lntBrim Heport, as a matter with which the Merchant Shipping Legislation Conference should deal), it will be seen by reference to Appendix F that this question has been

dealt with in Hesolution Hi of the Report of that Conference. As to the question of whether the North Atlantic mark should not apply to ships leaving Australia, -via Cape Horn, and whether it is advisable to have a light load line for ships in ballnst (v£de Section 12 and Section 20, ClAuse 45 \fl) of Interim Report), on this matter the Conference decided ns set forth in Hesolntion 17 of the

Report (vide Appendix F). Your Commisnioners recommend, in order to encournge the employment of British seamen on Anstraliau ships, and to bring our legislation into harmony with that of Great Britain (vide Hesolution 8, A ppontlix F, and 1 i of the Merchant

Shipping Act Amendmeut Act of 190G ), thRt provision be m11de in the Commonwealth Navigation Act, that no person should he employed on any vessel i·egistered in Australia who is not-(a) A British subject, and

(b) Thoroughly with the English language.

Under their respective headings we deal with- 1. Decline of British seamen 9

(a) Causes for decline . . lO

(b) Suggested remedies 11

· (r.) Accommodation 11

(n.) Provisions 13

(rrr.) Cooks 13

(lv.) Wages 14

(v.) Crimping 15

(vi.) Desertion 17

(vn.) Advance and Allotment Notes,. 18

(vnr.) Manning 18

(IX.) Rating of seamen 22

(x.) Compensation and Insurance 23

(xr.) Sailors' Homes 25

2. Bills of ledmg 25

3. Pilots 25

4. Health 213

5. Quarantine 27

6. Lighthouses 27

7. Coastal trade 27

8. Rebates 29

9. Seaworthiness 31

10. Life-saving provisions 31

11. Ferry and excursion steamers 31

12. Deck and load line 32

13. Survey 33

14. Inspection 33

15. Oil and electric launches 34

16. Australian Royal Naval Re-serve 34

17. Training Ships 34

18. Encouragement to British Producers and Ship-owners 35 19. Jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . 33

20. Summary of Findings and Recommendations 36


I. DECLINE OF BRITISH SEAMEN. The following figures quoted in the Board of Trade Report show that between statistics. the years 1890 and 1900 there has been, coincident with the increase in the number of foreigners and Lascars, a steady decrease in the number of British seamen employed

on British ships :--I Number of


Proportion of :b-.oreigneis to

Total British persons Number of every 100 Lascars (including Years. emp,loyed Foreign pers 8US British persons and J,as Jars anrl (not ncludlng employed. employed Asl.tUcs. Asiatirs). Ltsoars). (not inclndi.Jlg £[,S0l11S). 186,147 27,227 1891 IE6,176 . 30,267 1892 185,437 30,899 1893 186,628 29,549 14.63 16.26 16.66 15.83 22,734 24,037 25,399 24,797 236,108 240,480 241,735 240,974 Imperial Mercantile Committee's Report, 1903. Appendix A, No.6. J894- 183,233 31,050 16.95 26,175 240,458 1895 180,074 32,335 17.96 28,077 240,486 1896 178,994 33,046 18.46 29,999 242,039 1897 175,549 33,898 19.31 3!,484 240,931 1898 174,980 35,308 2.0. 18 32,265 242,553 1899 174,260 I 36,064 20.69 33,805 244,135 1900 174,532 36,893 21.14 36,028 247,448 It will be seen that the number of Britishers employed has actually decreased Nnmber ot d ' h b h'l h .. b f f · . l d' Brltl8h 110amen urmg t e years 1890-1900 y 11,615; w 1 e t e num er o ormgners, exc u mg A · · h ' d d A • • b l f , whilstfore•gners SiatiCs, as mcrease by 9,666, an siatlCS y 13,289.--a tota o 22,955. Durmg increase. the same period the population of Great Britain and Ireland increased by, approximately, 4,000,000, while the tonnage of British ships has advanced from 11,150,506 to 14,064,152. It will be seen that whilst the population has increased by something like 10 per cent., 1905• P· 14• the tonnage of ships by over 26 per cent., the number of foreigners, excluding Asiatics, by more than 35 per cent., and of Asiatics by over 58 per cent., there has been an actual decrease in the number of Britishers employed in the marine of about 6 per cent. And there is no reason to suppose that the increase of foreigners employed on British ships is not still going on. This is in marked contrast to conditions prevailing in other countries, where, either by legislative enactment or custom, ships are exclusively manned by seamen of their respective nationalities. Britain alone, amongst the maritime nations of the civilized world, is seriously increasing the number of foreigners and Asiatics employed in her ships. That the more general employment by other countries of men of their own nationality, and the restricted use of cheapest alien labour on board their vessels, have not been detrimental to the growth of their shipping is shown from the following figures:-British Empire American French German Russian Flag. 1890-1. Grosa Tonnage of Steam Vessels l 00 tons gross and upwards. Net Tonwge of Sailing Vessels 100 t


It will be seen that not only has the shipping of these countries increased, but that proportionately its growth is greater than that of the shipping of Great Britain. ' Proportion of foreigners · To what extent the practice of employing foreigners prevails on vessels in the

deep-sea trade engaging seamen in Australia may be gathered from the evidence of Mr. Lambert, Superintendent of the Sailors' Home, Melbourne, through whose agency nearly all the seamen required by British ships in the port are supplied:-

shipped in Australia.


M.S.A. Section 110 et seq.

Past and present conditions.

Suggested improvements.

723. What percentage of foreign seamen do you ship as compared with British seamen ?-The foreigners are at the present time as two to one. 727. It is a common occurrence for British captains to prefer foreign sailors.

And Mr. Hannell, Shipping Master at Newcastle, says:.-20638. Do you not think that such a reflection would have the effect of implying that the British sailor is deteriorating ?-Yes; and I am very sorry to see it. It is a fact. There are 60 per cent. of the sailors shipped out of this port every year of foreign nationality.


In dealing with the question of the decline of the British seaman, it is to be remarked that while legislation defining the conditions under which workers on shore might be employed has benefited them materially, it has left those affecting the seaman practically unchanged.

In some respects the British sailor has been treated as a child, and in others denied the rights of a free man. He has been the special object of legislation. The Merchant Shipping Act has made provisions of a most elaborate character intended to safeguard his interests, but these in most cases have proved a dead letter.

In many respects a radical change is urgently needed. The seaman should be treated more like his fellow-worker ashore. Discipline has, of course, to be maintained on board ship, and your Commissioners would be the last to recommend anything that would impair it ; . but between the maintenance of discipline and the exercise of undue severity there is a sensible distinction to be drawn. The nature of the seaman's calling doubtless will always differentiate him from landsmen. But we see no reason why this difference should proceed to such lengths as it does.

The condition of the seaman is little better than it was 50 years ago, although the shipping world in other respects has been revolutionized. Between the palatial passenger steamers of to-day and the vessels of 50 years back there is a great gulf fixed, but his position is much as it ·ever was. Your Commissioners inspected the forecastles of several ships. Some were markedly better than others, but the majority still left much to be desired. There does not appear to be any reason, making all allowance for the nature of their calling, why seamen should not be housed, fed, and treated as well as men on shore.

Dr. Robertson, of Melbourne, when before the Commission, laid down the con­ ditions which considered should prevail in seamen's quarters :-16240. By Senator Guthrie.-Do you suggest that separate mess accommodation should be provided ? -I think that a mess-room ought to be provided independent of the sleeping accommodation. I onlv know of one ship where it is done, and that is the Inchgreen. It is also necessary to provide for warming of the crew's quarters.

16241. By the Chairman.-Can that be done cheaply ?-Usually they have a stove, and its great advantage is in securing the ventilation the quarters. In cold weather, when. the men will stop up everything, a stove can be used as a ventilator. Bunks should be constructed of non, and so fixed that they may easily be taken down for cleaning purposes. There should not be more than two tiers of bunks, and the space between the lower bunk and the floor should not be less than 1 foot. Clothes lockers should b.e provided for the men. From a sanitary point of view, it is very objectionable for clothes soaked in sweat to be lying about a sleeping apartment, because they foul the air. The men should be provided with adequate lavatory accommodation, both for ordinary washing and for shower baths. Sanitarily designed and properly constructed privies and urinals should also be provided. According to the Mercha;t Shipping Act, there is no obligation on a ship-owner to provide this necessary accommodation. The last thing which I wish to bring under the attention of the Commission is the of submitting the

plans of ships to the sanitary I that should be treated as public buildings, and

that the plans should be subm1tted to the samtary authont1es for approval. · Dr. Ham, of Brisbane, gave evidence as to the state of affairs existing:-21794. . . . . . The seamen's quarters are often leaky through planks in the deck being

sprung. I suppose this is due to the constant strain of the windlass in raising the anchor. The forecastle is nearly always dirty, damp, and dark. On account of the darkness, the floor gets dirty without being noticed. The light provided is obstructed bY bunks and lockers. . . . . Then the chain locker

contains the mud attached to the cable, which gives off an offensive smell immediately below where the men sleep.


\Vhen these conditions are contrasted with those which the poorest worker on shore generally enjoys, it is hardly to be wondered at that a desirable class of men cannot be induced to follow the sea. One witness declared that the conditions were so bad that he "would not send his dog to sea"; another that he " would not under any circumstances allow his son to follow such a calling." One witness, Captain Mackay, Mackay, Q.

declared that the romance had gone out of the sea. It may be this is so; stiil, 21384. provisions for the comfort and health of seamen might prove more than an efficient substitute.


The sleeping accommodation for men whose duty prevents them from having sleeping . h h . h f. bl d d h f accommodatiOn. more t an four ours' consecutive rest, oug t to be com orta e an ece1,1t. T e ore-castle should be well lighted, ventilated, airy, and clean. It ought to be possible for a self-respecting man to live with some degree of comfort in a forecastle, which is his home for months, and sometimes even for years.

Provision should be made to enable men to take their meals under proper con- Mess-room. ditions. In very many ships there is absolutely no place where this can be done, except in the sleeping apartment itself. When the weather permits, the men take their tin plates and sit on the forecastle head, or on the hatch-the only alternative to their

taking their meals seated on the edge of their own bunks. ·wherever practicable, a separate mess-room should be erected, in which men can eat like civiliZed beings. When a seaman during his brief sojourn inport compares the accommodation provided for him at sea with the worst offered to his fellow-worker ashore, he cannot help being both

envious and dejected at the contrast. Sanitary accommodation, too, is, generally speaking, non-existent. Men begrimed sanitary . "th th "l d f f h . h. k h ld bl" d h h d accommodatiOn. WI e tm an sweat o our ours m t e sto e o are o 1ge to was on t e ecks .. in front of the passengers, or in the latrines, a bucket being the only provision which

the ship makes towards their ablutions. On some foreign ships we have seen bath-rooms, in which hot and cold water are provided, and mess-houses, where men can eat with ease and comfort. The sleeping accommodation, too, is very much better than that provided on most, if not all, the British

ships we visited. Much that can be said about the wretched conditions prevailing in the East End of London, and the slums of New York, can be said with qualifications, not always in favour of the forecastle, of the accommodation provided on a large number of deep-sea British ships. "\Vhen there is added to these dismal surroundings the

monotony, the hard labour, the dangers attendant on a sea-going life, it is small wonder, with an advancing civilization, and with the vastly improved conditions of theworking classes on shore, men with any ambition, or who are not absolutely destitute, decline to follow it. But we think that such a state of affairs is not inseparable from the life

of the seaman. Under proper conditions we believe that the sea will call with a voice loud enough to be heard by a sufficient number of our own nationality to man our mercantile marine.


To effect this salutary and necessary change, your Commissioners have recom­ mended the following amendments of the existing law:-{I.) AccoMMODATION. Application.

To apply to-( a) Ships registered in Australia. (b) Ships licensed to trade on the Australian coast. (cl Ships continuously trading to any port in the Commonwealth whose articles

are drawn out in the Commonwealth, and whose final port of discharge of crew is in the Commonwealth. (a) Air-space.-Section 135 of the Bill substantially repeats the provisions of Air space the Merchant Shipping Act. The evidence given before your Commissioners establishes recommended. the necessity for some radical alterations. In respect of air-space, very few witnesses

favoured the retention of the present provisions. 3 were in favour of 140 cubic feet. 11 were in favour of 120 cubic feet. 11 were in favour of 100 cubic feet.

6 were in favour of 72 cubic feet.


The medical men, eight in number, were practically unanimous in rec6mmending a minimum of at least 120 feet, with such measurement as to floor-space, and restric­ tions as to the erection and presence of impedimenta, as would insure the convenience as well as the health of the seaman.

As to the value of the evidence given on this head, it may be remarked that nearly the whole of the witnesses were experts-masters, officers, seamen, and medical men. The amount of space recommended by the British Labour Commission was 140 feet. This had regard particularly to conditions obtaining in England, and climates of a temperate character. Many witnesses pointed out during our inquiry that the climatic conditions obtaining here range from temperate to tropical, and, consequently, greater air-space is necessary; whilst 72 cubic feet is the present minimum, or, as Dr. Ham,

21753 · Ham aptly put it, "6 x 6 x 2, the sepulchral accommodation which a man is entitled to

at his own interment," is altogether inadequate. Your Commissioners therefore recom· mend that the air-space for each seaman shall be not less than 120 cubic feet. (b) The medical witnesses were emphatic in recommending that, in addition to the air-space, provision should be made for adequate ventilation. Doctors Ventilation necessary.

Robertson, Robertson and Ham stated that 3,000 cubic feet of pure air per hour per man was the 16230. Ham, 21759. recognised minimum for the maintenance of health and comfort. It would appear that

the section of the Merchant Shipping Act dealing with this most urgent matter has proved ineffective. As a matter of practice, the usual method of ventilation is by means of a shaft, down which, on occasions, a current of air rushes, seriously affecting the comfort, and even the health, of individuals within its immediate radius. On those ships which your CommisRioners visited, the ventilators were closed up with rags, and the quarters,· in consequence, stuffy and permeated with disagreeable odours. · Your Commissioners, therefore, recommend that provision be made for efficiently ventilating the sleeping quarters by such means as will secure a diffusion oi iresh air without such draughts as would be likely to prove prejudicial to the health of the seaman or apprentice, Several witnesses stated that this could be accomplished by electric fans and foul.air extractors, that it was certainly no more difficult to ventilate a ship than an ordina1·y

dwelling, and that sanitary experts could easily effect the desired improvements. Your Commissioners, therefore, recommend the adoption of such provisions a,s will insure

this being done.

Bath rooms. Hot water supply.

Increase of German shipping.


(c) Sanitary and Hwienic With regard to sanitary and hygienic

arrangements, these, a.s already pointed out, are in many cases non-existent; in others, inadequate; and in few, what they should be. Your Commission recommend that provision be made for the erection of bath. roJms, which in steam-ships should have an ample supply of hot water for the use of engineers, :firemen, greasers, and others, together with a sufficient number of suitable urinals and privies. .

Lest these recommendations should be regarded as tending to coddle the seaman, your Commissioners desire to point out that such provisions are made upon the steamers of the Nord Deutscher Lloyd, and, as a result of these and other advantages, desertions are practically unknown. On the contrary, it is not an uncommon thing for seamen to remain all their lives with that company, and for father and son to succeed each other in the same employment.

Your Commissioners desire to point out in this connexion that the steam-ship tonnage of the German mercantile marine has, during the last twelve years, increased by nearly 200 per cent., and that Germany must now be regarded as one of our most dangerous competitors in the struggle for the world's sea trade. It is to be noted, too, that this extraordinary industrial development has been achieved by a mercantile marine almost exclusively manned by seamen of its own nationality. With the exception of a few cases where coloured crews are employed in the stokeholds-a practice by no means generally adopted, even in tropical voyages-few but Germans are employed therein. Success so achieved is surely worthy of our consideration.

(d) Light.-Notwithstanding the provisions in the Merchant Shipping Act Regulations that sufficient light should be available to enable ordinary newspaper print to be read by a seaman in his bunk normal conditions, the generality of forecastles are dark, gloomy, and depressing.

Your Commissioners recommend, therefore, such an amendment of the law as will provide for the adequate lighting'of the forecastles by day and night.




To apply to- ·

(a) Ships registered in Australia. (b) Ships licensed to trade on the Australian Coast. (c) Ships continuously trading to any port in the Oornrnonwealth whow articles are drawn out in the Cornmonwealth, and whose final port of discharge

of crew is in the Cornrnonwealth.


Schedules of dietaries supplied by the various shipping companies of Australia Australian were furnished by Mr. Grayson, Secretary ofthe Steam-ship Owners' Federation, and these, Hso8 while not setting forth details, seemed, on the whole, satisfactory. As to the quantity and 24986' there is no reason to doubt that the rule "sufficient, without waste," is observed.

In the foreign-going trade, however, a very different state of things prevails. Deep-sea traue. ·while some of the witnesses declared there had been a vast improvement in the quality and quantity of provisions during the last 25 years, the majority thought other-wise. That there has been an improvement, however slight, is, your Commissioners think, very probable. But the quality and variety, to say nothing of the quantity, of provisions supplied to British seamen, cannot be compared to that provided on American

ships, much less to that consumed by the workers ashore. This question of food is one of vital importance. That more dissatisfaction and Need for discontent is caused by inferior provisions and bad accommodation than by any of the improvement. dangers, hardships, and discomforts of sea life, appears to your Commissioners beyond

question. The efficiency of a man is largely dependent on the character of his food. To obtain gqod work, it has always been found profitable by shrewd employers to supply good food to their employes. The American seaman is better fed than any other seaman, and is, perhaps, asked to work harder. Your Commissioners believe that a radical improvement in the sailor's dietary will do very much to make the sea more attractive

to Britishers. Several scales of provisions were furnished by witnesses, medical and other. Dr.1 R'fb;rtson·s That submitted by Dr. Robertson, of Melbourne (vide Appendix A), is recommended by your Commissioners for adoption. Differing from the American in some particulars, it has been compiled with a view of meeting the special requirements of the Australian

climate. A comparison of this scale, and that provided in the Merchant Shipping Act for steerage passengers, will make much clearer the difference between a sufficient and an insufficient dietary than mere words can do. The nutritive value of the various foods has been most carefully worked out by Dr. Robertson, and the schedule seems

well calculated to meet all reasonable requirements, and has the additional advantage of being economical. A suggestion by Mr. Trelawney that each ship should be compelled to show its Victualling bill. victualling bill for the voyage meets with your Commissioners' approval.

(nr.) CooKs. Application.

To apply to- - --·

(a) Ships registered in Australia. .

(b) Ships licensed to trade on the coast.

(c) Ships continuously trading to any port in the Oornrnonwealth whose articles ate drawn out in the Oornrnonwealth, and whose final port of discharge of crew is in the Commonwealth. ·

It is not, however, sufficient to make provision for a supply of food adequate in quantity, of good quality, and of sufficient variety, unless this is cooked in a proper manner. That the cooking on board all but passenger ships leaves very much to be desired appears from the evidence placed before the Commission undeniable. Generally speaking, cooks are paid at a rate little, if anything, higher than that of A.B. No man

who has any pretensions to a knowledge of cooking will engage for such a wage and submit to the hardships and discomforts of a sea life, when he can without difficulty command nearly double the wages on shore. Your Commissioners think the suggestion put forward by various witnesses, that certificated

1 b 'fi d d Th d . bl d"ffi l cooks reqmrcd. cooks shou d e certi cate , a goo one. ere oes not seem any msupera e 1 cu ty in the way. Certificates might be issued to cooks who have by actual service proved their efficiency, or who are employed in such capacity at sea at the time of the proposed law coming into force; and examinations held under proper supervision, where others

might qualify.


Your Commissioners, therefore, recommend that on all ships carrying eight or more persons a certificated cook must be employed. With decent accommodation, good provisions, and good cooking, there is every reason to believe that a superior class of men would be induced to follow the sea.

(rv.) WAGES.

To apply to­


(a) Ships registered in Australia; (b) Ships licensed to trade on the Australian coast. (c) Ships continuously trading to any port in the Commonwealth whose articles are drawn out in the Commonwealth, and whose final port of discharge

of crew is in the Commonwealth.

Mauuer of Although the rate of wage paid to seamen on foreign-going ships of the mercantile

marine of the Commonwealth is somewhat higher than that paid on vessels of most

other countries, it is still considerably less in general than that paid to workers ashore. We are, however, not so much concerned with the rate of wage as with the manner in which payment is made. By practice, as well as by law, the seaman is not entitled to demand his wage until the completion of the voyage, or of the period for which he has engaged. This places him in a position of dependence, and has a most demoralizing effect upon his fortunes and character. No matter what length of time he has been on the ship, nor what he may require in the way of clothes or other necessaries, he cannot legally demand one pe:imy. Other workers receive their wages when earned; the sea­ man, who works harder than most men, is not even entitled to payment at reasonable intervals. Where ill-fed, badly-housed; and sometimes even ill-treated, and, to crown

all, unable to obtain a penny of his wages, it is hardly a matter for surprise if the sailor on such ship succumbs to the deteriorating influences of his environment. Effects on The effect, too, of this practice upon the masters and owners is in some cases

not less deplorable than upon the seaman. Evidence was given before the Commission,

in Newcastle, that one master of a vessel that port made it a boast that he

Williams,23547. had not paid a man for three years. The mcent1ve to unscrupulous masters and

employers to connive at desertion, or even to induce seamen to desert, is, under such circumstances, considerable. It is not contended that the practice is general, but that it is not unusual, the volume of testimony given before your Commission at Newcast]e clearly shows. As this matter is dealt with more fully under the heading of " Crimping," it is not necessary to enter into further particulars here. But it is thought imperative that these conditions should be altered at the earliest possible moment. It is, therefore, recommended that in the foreign-going trade seamen shall Two-thirds of be entitled to receive, at the expiry of one month from the time of shipment, and

wages earned thereafter at intervals of a month, at .anv port where the ship calls for trading pur-should be paid. J

poses, two-thirds of the wages earned by them. The one possible objection to be urged against such a reform is that it would lessen the hold of the master over the seaman, and so conduce to desertion. We think a careful perusal of the evidence given at Newcastle will show that such an objection is not well founded, and that hardly any alteration of the law can render desertion more prevalent than at present. In suggesting this amendment, however, your Com­ missioners are very sensible of the strong opposition which a change of so radical a character will arouse in the minds of those who consider that their interests will suffer thereby. They are, nevertheless, convinced that the proposal is based upon justice, and in accord with common sense. Nor do they consider for a moment that the best interests of the ship-owners will be prejudicially affected. Besides, the recommendation Practice in . is supported by the experience- and practice of other nations. For instance, the laws other countries. . d q d N. · d f h t f h lf h

:Eames, 23781. of the Umte fJtates an orway prov1 e or t e paymen o one- a t e wages earned; Navigation Law while, in Germany a man may claim, after three months, half the wages due to him for

u.s.A., P· u. that period, or if on a time engagement, when he returns to the port of shipment, wages

Result of monthly pay­ ments on Australian coast+

earned to that date. The evidence at the disposal of your Commissioners does not disclose any increase of desertions as the result of the adoption of this practice; on the contrary, they are assured that they rarely, if ever, occur. It appears that the practice in the.Australian trade is to pay wages to seamen

monthly, and the evidence given shows that desertions are most unusual, and that it is no unco:rp.mon thing for men to remain in the service of the same employers for years


together. W'ith prospects of permanent employment better men are attracted, thriftier habits induced, domestic ties encouraged, and, generally speaking, the seaman com­ pares favorably with the man on shore. In Australian-trade and limited-coasting ships, where the time agreement prevails, the alteration in the law will effect no change in

the custom.


To apply to all ships engaging men in Australia. A considerable amount of evidence was r eceived in connexion with the supply and disch:;trge of seamen of foreign-going ships. Some of this was so sensational that, had it not been amply corroborated, its accuracy might well have been doubted. The

witnesses, it may be r emarked, were not recruited from any one class; but represented, indifferently, all sections of the community. From boardinghouse-keepers, shipmasters, seamen, lawyers, merchants, doctors, and police, the same testimony was received. As it would be impossible to suppose that witnesses of so representative a character would

mislead your Commissioners, they were forced to the conclusion that fresh legislation in this matter is most urgently needed. _

Briefly stated, the law, as laid down in the Merchant Shipping Act, permits llf.S_A. pro­ seamen to be supplied by a person who " holds a licence from the Board of Trade for ' h f h h' · b " fid h M.S.A. Sectton the purpose, or 1st e owner or master, or mateo t e s 1p, or 1s ona e t e servant, 111. and in the constant employ of the owner, .or is a superintendent." These provisions have proved quite inadequate to prevent crimping, and, in Newcastle, they may be said to have been for years past openly defied.

The practice seems to be to employ boardinghouse-keepers and runners to The practice. supply seamen. The charge made by these persons for their services, so far as your Commissioners could learn, is £1 for every seaman supplied. This in.itself, of course, constitutes a grave breach of the law, but other and more important ones are committed

daily. For instance, it was sworn by several witnesses that this £1 per head was shared with the master of the ship, vide O'Sullivan's evidence:-21289. I s this your signature, to that letter addressed to Captain McNeeley,

21290. The letter states :-'-" Sir,-1 wo uld like you to excuse me taking the liberty of writing ,to you concerning your business in supplying you with men, sailor's wages are £3 lOs. per month, my terms, £1 per man, and I return lOs. from each £1. Hoping I will have the pleasure of doing your business, I remain, at your services, .John O'Sullivan, boarding-master, Newcastle." Attached to that letter is this

card:-" J. O'Sullivan and Bridges, boarding-masters. Gentlemen sailors attended to. Ancher Frere's pianos, pills, and salts for use of boarders." Did you send that letter and card to the captain ?-Yes. 21291. Did he agree to your terms ?-Yes. 21292. Did he take the lOs. ?-Yes.

21293A. How many men did you supply Y-Eight. . .

21293n. Is it the usual practice in Newcastle to do this ?-Everybody else does it; Andrew Wafer does it. This cold-blooded avowal o£ participation in a nefarious and criminal traffic excited no surprise in the shipping community at Newcastle, where long usage had

rendered those concerned familiar with that, and much more o£ the same kind. It was swo!n, too, that a traffic existed in inciting to desert, and Defrauding

that this was carried on by boardmghouse-keepers, runners, and others, some of whom, it was alleged, did not even have a place of accommodation. Several witnesses alleged watson, that some masters of vessels connived at such practice, partly for the purpose of sharing 20152-4. what was suggestively termed" blood:money" (the £1 paid for the supply of seamen),


and partly for the purpose of defraudmg the seaman of his wages. Cases were cited in support of this statem:ent. In one, men to whom three years' wages were due were Goding, 2011H. compelled to accept an insignificant proportion in order to obtain their discharges. Mcvane, 20373


A witness gave an instance where £60 being due, £10 had to be accepted. In other cases; _despairing of ever getting_ anything, and induced by glowing reports of local conditions put forward by the cnmps, men have left the whole of their wages in the hands of the ship.

Your Commissioners were unable to learn the ultimate destination of such moneys. Whether they went as perquisites into the pockets of the master, or found their way back to the owner, or (as provided by the Merchant Shipping Act) reverted to the Crown, is a matter of conjecture. One thing is clear-the men to whom thev

were due received no share of them. It was stated that one master, of whom Williams,23547,



has been made, boasted that he had not paid any wages to his seamen for the past three years. During that period, he had been in and out of the Port of Newcastle several times, but had oontrived, by an ingenious combination of ill-treatment, bad conditions, and worse food at sea; and the employment of unprincipled agents in port, to make every one of his crews desert their ships and abandon their wages, in preference to enduring such conditions any longer. Commissions on. sailor's purchases.

Nor does the extortion of" blood-money "and the forfeiture of his wages complete the exploitation of the unfortunate seaman. Very frequently, upon every article that he purchases, the vendor and the boardinghouse-keeper take their commission, ranging Dayle, 23927. from 20 to 50 per cent. In very many cases, not a penny of wages is advanced to him

Williams, 2s5so. by the captain for the purchase of the merest necessaries, unless he agrees to buy from

a particular storekeeper or trader, who shares with the master, ·and sometimes with the boardinghouse-keeper also, the usurious profits of the trade. Your Commissioners were informed that photographers carry out their business, and even doctors and lawyers are retained, in the same way. In such cases, all hands are stretched instinctively towards the pockets of the unfortunate seaman, and not until absolutely destitute is he free from this systematized robbery. When no longer worth robbing, then, by common consent, employment is speedily found for him. Utterly penniless, he is in no position to stand on the order of his going, or to insist on such rights as the law allows. His advance-note is cashed at usurious rates, and he may consider himself fortunate if he gets to sea with sufficient clothes to cover him. ·

"Shanghai-ing." How far crimping as carried on at Newcastle involves what is known as "shanghai-ing," or the shipping of a man without his consent, we were unable to learn with any degree of precision. But it would appear that while not a general feature, it is by no wafer, 196so-z means unknown. A milder form of "shanghai-ing," indeed, appears somewhat

Goding, 21096 " prevalent. Men desiring to ship to one particular port are fraudulently induced to sign

articles for another, and entirely different, one. It is true, of course, that the law requires the articles to be read ;ver to the men, but from the evidence this appears in most cases a formality, which is carried through under such conditions as to make comprehension difficult, even in the case of educated men, and impossible in the case smith, 10691. of illiterate ones, or foreigners not acquainted with the English language. The Bell, 13021-3.

evidence of Captain Smith, Shipping-master, at Fremantle, and of the captain and first officer of the Charon, shows that in itself this is quite inadequate as a safeguard to the seaman. .

To such an extent has the practice of supplying seamen by boardinghouse­

ill-practices. keepers superseded the law, that, as one witness pointed out, "none but stiffs and

McVane, 203 62· loafers were to be found round the shipping offices." The effect of all this upon the

seaman can be easily understood. To find himself, after months of incessant toil and hardship, the victim of a conspiracy between the master o£ the ship and the crimps to rob him of his wages is not calculated to raise his standard of morality, or to make him regard the sea as a desirable calling. None but the most 'improvident, the most careless, the least ambitious, and the most worthless, or the most unfortunate, tolerate . _ these conditions for any length of time. If in all ships the treatment was as in those

we have spoken of, the British seaman of a desirable dass would soon become extinct. As it is, there is every reason to believe that the conditions described are sufficiently LambBrt, s5s. prevalent to constitute a menace to the most important industry of the Empire. It is

most significant that desertions from this and other causes seem more prevalent from

Remedies for crimping.

British than from foreign vessels. Such a state of affairs calls urgently for a remedy, and the witnesses were prac­ tically unanimous as to the kind required. Your Commissioners, therefore, recommend the adoption of the following provisions :-

1. No person other than a superintendent shall supply or engage a seaman to be entered on board a ship. 2. No person shall employ another to engage or supply seamen for any ship. ,

3. No person shall receive or accept on board any ship any seaman unless he is satisfied that such seaman has not been engaged or supplied in contravention of the laws. ·

4. Any person demanding or receiving, directly or indirectly, from another seeking employment as a seaman, or from any person on his behalf, any remuneration whatever for providing or promising to provide him with employment, shall be guilty of an indictable offence.




Imprisonment for desertion to be abolished in respect o/­ (1) All desertions in Australia from any vessels. (2A) Desertions abroad from ships registered in the Commonwealth. (2B) Desertions abroad from ships continuously trading to any port in the Com­

monwealth, and whose final port of discharge of crew is in the Common­ wealth.

In no particular does the law require amt:Jndment more urgently than in respect for of the consequences following from a rdasal or neglect on the part of a seaman to carry out the terms of his agreement. By absenting himself from his vessel without permission for over 48 hours he becomes a deserter, and is liable, upon arrest, to be imprisoned for

three months, and to forfeiture of his accumulated wages, whether arrested or not. No provocation is, in general, considered sufficient to justify him in leaving his employment. He may have been shanghaied, or deceived as to his destination, or the nature and duration of the voyage. But to urge these matters in his extenuation or

defence will usually avail him nothing. It will be urged b-y: those who seek to justify this anomaly that the nature of seaman's employment differs fundamentally from all others. In some respects, no doubt, this is very true. But that this difference demands, such disregard of the

seaman's rights-has yet to be shown. The reason generally put forward in justification is that, if the seaman were free to leave his employment, after due notice, ships would be left unmanned in foreign ports, involving the owners and shippers in heavy loss, and ;rendering regular trade impossible. To this argument it is not difficult to find an

effective answer. Men do not leave their employment without cause, if reasonably treated, well paid, and properly fed. In any case, disorganization of the shipping trade is not likely to result from such a cause. One or two vessels in any port might be affected, but not all, nor even

a majority. For if a man leaves one ship at a foreign port, he must perforce find another in order to get away again. Other ships can avail themselves of his services, and the ship which he bas left can engage in his place a man who has previously left another. If an owner knew that unless he treated his crew properly they could leave at the first opportunity he would see that they had no just cause for complaint. And the com­

petition of men at foreign ports for employment would prevent unreasonable com-plaints. _

But this anomalous treatment of the seaman is not only unjust and inexpedient, · · ff · d I b ·· 1 d b · d d h h d for desertiOn 1t lS not even e ectwe as a eterrent. t as a rea y een p01nte out un er t e ea -ineffective. ing of "Crimping" to what extent "desertion" takes place at Newcastle. Neither dread of imprisonment, nor the actual forfeiture of wages, prevents men from leaving

a" bad ship." And where the impulse is lacking, the master or the crimp often supply No attempt is wade to imprison the " deserter " in such cases, his employers being

satisfied with the confiscation of his wages. But the law has not only failed to deter men from deserting from " bad " ships, but even from good ones under exceptional circumstances. The discovery of gold in California and Australia saw the roads to the gold-fields thronged with deserting sea­ men in search of their fortune, and the harbors on the coasts filled with ships unable to get crews.

It appears, therefore, that where sufficient inducement offers, the law as it stands Imprisonment is no deterrent. Imprisonment for desertion is thus condemned as both unjust and ineffective, besides lending itself to the devious sc}lemes oj the crimp; and under the circumstances your Commissioners recommend its abolition.

*This recommendation should extend to-( 1) All desertions in Australia from any vessels. (2a) Desertions abroad from ships registered in the Commonwealth. (2b) Desertions abroad from ships continuously trading to anv port in t':·e:

Commonwealth, and whose fin:al port of discharge of cr,cw is in t:c.a Common wealth.

*The Merchant Shipping Legislation Conference indurserl the rec:oJYomendatiOJ;, r:xcq.t ili tL' who, after negotiating his advance note, wilfttlly, or through miscoudnct, fails to join his .-ln1:, e1 '--"- note payable. As the Commissioners recommend the abolition of advance notes, such cases cannot occur; but if advance notes not abolished the Commission heartily indorses recommendation of the Conference.

)',10492. Jl


seJ,men m1-y on due



In cases of desertion in Commonwealth ports from ships other than those men­ tioned in 2a and 2b quoted above, deserters should be placed aboard such· vessels upon request by competent authority. And the 'law should be further amended so that any seaman may, by giving due

notice, quit his ship without incurring criminal or civil liability. If he does not give notice, your Commissioners consider the case will be met by the forfeiture of all or any part of the wages, at the discretion of the Court, then due to him, together with the liability to be sued for such damages as his employer may have suffered through his


(vn.) ADVANCE ALLOTMENT NoTES. To apply to all men shipped in Commonwealth ports.

Attvmoe note The evidence received at Newcastle in regard to crimping directed your Com­

missioners' attention to what -is known as advance and allotment notes. The practice

of issuing notes, called advance notes, payable to the holder, and enabling him three days after the sailing of the ship to draw an amount equal to one month's wages of the seaman, is one which for a very lemg time has been almost general throughout the Abolished in shipping world. By recent legislation in the United States advance notes have been

u.s.A. abolished, and allotment notes restricted to near relations without limitation as to

amount, and to original creditors for one month's wages only. Your Commissioners are unable to say to what extent this example has been followed in other countries. Bad effects of The evidence in respect to advance notes seemed to show that they aid the

advance notes. machinations of crimps and other harpies who prey upon the seaman, that they conduce

Doyle, 23936 . to desertion, tend to create a sense of irresponsibility, encourage thriftlessness, and are Eames,zs77o-L generally opposed to his best interests. It appears that the seaman frequently does

carroll, 24254 · not obtain more than 50 per cent. of the value of the advance note. As has been

already pointed out in the section dealing with crimping, he is exploited on every hand. The storekeeper, the boardinghouse-keeper, and, in some cases, the master, all ta1,..e their quota. There seems little to recommend the issue of these notes. The practice Ab,lition of was condemned on all sides, hardly one witness who appeared before the Commission

aJvance notes. having anything to say in its favour. Your Commissioners therefore recommend that

it be abolished.

Allotment notes As to allotment notes, they stand, in some respects, on a different footing, seeing

that they deal, not with wages to be earned, but with those already earned. As a

means of enabling the wife or other dependents of a seaman to obtain his wages, or such portion thereof as are payable during the wage-earner's absence, much may be said in their favour. Still, the system is liable to abuse; there is a danger that they may become, in effect, "advance notes" ; and if the larger proportion of wages is payable when due, the same necessity for allotment notes is not apparent. It is recommended that allotment notes to wives, parents, grand-parents, children, brothers, or sisters, shall be payable to any amount. As, however, according to a recent report of the United States Superintendent of Mercantile Marine, it would appear that allotment notes to original creditors have in many cases practically become advance notes, your Commissioners cannot recommend their continuance.

(VIII.) MANNING. Application.

To apply to-(a) Ships registered in Australia. (b) Ships licensed to trade on the Australian coast. (c) Ships continuously trading to any port in the Commonwealth whose articles

are drawn out in the Commonwealth, and whose final port of discharge of crew is in the Commonwealth. One o£ the chief fea'eUres of the Bill on which your Commissioners were asked to teport was the schedule for the manning of ships. The conference of experts, upon

whose suggestions the original draft Bill was drawn up, strongly recommended the necessity for such a schedule, and the weight of evidence received by your Commis­ sioners supports their recomrne;ndation. }I.S.A. does ,ot It ha'3 long been a m'1tkr for comment that the definition of "unseaworthy"

in the Merchant Shipping Act did hot include under-manning. Evidence before. the

,.r lmnerial Manning Committee in respect to ships wrecked through having insufficient

wJrthiness." showed that the Board of Trade had been advised by its legal officers that no

proseeution on those grounds would lie, under the section dealing with unseaworthy ships. The conference of experts rightly regarded this as a most serious defect, and provided for it in the way indicated. .,>_


Your Commissioners had to consider, first, the expediency of providing a manning schedule, and, second, if a case were made out, its nature. A large amount of evidence was received under both these heads. As to the first, some witnesses objected to any restrictions upon the rights of

employers to determine such matters for themselves, while others pointed out the practical difficulties in the way, particularly in connexion with the manning of the engine-room and the stoke-hold. Your Commissioners recognise very fully the objections that can be urged

against any scale of compulsory manning. Anomalies must necessarily arise, and the right of employers to determine such matters for themselves ought not to be interfered with, if the continuance of serious abuses can be prevented by other means. The suggestion of Mr. Grayson and others that the existing practice should be adhered to

without any basis other than a rule of thumb appeared to us an untenable one. It would be impossible to determine whether a ship was seaworthy or not if a definite scale of manning were not drawn up. In an inquiry following into the cause of a mishap to any vessel, or arising from its detention as being allegedly unseaworthy,

would be no means of arriving at any decision without such a scale to provide a basis. The weight of evidence was very strongly in favour of a manning scale of some sort, and in this opinion your Commissioners most heartily concur. They consider

that no ship can be regarded as seaworthy unless she is not only properly constructed, provisioned, and in every respect equipped to encounter the perils of the voyage which she is about to undertake, but also manned with a sufficient crew of competent persons. We have, therefore, adopted the recommendation of the draft Bill, as set forth in the

judgment of Hedley v. Pinkney S.S. Co., as to what" seaworthy" ought to mean. v. As to the schedules themselves, but little exception was taken to the scale proposed for deck hands. With respect to that for officers, the Bvidence given by Mr. rO'::l':pe::t Lawrence, on behalf of the Merchant Service Guild, and Captain Dakin, for the Coast P·

227 "

Masters and Officers Association, showed that it was hardly liberal enough. In their Lawrence, s1es. evidence, uncontradicted in the main, instances were given of officers being on duty Dakin, 9060-s. 1 f h , h"l h . l h . b Long hours

472 out o 57 ours. W 1 e t ese were except10na cases, t e practice seems to e worked by that officers have to superintend the loading and discharging of cargo during the stay mates. in port, for periods extending up to 21! hours, and then, upon the ship proceeding to sea, are compelled to take the first watch. One of the witnesses stated, citing cases

in support, that a large number of the accidents to Inter-State and coastal ships have occurred during the first 24 hours after leaving port, when the officers were completely worn-out, and a carefullook"out was ou.t of .the question. The following decisions of the New South Wales Court of Marine Inquiry seem to bear out these contentions :-


The Court adds a strong expression of opinion that the action of Captain Darley, the master o£ the Dovedale­ Dovedale, in providing only a certificated officer for his ship, is deserving of censure. The Court considers Cloud that a s_hip of. class trading on this coast three, or, at the very least, two ?ertificttted B.

officers m addition to the master, and that, while the strwt letter of the law has been compiled with, a . serious and inexcusable risk of life and property has been run in under-manning this ship ; the Court is, . therefore, strongly impressed with the necessity for an amendment of the law in this relation. . . . . . . .

The Court, considering all the circumstances of the case, and especially the very long hours the mate had to work, he is fairly entitled to the benefit of the doubt. He will therefore retain his certificate.


The night was a bright moonlight one. The sea was smooth, and the wind light from the north. wreck of the • . • • • • • • • • Groki.

Alt_hough first sight w?uld there was gross negligence on the part of the master,

t.he C_ourt 1s opm1on that, mto cons1deratwn the fact that he has been practically on duty involving Appendix. a senous stram, mental and physlCal, for more than twenty-one and a half hours, without any sleep, it is not to be wondered at if his vigilance was somewhat relaxed, and if, unintentionally he dozed when at his post. _ · '

Your rega_rd this matter of excessive hours in coasting ships as Excessive honn extremely serious, and are of opmion that ship-owners could make such arrangements condemned. without incurring very much extra expense, as would render them unnecessary. ' . Mr. Lawrence, on behalf of the Merchant Service Guild, an association repre- service. sentmg the officers employed on the Inter-State trade, handed in a manning schedule . .

for officers which will be found in the evidence. It differs in some important particulars Lawrence. 87ijo. from the Bill, chiefly, however, in connexion with the smaller class of steamers. B2


Scale of IIllUllllng.

Sailing vessels.


5\eam or sail.

Third-class engineets.:J


After a careful rev1ew of the evidence, your Commissioners approve of the following schedule:-ScALE oF OFFICERs.

Every ship shall be provided with duly certificated officers, according to the following scale, that is to say:-In every case a master, and, in addition to a master, officers as :­ FoREIGN-GOING SHIPS AND AuSTRALIAN-TRADE SHIPS.

(a) Sailing vessels not exceeding three hundred tons net A mate (holding a first mate's register tonnage. • certificate).

(b) Sailing vessels of over three hundred tons net register One first and one second mate (the tonnage. latter holding not lower than a

second mate's certificate).

(c) Steam vessels not exceeding one hundred and fifty tons net register tonnage. . (d) Steam vessels over one hundred and fifty and not exceeding one thousand tons net register tonnage.

(e) Steam vessels over one thousand tons net register tonnage.


To be defined as follows :-

A mate (holding a first mate's

certificate). One first and one second mate .

One first, one second, and one third mate (the latter holding not lower than a second mate's certificate).

"Limited coasting ships means such sea-going ships as are not qualified to engage in the Australian trade, but may make short voyages to sea from any port in Australia or British New Guinea within limits determined for each port, by the Governor-General, and may include tug and fishing steamers going beyond the limits of a port." Vessels of over fifteen tons and not exceeding one hundred A mate. ' I

tons net register tonnage when going over fifty miles Vessels of over one hundred tons and not exceeding three A mate. hundred tons net register tonnage. Vessels exceeding three hundred tons net register tonnage One first and one second mate.


It has been found impossible to provide for the varying requirements of vessels of this class. It is therefore recommended that the matter be left to the Committee to adjust anomalies suggested by your Commissioners on page 22. .. Your Commissioners' task in connexion with engine-room manning

was complicated through certain differences as to qualifications between the first and second class engineers, and those holding third-class certificates. In New South Wales and Queensland, and with modifications in other States, holders of third-class certificates may, under existing law, take any vessel up to 50 n.h.p., whether carrying passengers or not, anywhere within the limits of the State. ·

The law in New South Wales prior to 1901 confined third-class men to cargo Qnallllcatlon ot boats, and to passenger vessels plying within harbor a:rid river limits. In 1901 the law engineers. - was altered, but it would appear that the qualifications of candidates for third-class certificates still remained the same. These qualifications were such that sea experience Sette, 18640, was unnecessary. Evidence was given to show that a man might qualify for a third­ class certificate who had never been to sea, and whose claim to be regarded as an engineer wa!;J based upon his ability to drive a creamery or saw-mill engine. The representatives of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers strongly urged the necessity for an amendment of the law in this particular. They contended that there was no necessity for third­class engineers; that they ought to be done away with; that they were merely marine engine-drivers ; and if permitted to engage in sea-going boats, then sea experience oampoon, 3902• ought to be made an essential qualification. The necessity for shop experience was .Johnson, z2oas. emphasized by nearly every witness from the Society. Several insisted, indeed, upon Miller, 20890• a preliminary period of apprenticeship. They declared that after spending some years Satlsfactlon given by thixd· class engineers. Bennett, 7056. to qualify, and in many cases, paying a heavy premium, it was not fair that they should have to compete against men, who were, at best, mere engine-drivers. It was abso­lutely necessary that men should be able to repair a breakdown at sea, and this could only be done by men who had had shop training. On the other hand, a volume of evidence was adduced to show that the experi­ ment of extending the powers of the holders of third-class certificates had been most successful. It was shown that for some classes of boats their qualifications·were most suitable; and further, that in those in which they had been employed there had been an immunity from accident. Testimonials from various ship-owners were put in evidence testifying to their high appreciation of their services.


- It was pointed out that the Merchant Shipping Act imposed no such restrictions as the Amalgamated Society's representatives sought to enforce. In Great Britain, it would appear, that a man having no certificate of any kind can take charge of any home­ trade cargo steamer. Passengers' steamers under 100 n.h.p. need only carry one

engineer. The other, or others, need not be certificated at all, while for steam-ships of the largest size only two certificated engineers are required by the "so that at least one watch might be in charge of an uncertificated man. In another matter it would appear that the third-class certificated men have Third-class • • engineers not good ground for complaint. Section 13, sub-section (4), of the Bill provides that no now allowed to . • • qualify as person can get a second-class certificate unless he is the holder of a thud-class certificate. second-class. Now, the Board of Trade Regulations for candidates presenting themselves fcrr exami-nation for second-class certificates provide, inter alia, that a candidate must have served as engineer on the watch of some steam-ship of not less than 66 n.h.p., and have had four years' shop experience. As the third-class certificate under the New South Wales Act only entitles the holder to take boats up to 50 n.h.p., it is very obvious that the holders of such certificates can never qualify, no matter how'capable they may be, for second-class certificates. This your Commissioners regard as being both anomalous and unjust, and recommend that the section be amended so as to remove this injustice. On the main question, however, they were of opinion that many of the conclu­sions put forward by the representatives of the first and second engineers were sound. It is obviously improper to allow a ship to proceed to sea in charge of a man who may never have driven a marine engine, nor have had any experience whatever of the sea. · Your Commissioners, therefore, recommend that, in addition to the Board of • • • certificate. Trade certificates, which it is not proposed to interfere with, provision be made for a certificate of two grades to be termed a " Coastal certificate" ; and also for a Harbor and River engineer's certificate. The Coastal certificate should be divided into two classe:s-(1) for boats up to 65 n.h.p., and (2) up to 95 n.h.p., enabling holders of these certificates to take vessels up to these powers anywhere within the limits of the Commonwealth, and the Harbor and River engineer's certificate should be confined to operating within the precincts of Bays, Harbors, and Rivers. Provision should be made enabling holders of third-class certificates to qualify for Coastal certificates, and for holders of Coastal certificates to qualify for second­class certificates. Your Commissioners are of opinion that competency, together with sufficient sea service, will justify the issue of a Coastal certificate, and they recommend that apprenticeship or shop experience shall not be essential, but that cm::r{petency shall be proved by an examination of a practical character. recommended. As to the complement of the engine-room, your Commissioners had to consider the relative value and suitability of the schedule1:1 submitted by various witnesses, and that in the Bill, as well as a suggestion by Mr. Grayson, that the existing conditions should not be disturbed. After a very careful consideration of the whole matter, your Commissioners recommend the following schedule :-Under 60 60 to 100 100 to 175 175 to 240 240 to 300 300 to 400 Over 400 101 to 200 Over 200 50 to 100 100 to 200 Over 200 N.H.P. of Engines. ENGINE ROOM MANNING SCALE. Minimum Number 1st Class Engineers. I 1 1 I I Minimum Number 2nd Class Engineers. 1 -I 1 1 1 1 I RuNNING 200 UNDER MILES . . . l 1 ! I l . . 1 1 RIVER AND BAY. l i 1 1 1 • 11 running over 200 mil..,, one greaser additional. t If running over 400 miles, one additional engineer. t Under 50 n.h.p., one marine engine-driver. Total Engineers, Single Screw. .. \2 3 3 4 4 5 2 3 .. 2 2 Additional Schedule of Engineerst Twin Greasers. engineers. Screw. * . . . . .. .. t .. 1 .. 2 1 2 1 3 2 3 I .. I 2 .. 2 . . It .. 1 .. 2






:. !'

!i •!I l, ::.






:Bases for stoke-hold manniug.

Fire-grate area unsatisfactory.

Corby, 3811.

Iudicated horse power vague.

Shirra, 16471.

Coal con­ sumption 3i tons per day per 1nan recoromeuded.


N.H.P. (Nominal Horse Power) to be calculated as follows :­


Sums of the squares of the cylinders = N.H.P. 25


Grate area = N.H.P. ·5

Stokeholds.-Four suggested alternative bases for ·the manning of stokeholds were put before your Commissioners :-1. That in the Bill, viz., fire-grate area. 2. Coal consumption.

3. That adopted in New Zealand-indicated horse-power. 4. The present practice existing in the Inter-State trade.

Several witnesses adversely criticised the proposal in the Bill that the fire-grate area should be the basis. It was urged that it would be an inducement to builders of future steamers to reduce the size of boilers. It being generally recognised that the larger the boiler the less the strain imposed upon the men, any basis which would tend to encourage owners to restrict the size would be most undesirable.

The New Zealand basis, i.e., indicated horse-power, had but few supporters among those appearing before the Commission. Witnesses generally regarded it as too vague a thing to be of practical value. The great majority recommended coal consumption as the most satisfactory basis. The amount of coal agreed to by the

majority of the Imperial Manning Committee, which reported in 1896, was 2t tons per day per man in tropical climates, and 3 tons per day per man in temperate climates. From an examination of the tables supplied, and the evidence given, by Mr. Grayson, of the coal consumed on the fleet of the Federated Steam-ship Owners' Association, it appears, however, that in the case of modern vessels the coal consumption averages

between ·3 and 4 tons per day per man. It is, therefore, recommended that 3-! tons per man per day be the basis. In case of doubt as to the amount likely to be consumed on first voyages, or at other times, the check suggested by Mr. Corby of 20 lbs. per square foot of fire-grate area per hour would provide a tentative basis.

Comm.ittee to adfust .. Grayson and other suggested

that. contmually anse, whwh would render the apphcat10n of any

Grayson, 14846. particular scale unJust or unworkable, and that none but practical men could determine

corby, ss01. the merits of each partiqular case. It was pointed out, in support of this contention,

that vessels were constructed at present of such varying types in respect to the positions of the bunkers, engines, boilers, &c., that any scale would work in very many cases unfairly either to the employer or to the men. Your Commissioners so far agreed with these objections as to recommend the appointment of a committee, formed of one sentative of the employers, one of the men, and a neutral Government expert. The functions of this body would be to adjust such anomalies as might from time to time arise, and to prevent the scale operating unjustly. They think that a committee of this kind .could, and should, deal with. all .de_Qar.tments in with manning, deck, engme-room, and stoke-hold. This w1ll, 1t 1s thought, entuely remove the main objection to the adoption of the scales recommended by the Commission. ·


To apply to all men shipped in the Commonwealth.

It is useless t? insist upon a certain complement of men if employers are to 1at hberty to engage persons._ The reasons for the adoption of a mannmg scale are to prevent sh1ps gomg to sea 1n an unseaworthy condition life and property being endangered, and men being overworked. If no are

placed upon the class of persons employed, mere insistence upon a certain number will be quite valueless for both these purposes. Your Commissioners therefore recommend

t 23

that provision be made for insuring the competency of persons to fill the positions ror which they are engaged. The Merchant Shipping Act, section 126, provides for the rating of seamen as follows :-1. A seaman shall not be entitled to the rating of A.B., that is to say, of an M.s.o\:

able-bodied seaman, unless he has l:lerved at sea for four years before the re mast, but the employment of fishermen in decked fishing vessels regis-


tered under the first part of this Act shall only count as sea service 1

up to the period of three years of that employment ; and the rating of A.B. shall only be granted after at least one year's service in a trading vessel, in addition to three or more years' service on board of decked fishing vessels so registered. 2. The service may be proved by certificates of discharge, by a certificate of

service from the Registrar-General of Shipping and Seamen (granted by the Registrar on payment of a fee not exceeding sixpence), specifying in each case whether the service was rendered in whole or in part in steam­ ship or in sailing ship, or by other satisfactory proof. The Bill before your Commissioners adopts this provision practically without M.B.A .. alteration. The evidence given, however, emphasized the fact (sufficiently shown in

the report of the Imperial Manning Committee) that the section was simply a dead Of the shipping masters of the different States who gave evidence before us,

1 h d . d t•fi t d h . H h d . th f Smith, 9381. on y one a lS§!Ue any cer 1 ca es un er t e sectwn. e a , m e course o Hannell, 20667. twenty-seven years, issued about half-a-dozen. Of the others, some had neither heard of nor received any application for them. They had never considered that the section necessitated, or provided for, such certificates. ·

Evidence was also given that anybody could be engaged as an A.B. who had Discharges an A.B.'s discharge, and that this discharge ·might be given to persons who had abso- lutely none of the qualifications of a seaman. Cases were cited where a man had, on men. the completion of his first voyage of less than six months, received such discharge. It

was freely stated that a very large number of those signing on as A.B.'s were men who were not entitled to be so rated. It is quite clear that in a very large number of cases no effort is made to see that the persons to whom the discharges are issued have any of the necessary qualifications. It is essential, both for the safety of the ship and the

welfare of the men who follow the sea, that this should be remedied. One result of the adoption of this course will be to raise the status of the seaman, and make it impos-sible for ship-masters to take, as one witness at Newcastle put it," anything that walks on legs." Your Commissioners are very emphatic as to the necessity for this rating,

and consider that, in conjunction with other suggested amendm-cmts, it will do very much towards making the sea more attractive to the right kind of men. As to what length of sea-service should be sufficient to qualify a man for the rating of A.B., your Qualifications Commissioners see no reason to depart from the provisions of the Merchant Shipping A.B.

Act, and recommend four years' sea-service before the mast, while the qualifications of an O.S. should be those recommended by the Imperial Manning Committee-i.e., Qualifications that he should be seventeen years of age, and have had at least one year's sea-service of o.s. pefore the mast. ·


. 1 For some reason seamen have been placed at a disadvantage, as compared with L.egai .. their fellow workers ashore, in connexion with recovering compensation for accidents received while in the dischar?e of their The statutes known as Employers' to

Liability Acts and Workmen s CompensatiOn Acts have generally excluded seamen from their provisions. · As there appears to be no sufficient reason for this discrimination, which various witnesses described as unjust and inexpedient. and as it has been brought under the

notice of your Commissioners that the British Board of Trade is considering legislation to extend the benefits of these Acts to those following seafaring pursuits,

your Commissioners recommend provision being made in the Bill to this effect. It is suggested, in the event of being to proposed Im?erial Shipping Conference, the be there d1scussed, w1th a v1ew to secure umform legislation throughout the Empire.

A revie.w of has been .done in the direction of providing for compulsory insurance agamst ace1dents, both m the States of the Commonwealth and elsewhere,


shows. that there is a growing tendency to legislate for this purpose, and that, generally speakmg, the results have been most successful. Amongst the more notable statutory enactments dealing with this matter, the following may be quoted:-1. The Workmen's Compensation Acts (1897-1900) of Great Britain.

2. The Accident Insurance Law, 1884, Germany (Unfallversicherungs-Gesetz). 3. The Miners' Accident Relief Act, New South Wales (No. 2, 1900).

The following countries have adopted statutory schemes of insurance against accident:-Austria 1894

France 1898

Italy 1898

Denmark 1898

Switzerland 1899

Belgium 1903

workmen's I. The Workmen's Compensation Acts apply to personal in]·ury received by any Compensation Acts. workman arising out of, and in the course of, his employment.

Workmen engaged in seven classes of industries are included within the scope of the Act (seamen are excluded). Employers alone are responsible, and neither employes nor Government con­ tribute.

The amount paid to the widow, or other relative, upon death is limited to a sum equal to three years' wages, or £150, whichever is greater. In cases of disablement a weekly sum, not greater than 50 per cent. of the average weekly earnings of the workman is paid.

(The Act is admittedly imperfect. It is limited in scope, and hardly comes within the category of Compulsory Insurance Laws.)

2. The Accident Insurance Law of Germany 1884 imposes on the employer the

Insurance Law. obligation-Willoughby on Workingmen's (a) to compensate workmen inJ·ured in his service Insurance, p. 60. · · (b) to pay a pension to the widows of workmen kiJled in his service.

Provisions extended to seamen. lb. p. 60.

lb. p. 42.

(o) to maintain the children of workmen killed in the service till they have reached a specified age.

Here, too, neither the State nor the employe contribute anything.

This law has proved so successful that its scope has been more than once enlarged, and your Commissioners were informed by Mr. Boner, of the Nord-Deutscher Lloyd, that its provisions have recently been extended to seamen.

There is, besides this law, the Krankenversicherungs-Gesetz 1885-insurance against sickness-to which the employer contributes one-third, and the employe two­ thirds. N.s .. 3. The Miners' Accident Relief Act, New South Wales (No.2, 1900), is confined

Acc1dent Rehel • • • • • d b · · "d d h 1 · f

Act provisions. m Its operatiOns to persons lll]Ure y mmmg acCl ents, an t e re at1ves o persons

killed by such accidents.

A fund is created £or the purpose of the Act, to which the Government of New South Wales, the mine-owner, and the miner jointly contribute, upon the following basis:-1. Mine-owner: lOs. per annum on the average daily number of persons


2. Government : An amount equal to the aggregate of moneys so contributed. 3. Miner: 4-!d. per week during employment (deducted from wages).

The benefits are-12s. per week to the miner upon disablement (wholly incapa­ citated from following occupation) ; 8s. to widow (or certain other relatives) ; and 2s. 6d. for each child per week, while such child is under the age of fourteen years.

In the absence o£ sufficient evidence, your Commissioners do not feel themselves competent to recommend the adoption of any of these schemes, but are strongly of opinion that compulsory insurance for seamen ought to be considered with a view to 1

egislating at the earliest opportunity.


The evidence received in connexion with these institutions seems to indicate that there is much room for improvement both in their management and methods. The Melbourne Sailors' Home, in essentials, is a private institution run for profit, and, 1 . . l . l d f h . Th Sa1lors Home; a though patromzed by seamen, Is not exc us1ve y reserve or t eu use. e accom- Lambert, 613

modation provided does not appear to be better than that of the ordinary boarding- et seq. houses frequented by seafaring men. No particular advantages are given by the Belfra e 5085• institution to induce seamen to patronize the establishment, save, perhaps, that a savings g' bank has been established there. It has resolved itself into an agency for supplying

seamen, and receives a considerable proportion of its profits from this source. It cashes advance notes, and from what we can learn, is satisfied with a fair, but-not particularly small, profit. Your Commissioners consider that theseinstituti

valuable than they are if run upon different lines. In very many cases they present an McSharer, 9971, unattractive appearance, comparing unfavorably with the private institutions with which they come into competition. There is, too, an amount of restraint imposed upon the seamen who patronize them which is irksome,· without being in any way

useful. It is recommended that the Commonwealth should make laws for the .consti- commonwealth tution, regulation, and management of these homes, and that they should be conducted

wholly in the interests of sailors. Homes.


A considerable amount of evidence was given in regard to bills of lading, the law relating to which was, at the time of the Commission's appointment, in a very . f d' . D . h f th . . th S C . f G d themselves unsat1s actory con 1t10n. urmg t e course o e mqmry e ea- arr1age o oo s of liability. Act was passed, amending the law very considerably. Your Commissioners received

evidence relating to the condition of things prior to the Sea-Carriage of Goods Act, and also as to the effect of that Act. Instances were given to show that prior to the Act the companies declined all responsibility for damage to goods through negligence, and that shippers were completely at their mercy. With regard to perishable produce, Griffith,

there can be no doubt there has been ample room for complaint on the part of shippers. 3217- 20 • The evidence of the fruit shippers, in particular, points to this conclusion. Your Com- missioners regarded the conditions surrounding the carriage of perishable produce to Great Britain and elsewhere as of very great importance to the country, and considered

an amendment of the then .existing law necessary. The Sea-Carriage of Goods Act, which embodies some of the provisions of the Harter Act of the United States, has, however, altered the considerably; and although evidence received after the passing of that Act served to show that the ship-owners were, owing to the omissi0n

of certain clauses in the American law, somewhat dissatisfied, your Commissioners do not feel justified in at present recommending any amendment of the law.


The evidence taken before your Commissioners with reference to pilots and Nearly an state pilotage showed that pilots on the Australian coast, with few exceptions, are State servants. servants. Evidence was given by the Port Phillip and Torres Straits pilots in favour of the continuance of the licensing system. It appears that the salaries received by the licensed Port Phillip pilots largely exceed those paid elsewhere. It was contended

by their representatives that the service was much more difficult, the work more arduous, and requiring more skill than at any other port. But similar evidence in respect to other ports was by the statio?-ed those ; while, Wills, 16016_2_ doubtless, there are some special features m connex1on with the pilot serviCe at Port Morris, 8356. Phillip that differentiate it from other harbors, yet, from the evidence given before Port Phillip your seems no reason to believe that this difference. is so great be as to necessitate a contmuance of the present system. Apart from the drfficulties of servants. the port, it was contended that no adequate supervision could be exercised over the McKie, 3669. men engaged, and that, therefore, it was highly desirable they should be licensed rather than State servants. No satisfactory proof, however, was adduced in favour of this contention, which might, in lesser degree, indeed, be made in respect of several other ports of the Commonwealth.





Pilots' salaries. In reference to salary, there appears to be some reason for the complaint made by the pilots of other ports, that they are insufficiently paid, and your C?mmissioners suggest that, when taken over by the Commonwe:tlth, a revision of salaries should be Torres straits effected. They recommend strongly that the Port Phillip pilot service should be taken

pilots. over by the Government. In respect of the Torres Straits service there may be some

reason why this cannot be advantageously done. .. .

Upon the licensed pilots being taken over by the Commonwealth, l?roviswn should be made for the purchase of the whole of their plant at a fair valuation, and due regard paid to the equities of their position. The revised provisions for periodical examinations to test the fitness of pilots made by the various States seem to leave little room for improvement. Annual The evidence shows that the men now engaged are. physically fit, their eyesight examination of • ·

pilots. being regularly tested. We recommend, however, that uniform regulations be drawn

up with a view of making arrangements for an annual examination for physical fitness, smith, 928o. and that the eyesight test be based upon Dr. Ramsay Smith's suggestions, which your

Commissioners consider to be both efficient and appropriate. Liability of pilots for accidents.

A considerable amount of evidence was adduced on the question as to whether pilots should be liable (as proposed in the Bill) to theextentof£100foraccidentscaused through want of skill or neglect. This provision has been in force in Victoria for some time, and, believing it to be a salutary one, your Commissioners recommend its general


Liability or The sub-section providing that the Commonwealth should be entirely exempted

from liability for accidents to vessels whilst in the charge of pilots did not meet with

causedbypilots. h l l f · b C · · h ' t

Smith, 9228. Robertson, 16164.

Fumigation of cabins of consumptives and others. Sinclair, 24844.

t e genera approva o witnesses, ut your ommisswners cannot see t en way o recommend any alteration in this respect.



Provisions of "A " to apply to all ships in Comrnonwealth waters. Provisions of "B" to apply to-(a) Ships registered in Australia. (b) Ships licensed to trade on the Australian coast; .

(c) Ships continuously trading to any port in the Commonwealth whose articles are drawn out in the Commonwealth, and whose final port of discha1·ge of crew is in the Commonwealth.

A. The provisions of the Bill relating to health were duly considered by your Commissioners, whose labours were aided by most valuable and carefully compiled evidence from expert witnesses. The provisions, as they stood in the Bill, differ in several important particulars from those of the Merchant Shipping Act, which were in some respects not suitable for modern requirements. In particular, the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act fail in not providing for adequate inspection. Your Commissioners recommend that more stringent regulations with respect to the sanitary appliances on board ships than those in the Bill be adopted, and the law relating to

contagious and infectious diseases be amended. In this connexion, too, your Commissioners recommend that provision ·be made for the thorough fumigation and scientific cleansing of all cabins occupied by persons suffering from tuberculosis or any infectious or contagious disease. In view of the evidence given, this would appear to be a reform urgently necessary. _

It is an open question to what further extent the entrance into the Commonwealth of persons suffering from any physical or mental disability should be restricted. The Immigration Restriction Act gives certain powers in this connexion which, if exercised, would, we think, do all that is required. ship should B. In another direction, too, your Commissioners suggest an alteration of the

existing law. Where accidents or diseases of a serious character occur on a vessel

when some considerable distance from her destination, other ports, however, heing

within easy re:otch, it is desirable that the ship should make for one of these with all despatch. A case was cited in which the captain of the Coolgardie was seized Grayson, 15553. with some illness when the vessel was between Fremantle and Adelaide. Becoining rapidly worse, the ship was headed with all despatch .for Albany, and the patient landed.


Your Commissioners recommend that the ship shall in all such cases with all convenient despatch be required to put into the port most easily reached where the necessary medical attention can be obtained. ·

In conformity with the general practice now followed on up-to-date ships of Medical men carrying a medical man, we recommend that in the case of vessels carrying not less on than 100 passengers, and on voyages of five days or over, a legally qualified medical man be carried; and on those vessels not thus provided for, it is suggested

that the master or some other person should be qualified to render" first aid." It is also suggested that a knowledge of" first aid, should be necessary to obtain a master's, or office!'s, certificate, and that opportunities should be . afforded for seamen and apprentices to qualify.


On of the of the Commonwealth taking over the

of quarantme considerable evidence was taken. It would seem that the present dis- jointed systemsnarass ship-owners, irritate travellers, and impose restrictions on trade a voca 0

which are alike unnecessary and ineffective. Your Commissioners are of opinion not Smith, 9258. only that the control should be transferred to the Commonwealth, but that the necessity for the transfer is urgent. They therefore recommend the immediate introduction of a Quarantine Bill, which, at a later stage, may be incorporated with the Navigation

Act. In the preparation of such a measure the draft Bill furnished by Dr. Ramsay Smith is worthy of careful consideration.


The expediency of taking over the lighthouses, beacons, and buoys, except those within the limits of ports, is, we think, unquestionable. The witnesses were unani- mously in favour of this course, and we recommend its early adoption. As to the Commonwealth. powers of the Commonwealth to take over the control of harbor lights, beacons, and buoys, there seems to be some. difference of opinion. Assuming that the Commonwealth has the power, we still consider that no good purpose is to be served at present in removing the lights, beacons, and buoys in harbors from the control of the States.


For many reasons your Commissioners regard thispart of the Bill as one of the most important presented for their consideration. A very considerable amount of evi­ dence was received in connexion therewith, and a great diversity of opinion expressed. of some thirty witnesses who came before the Commission, fifteen, more or less unreservedly, supported the principle embodied in the Bill, the remaining moiety opposing it. Your Commissioners' attention was directed by several witnesses to the practice of foreign

countries in this conne:rion. Those who opposed the principle pointed out that it was contrary to the policy of Great Britain. On the other hand, very few nations allow foreigners to participate in their coastal trade. According to a compilation of the Board of Trade, dated 17th June, 1902, the following countries reserve their coastal trade for native bottoms absolutely :-Brazil, Columbia, Costa Rica, Egypt, France, .

Guatemala, Italy, Peru, Portugal, Russia, Spain, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela; whilst almost all other nations having any mercantile marine worth speaking of open their coastal trade by treaty only. It must be noted, too, that those countries which open their coastal trade to foreign shipping by treaty arrangement or law, in some cases are not exposed to com­

petition of any serious kind. The coastal trade of Germany, Norway, and Denmark for example, is almost entirely carried out on native bottoms. Where there are few inducements to foreign competitors, the necessity for restriction does not arise. Your Commissioners, in their deliberations upon this question, have been sensible Effects of

of the national and Imperial responsibilities of the Commonwealth. The matter has of restriction. been complicated by many points peculiar both to our geographical and industrial position, and our relations with the Empire. Many witnesses, while admitting the of fo.stering a mercantile marine, to any restriction upon

sh1ppmg whiCh m1ght tend to decrease the fa01htws for Intercourse and trade with foreign countries. It was pointed out that we were cut off from the rest of the world by a wide of and that our prosperity an

upon a speedy and economical transport of our produce; that to restrict foreign-going






ships from participating in the coastal trade would tend to drive them away altogether. Further, it was urged, that in the case of our Empire, which is, in effect, a family of nations scattered over every quarter of the earth, whose ships carry one-half of the ocean-borne goods of the world, peculiar difficulties arise when any member desires to deal with the conditions under which its coastal trade shall be conducted. It is sufficient for most countries to consider their relationship with foreigners. With us it is necessary also to consider the effect of any such conditions upon other parts of the Empire. The Partial witnesses fully realized this difficulty. Some recommended that all British ships should

be exempted from the operations of the proposed law, while others thought that such

steamers. an exemption should only extend to the carrying of passengers by British mail steamers

between Western and South Australia pending the connexion of the railway systems of those States. With respect to these steamers, your Commissioners consider that such an exemption may be safely agreed to. But while thoroughly appreciating the desir­ ableness of differentiating between British and foreign shipping, and having a lively apprehension of the importance of encouraging British, as opposed to foreign, ships, your Commissioners have not been able to recommend a more general exemption.

Among the reasons which actuate your Commissioners in indorsing the pro­ visions of this part of the Bill are the widely-differing conditions existing in the coastal trade of Australia and those in the deep-sea trade. wages on For instance, the cost of up-keep of vessels engaged in our coasting trade is

very much greater than that of the foreign-going ships. Again, the wages paid on

Grayson, I5159. foreign-going boats range, in the case of A.B.'s, from £2 lOs. to £3 l5s. per month;

for firemen, from £310s. to £410s. per month; for coloured seamen, from £1 to £113s. 4d.

72w6• per month; and for coloured firemen, from £1 2s. 8d. to £2 per month; while A.B.'s on the Australian coast receive £6 lOs., and firemen £8 lOs. ; besides which the food supplied on vessels on the coast is of a much higher quality, and costs more. sutsidies. Nor does this complete the inequality in conditions. The foreign-going com-

petitor is in a large number of cases subsidized by his country to such an extent as to· Imperial . make the task of competing with him extremely difficult. In some cases the amount

of this subsidy renders the foreign-going ship-owner comparatively indifferent to the .. received for freights. For instance, the Mes»ageries-Maritimes receives, in

addition to a subsidy on ship-building, a sum of Ss. 3d. per mile on every trip. The

Nord-Deutscher-Lloyd is paid a sum of £115,000 per year for the service to Australia;

Report, P· 24· whilst in 1901 the Japanese Government authorized a payment for that year of £53,660

for the Australian trade. It is obvious that the receipt of these subsidies, together

with the lower rates of wages prevailing on these steamers, may enable the companies

Report, P· 10 ' named, or others which may hereafter receive subsidies, to completely undercut com-petitors who have not these advantages. . .

subsidized ships Your Commissioners, therefore, recommend that all foreign ships rece1vmg

from subsidies be prohibited from participating in our coastal trade. This provision will

coastal trade. not apply to subsidies paid by the Imperial or Commonwealth Governments, or by the

Arguments against Part VII. of the Bill.

McMillan,18125. p,.xton, 2591)5. Laurie, 11552-5.

Imperial interests considered.


Government of any State.

* * * * * * I<

The arguments against the clauses in Part VII. were'-1. That they are opposed to Imperial policy. 2. That they will prove detrimental to our industrial progress by restricting facilities for transport.

3. That they will conduce to a monopoly by the local companies, and place the producers and the travelling public at their mercy.

As to the first, your Commissioners have already pointed out that the only real and effective safeguard for our Empire, industrially as well as nationally, is the existence of a numerous and efficiently-manned mercantile marine--that we shall be best doing our part in this great work by providing the facilities for the establishment and the maintenance of a marine sufficient to transport our products in time of peace, and to assist in guarding our shores in time of war. . f 1 .1S;.>

That this can only be effected by providing facilities for the employment and training of British or Australian seamen goes without saying. Allusion has already been made to the alarming decrease of British seamen. In the opinion of your missioners, such conditions are incompatible with the maintenance, to say nothing

of the further progress of the Empire, for we cannot, and ought not, look to the foreigners in our ships to fight our battles for us. . ._ _ .. • : L _


Your Commissioners consider, therefore, that we shall best serve Imperial in­ terests by setting an example which the other members of the Empire may be in­ spired to follow, in providing for the defence of the Commonwealth by employing our own citizens on our own ships.

As to the sec.ond, that our industrial interests are imperilled by the proposal to permit only Australian ships, and those complying with Australian conditions, to trade on the coast, your Commissioners are of opinion that there is no real foundation for such fears. Australian trade with other countries is growing by leaps and bounds, and, with a recurrence of good seasons, may be expected to continue to do so.

Nor is there any reason to believe that the trade has been, or is likely to be, rrncrease oreign·gomg unprofitable to the ship-owner. Notwithstanding statements as to the unprofitableships. nature of the Australian trade, an increasing number of vessels of modern construction compete for our oversea carriage each year. Their speed is greater, their carrying

capacity larger, and their arrangements for the stowage of produce more in accord with what we need. One hundred more ships, aggregating approximately 400,000 tons, left the port of Sydney alone for.foreign parts in 1904 than in 1901. The evidence of Mr. Boner shows that the Nord-Deutscher-Lloyd, which receives its subsidy con- Boner, 17525.

ditionally upon not carrying our meat, grain, or produce to Germany, is so satisfied with its operations in our trade, and the profitable prospects of the future, that it has decided u pun the construction of half -a-dozen vessels to be run without subsidy, in order to compete for a larger share of it. In view of these facts, and of the substantial reduc-

tions made by the various foreign-going companies during the present year for the carriage of Australian produce to London, it would appear that the fears expressed by certain witnesses as to the possibilities of transport facilities now available being reduced are groundless. Your Commissioners consider that the evidence before them

amply shows that the Australian trade has been, and will continue to be, so profitable as to attract a sufficient fleet of ships to meet all the reasonable requirements of Australian producers. As to the third, the possibility of the provisions in Part VII. creating a monopoly of the Australian coastal trade may be conveniently considered under the heading of



Upon the point that the limitation of the coastal trade to vessels complying with co.astal . A 1. a· . ld l . 1 ·a bl f ·a shipping rmg. ustra Ian con 1t10ns wou resu t }n a monopo y, a cons1 era e amount o ev1 ence Extent. of its was received. It was freely stated that a combine does already exist, by which the operatwns. rates for passengers and cargo carried by the companies in the Owners'

Federationare regulated. Its extent may be gauged from the fact that out of about 188,000 tons engaged in Inter-State traffic, less than 10,000 are oustide the ring. It McLennan, would appear that the combine has been in operation for some time, and complaints 24287- 92 · of a very ,Strong and emphatic character were received as to its methods.

It seems to be the practice to make rebates to shippers who deal exclusively with the members of the Federation. The extent and the manner in which this practice operates is set forth by the witnesses, Messrs. Alexander, McPherson, McLennan, and Alexander, others. The witness, Mr. McLennan, occupies an exceptional position. He is present representative of the chief ship-owners outside the Federation, yet whilst erson,

director of one of the companies within the Federation, he assisted to draft the rebate scheme. It may be taken for granted, therefore, that his information is reliable, and, in the main, it was not contradicted by Mr. Grayson, secretary of the Federation. Gra:r-sun, 25060. Mr. McPherson, a member of the Council of the Chamber of Commerce of Mel­

bourne, and Mr. Alexander, Chamber of Commerce, Fremantle, gave evidence in accord with that given by Mr. McLennan. The method pursued in connexion with the granting of rebates would appear to be open to some criticism. An undertaking has to be given that the shipper, neither by himself nor through his agent, will send or receive any goods other than by the vessels of the Federation. According to the evidence of Messrs. McLennan, Alexander, McPherson, and others, this is rigidly enforced, any

departure from the agreement involving the forfeiture of the whole of the rebates on the year's transactions. Mr. McPherson gave an instance of how this worked out in his own case:- ,

In 1903, when I had 300 tons of iron to ship to Fremantle, I went to the shipping people to learn Working of the rate of freight. They held a meeting, and then they gave me a quotation. They said-" You will rebate system. have to pay 18s. a ton now, but in twelvs months' time, if you confine all your shipments to the ports of


:I I

,j ·I


J, ;i, I!

llfcPherson, 3964.

Articles of combine.

McLennan, 2435\l.

:McLennan, 24371.

McLennan, 24380.

MCLennan, 24524.

Defence of the combine.

McWilliam, 22679. Glassford, 16337. Moxon, 12867.

:Legislation recommended.


the North and the West to the companies within the ring, we will grant you a rebate of 20 per cent.': In other words, I had to leave with them a hostage of 3s. 6d. a ton on the 300 tons, and let it stay in their hands for twelve months. Had I not agreed to confine all my shipments to the Association, I should have had to charge ISs. a ton for the freight of the iron, and probabl.v I should have lost the business.

This statement was fully corroborated by other witnesses,. It would seem that to commit a breach of this undertaking, it is not even necessary for the person to whom the goods are consigned to authorize shipment on any vessel outside the Federation; the fact that they were so shipped, with or without his knowledge, is sufficient to involve the forfeiture of the rebates in hand, both on account of the shipper and the consignee. The following articles of the combine were put in by Mr. McLennan :-

Acts which constitute breaches of bonus regulations :-Accrued bonuses become forfeited unde:r the following conditions :-Through a company, firm, or individual shipping or otherwise receiving cargo, directly or indirectly, by any other vessels than those owned or chartered by the associated companies. It is distinctly understood that any company, or firm, or individual, who may ship or reeeive cargo by any outside vessel,

although it does not pay the freight to that outside becomes disqualified under the above clauses. In the case of a company, firm, or individual, carrying on business as general carriers, and acting under instructions merely as general eargo carriers, with no control over the purchase sale, or shipment, of the goods, then that carrier is exempt.

There is a note with regard to that. It says :-If a firm of carriers ship or receive cargo by outside vessels, that fact at once disqualifies them, but should they prove to the Bonus Committee that they had no control over the purchase, sale, or shipping of the goods, then the above clauses will enable local committees to add their 11ame to the bonus list without having first to cancel their name and get the authority of the

Central Committee to re-instate them on the bonus list.

That the transactions of the combine in this connexion are very large may be judged from the statement of Mr. McLennan that" There must be in the hands of the Associated Steam-ship Companies at the present time about £60,000 of these accrued bonuses which they pay out to shippers; it cannot be less." He added that of this from 20 to 25 per cent. is either forfeited through breaches of rules or unclaimed.

According to Mr. Grayson, whose defence of the practice and the methods of the combine generally is fully set forth in reply to Question 15221 et seq. of the evidence, it was stated that some such system was absolutely necessary in order to_,_ (a) Check ruinous competition amongst the local companies.

(b) Insure regularity of charges ; and

(c) Prevent the carrying trade of Austraha drifting into the hands of foreign-owned shipping.

Mr. Grayson stated that the competition between members of the Federation had at various times reduced their rates to a point far below a remunerative one, and gave instances in support of this statement. He denied that the system, was unfair; on the contrary, he considered reasonable rates of a permanent character of great advantage to shippers. A man contracting to deliver goods some time ahead was able to do so

now with the assurance that the rates of carriage would be those ruling at the time the contract was made.

Upon the necessity of the Federation using every legitimate means to control the trade, and to prevent shippers sending their goods by tramp steamers in search of "wayside pickings" at rates far below those at which the companies, or, indeed, any regular traders, could afford to charge, Mr. Grayson and other witnesses were most

emphatic. Mr. Grayson, supported by Mr. Me William, of Brisbane, said that no complaints had been made by the great body of shippers, and some other witnesses agreed that the operation of the combine in fixing a schedule of uniform and permanent rates was distinctly beneficial.

As your Commissioners consider that the rebate system is open to grave abuses, and calculated to seriously prejudice the commercial and industrial interests of the Commonwealth, they recommend the introduction of legislation at an early date, making it illegal for the owners, master, or agent of any vessel to give rebates or other advantages to any shipper or consignee of goods, if the condition of such rebates or advantages is that there shall be exclusive shipment by a certain vessel or vessels.



The scope o£ the Bill in dealing with seaworthiness is limited to­ ( a) All British ships. (b) All foreign ships carrying passengers or cargo shipped in any port in Australia to any port in the British dominions.

By Division 5 of Part IV. of the Bill, however, unsafe foreign ships may be provisionally detained by notice served on the consul of the country to which the ship belongs. The evidence given before your Commissioners points to the necessity of bringing all ships within the scope of the sections dealing with seaworthiness and survey. Official unseaworthy

. f h . . h. h . f M M K. ( h h d d ships should witnesses o t e varwus States, w1t t e exceptiOn o . r. c 1e w o a some oubts be detained. as to· our jurisdiction over foreign ships), were unanimous in this recommendation. Your Commissioners, having in view the importance of protecting life and property, recommend that no ship shall, under any circumstances, be permitted to leave any

Australian port unless conforming to the standard of sea worthiness, as set forth in the judgment of Hedley v. Pinkney S.S. Co. In case of ships belonging to countries whose laws do not provide for any manning scale, it is recommended that it shall not be necessary to conform to our manning

schedules, so long as, in the opinion of the superintendent or other duly appointed officer, such ships are sufficiently manned.



To apply to-( a) Ships registered in Australia. (b) Ships licensed to trade on the Australian Coast. (c) Bhips continuously trading to any port in the Commonwealth, whose

articles are drawn out in the Commonweal h, and whose final port of discharge of crew is in the Commonwealth.

As to life-saving appliances, in which category boats and their gear, fire of life­ extinguishing apparatus, life rafts, belts, and other equipment are included, your Commissioners recommend that schedules be drawn up to meet all reasonable require-ments, and provision should be made to determine and maintain, by frequent practical tests and periodical inspection, the efficiency of the wholeof the life-saving appliances

and equipment. In respect to boat and fire drill, the evidence shows that in manv cases few, t any, opportunities are afforded to the crews of vessels to make efficient. " cien ·

Boats are rarely, if ever, swung out, and still more rarely placed in the water. The crews are not drilled, although the.y contain stewards, firemen, trimmers, and others who are utterly untrained in the use of oars. While this laxity is very general, your Co;mmissioners were glad to note that on

some vessels, such as the mail steamers and the Inter-State passenger steamers, a different state of things prevails, as on these there would appear to be periodic drill. The evidence further shows that one of the chief dangers to which modern vessels are exposed is that of collision. While not undervaluing the importance of life-saving appliances, your Commissioners strongly recommend that all ships built

after the passing of the proposed Navigation Act shall not be regarded as seaworthy unless divided by properly constructed water-tight compartments.

ll. FERRY AND EXCURSION STEAMERS. In respect to ferry-boats, the evidence shows that, while as a rule there is ample life-saving apparatus carried, there are, however, no suffici_ent means of utilizing them in times of disaster. Practically the only dangem to whiCh ferry-boats are exposed

are collision and fire. As to fire, the circumstances of the harbor, river, and bay steamers of Australia are such as to reduce the risk to a minimum.


But the danger from collision is a very real, and, with increasing traffic, an Life:saving · ·wh · · b 1 h t h b lk f h l"f · 1· appliances on ever-growmg one. en 1t 1s remem ere(. t a, t e u - o t e 1 e-savmg app 1ances rerry·boats. form the seating accommoJation of the steamer, and that the passengers would. in most cases be seated or danding upon the seats, it c:m he readily undPrstood that in a crisis

it would not be easy to get them overboard. ·



In harbors such as Port Jackson, where a steamer is never more than, say, five minutes from shore, these appliances must be available within that period, since the boat can be, where the engines are not at once disabled, be.ached or run alongside a wharf. Your Commissioners, therefore, consider, in view of the fact that collisions are the chief danger to which ferries, and, indeed, all modern ships, are liable, that a

system of water-tight compartments is the only safe method of providing against loss of life under such circumstances. water-tight They, therefore, recommend that no further licences should be issued to ferry-compartments recommended. boats, unless provided with a sound hull and equipment, first-class machinery, and an

Bad weather not confined to any particular season.

Cuthbertson, 6168.

Watson, 1098!}.

Anomalies in load-line proVlsions.

Minister's] power to fix when winter l

oad·line to be used.

• to be

up-to-date system of water-tight compartments.


To apply to all ships leaving Australia, excepting those belonging to countries whose load-lines are accepted by the British Board of Trade.

On the subject of deck and load -lines considerable evidence was received. Opinion as to the necessity for a bad weather load-line was almost equally divided. Those who thought this unnecessary were largely influenced by the fact that the periods at which bad weather may be expected on the Australian coast are irregular, and not confined to the winter months, and that, therefore, it would be useless to lay down a rule insisting upon lighter loading during any particular season of the year. The Government Meteorologist of New South Wales furnished a return, put in by Mr. Cuthbertson,

which showed that bad weather was not confined to any season of the year; and although this applied only to the coast of New South Wales, similar conditions might be expected on the whole of the eastern coast. The opinion of the Government Meteorologist was challenged by several witnesses, even in its application to New South Wales, while as to other portions of our coast widely divergent statements were made. It, however, seems, in respect of the north-west coast of Australia, that a hurricane season may be regularly looked for between November and April.

As to a comparison between the weather in these and other latitudes, your Commissioners were informed it was usually much less stormy here than in the other hemisphere. One effect of this difference in climatic conditions was that vessels sailing out of Great Britain for Australia and the Southern Hemisphere during certain months were only permitted to load down to the winter load-line, although during.a considerable portion of -their journey they would be exposed to conditions similar to those which affected our own shipping loaded to the summer mark. And, again, with respect to Australian ships engaged in the foreign trade, they would be permitted to load down to the summer mark, even when competing with others loaded only to the winter mark.

The margin of safety afforded by the present load-line was stated by some witnesses to be too small. In support of this contention, a list of the number of disasters which have happened to vessels trading on our coast was given. It was shown that the majority of these were cargo vessels, imd further, that in the case of such vessels only was it usually the practice to load to the summer mark. Passenger vessels, by reason of their sailing to schedule times, and depending less upon the amount of freight, seldom or ever were so loaded. ·

After a careful review of the evidence, your Commissioners are of opinion that, in consequence of the Australian coast extending over so many degrees oflatitude and longitude, a uniform load-line suitable to these varying conditions cannot be adopted. They, therefore, recommend that the provisions of the present Imperial law be adopted, but that power be given to the Minister to fix as-(1) the seasons of the year; (2) the nature of the voyage; (3) the nature of the cargo may demand, when the ship may not be submerged below her winter mark.

In to load-lines generally, your Commissioners further recommend that all ships leaving any port in Australia shall be marked according to the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act. An exception might be made in favour of vessels belonging to countries where load-lines are provided for which are accepted by the

Board of Trade as equivalent to the requirements of the British Act. · Questions for Imperial Conference.

In the event of an Imperial Conference being held, your Commissioners think it desirable to consider-( a) Whether the North shall not apply to ships

leaving Australia, vid Cape Horn; (b) the advisableness of a light load-line for ships in ballast.



In connexion with the provisions for survey, thrE3e things seem essential­ !. That sufficient surveyors should be appointed. 2. That they should have adequate powers.

3. That provision be made to enable these to be given effect to.

As to the first, the evidence shows that modern ship-building called for some Qualifications change in the qualifications of persons acting as marine surveyors. The modern ship ot surveyors. is largely constructed of steel, yet the marine surveyor is usually a man whose knowledge better fits him to speak as to the seaworthiness of the older type of vessel. He is not

usually an expert in machinery, and so cannot speak with authority as to the condition of the ship's engines. Yet it is upon the efficiency of these that the safety of the steam-ship largely, if not entirely, depends. And, as has been pointed out by 1\Ir. Travers, Travers, 18258. secretary of the Shipwrights' Society, surveyors are generally seafaring men, possessed of expert knowledge on the general fitness of the ship, but not so competent to detect

flaws and imp&fections in structure or equipment as an expert. Your Commissioners, therefore, consider that, in these days of specialization, a radical departure from old-time methods is necessary, and they therefore recommend the appointment, after examination, of three classes of surveyors :-

, ..

1. General surveyors-men who are qualifiea to speak of the general fit- classes ot ness of the vessel, her deck, and hull (if constructed of wood), rigging, stowage of cargo, fitness for the voyage, and general equipment.

2. Boiler and iron hull surveyors,-experts in regard to boilers and iron hulls.

3. Engineer surveyors-experts in respect of the engines and machinery.


Your Commissioners learned, during the course o£ their inquiry; that very Inadequate. many of the most salutary provisions of the law fail to effect their purpose, owing to m inadequacy of inspection. Indeed, many of the evils to which reference has been made in this report, would have been minimized, if not entirely removed, had the existing law been effectively administered.

instan.ce, the Merchant Act, and the Board of Trade

regulatiOns, provide, m regard to accommodation of crews, that forecastles shall be schedule o. · well lighted, properly ventilated, and kept free from anchor chains, paint lockers, &c., the evidence showed that, in many vessels, the space allotted to the crew was dark and gloomy, insufficiently ventilated, and uncomfortable and unhealthy through the

presence of forbidden impedimenta. , A scale of provisions is prescribed, but no adequate inspection provided to of insure a proper standard in quantity, variety, or quality. The law enacts that' a and medicine chest must be carried ; but in some cases this is empty, and in others stored Smith, 9228·

. h d h' h ld d 1 1 . Doyle, 24012. w1t rugs w IC are o an va ue ess. The inspection of life-saving equipment has been too often merely perfunctory. One instance was quoted where a ship's boat, on beingplacedinthewater,sank almost immediately; whilst in another case, although the boat was in every way well found, Travers, 18267 it was fast to the chocks, and, owing to defective falls and tackle, took two hours to launch.

As the evidence shows that the same looseness in administration exists generally, your Commissioners desire to emphasize the necessity for a more thorough adm1nistra· tion of the law. Qualified men, such as the Port Health Authorities, should regularly and systematically inspect medicines and provisions, and all that pertains to health.

Competent inspectors should be charged with the duty of examining and testing life­ boats and other life-saving apparatus, and all that pertains to seaworthiness. A number of witnesses urged. that competent men should inspect the loading Inspectiou of gear on ships and the stowage of cargo ; and as these are essential to the protection gear,

of life and safety of the vessel, your Commissioners indorse the recommendation. F.l0492. c




1'o apply to.: all oil and electric launches.

In reference to the application of the oil and electric motor to marine naviga· tion, your Commissioners consider that for harbor and river traffic is likely to become increasingly popular in the very near future. It is thought desira.ble to recom­ mend that. separate provisions be made in respect of such craft. The evidence shows . that they do not require so much slcill to drive as ordinary engines.: and that at. p:esent ot no certificate of a:hy kind is necessary to take charge of them. Your CommiSSIOners

consider it inadvisi'ble that this state of things should continue. Licences should be

issued to persons who, after practical examination, show themselves capable of driving a boat within the precincts of the waters in which they desire to ply, and who possess such knowledge of the rules of the road as will prevent them being a danger to other traffic. In their opinion, no person should be permitted to take charge of such a boat

unless liCE'llSed.


Reference has already been made to the urgent necessity which exists for encouraging the employment of British seamen. ·

Ne:m3ity lor a The amendments in the law suggested by your Commissioners will, the.r believe, defence force. • k d h

do something in this direction. But there is much leeway to rna e up, an t e matter calls for immediate action. Not only are seamen required to man the mercantile marine, but also to defend the Commonwealth, and thus enable us to play our part in the defence of the Empire. While the British Navy is unassailed we are secure, but the most optimistic can hardly hope that this happy state of things will continue for ever. The nations of the world, jealous of her power, and covetous of her possessions, will, when the psychological moment arrives, challenge her supremacy, and we shall suffer a rude and, it may be, terrible awakening. To be prepared against such a day, we must have ships and men. Our financial resources are limited, and we cannot hope to possess line-of-battle-ships, or even first-class cruisers; but torpedo boats and similar craft are

within our means, and, properly handled, would give, as the late war has shown, a good account of themselves. These can be obtained at comparatively short notice, and with little difficulty. But it is far otherwise with the force needed to man them. It has become a truism, which people accept unquestioned, but do not heed, that it takes: tiille to train a seam!in; and the time required to produce an naval fighting

man is much greater than formerly. To what extent the effectiveness of a navy is absolutely dependent upon a sufficient supply of trained seamen, the experience of Afuerica and Russia in the recent wars may be instanced. In the Report of the Com·

mittee of Congress appointed in 1904 in connexion with questions affecting the marine EA:

of the United States of America, it is stated that had Am. erica, in her war with Spain,.- "]}enca an o - .· Rts]i>. met with a single reverse, necessitating further drafts of seamen, none were available

for the purpose. Practically the whole of her sailors and fishermen had been absorbedr and to man the fleets recourse must have been had to landsmen. Just what this means: is shown by the experience of the ill-starred Baltic fleet of Russia. America is now, with feverish haste, building a fleet of up-to-date battleships, and this her colossal resources will enable her speedily to accomplish; but the task of manning these· leviathans as soon as completed with trained seamen. is likely to prove beyond even he!' power.

Whilst unable, owing to a lack of sufficient data, to recommend any definite plan, your Commissioners are convinced .that prompt action is highly desirable. Sug­ gestions have been put forward by the Chairman of the Commission, which appear in Appendix D, and which your Commissioners regard as worthy of serious considera­ tion.


It was suggested in evidence that means should be adopted to train boys desirous· of following the sea as a calling, and also to utilize a proportion of the neglected youths of the Commonwealth. Unfortunately, we have no training ships in Australia similar to W and the of and consequently there are no oppor­

t.umties given to to the educat1?n ne?essary to fit them for a seafaring

hfe. At same time nas been accomplished m New South Wales by the nautical school sh1p Sobraon, whiCh has for many years been the means of reclaiming the unruly,

and o£ providing a home for the neglected a-nd the unfortunate of our growing youths. Official reports show that its success in transforming, by discipline and suitable educa­ tion, boys who would otherwise have most probably filled our gaols or become ip. other ways a burden upon the community, into reputable citizens, hil-s been remarkable. But as a means of tr1:1ining boys in practical sealllanship, it has, until qqite recently, owing to the absence of a seagoing tender, been able to do little or nothing. By an arrangement with the Admiralty the New South Wales Government has now secured the H.M.S. Dart to act in that capacity, and w-ith the co-operation of ship-owners a constant supply of trained youths will be available for enrolment in our niJ,val forcee.

Your Commissioners recommend that, if possible, .arra11gements be made with the various State Governments to have this system generally adopted through the Commonwealth. Training ships should be stationed at the more important ports, and provision made for boys being plact'd aboard and instructed in seamanship,

gunnery, torpedo work, and other essentials, with the view to subsequent enrolment in the A.R.N.R. In this way much might be done to provide Australian seamen for Australian ships, and furnish a valuable addition to the e:ffectiye fighting fomes of_ the Empire. : , , .


Your Commissioners have already pointed Dut the advantages to be gained by the more general employment of British- seamen the marine ot the Empire. It would appear, frDm figure:;; .alreaily that Britaj;n',s pr.opo;rti.o;nate share of the world's shipping trade has been during the last deca(le reduced, owing to the increasing competition of other countries, alld the;re is reason to believe, unless

some remedial measures be adopted, that it will be still further affected. Both the evidence given before the Commission, ;and.the Report of the British or Steam-ship Subsidies Committee, show every cll.early the 'Unfair b,andi£aps im.p,osed upon the British ship-owners by the laws and customs .oi .othltr deter-

min,ed efforts are bei11g made by $3:Ubsidies .a.nd other means to wrest the se.a-bo:rne trade of the-world from Great Britain, It is not ne.cessary tp refer in detail to what is being done in the f?-llest may b .. e obtained _from the ort of the

Steam-sh1p Subs1d1es Committee. Nor IS It mateir'L9,l to constder the w:tsdom of the policy of encouraging ship-owners by means of subsidies. It is obvious, if th-ese he sufficiently large, they will enabie cea;rgo to be at rates ewe:lil bdo-w co,st. Apart fr:om these, the Britishship-mwlfler !labours up.der He

pays higher wages than the ship-owners of most other countries. His vessels are ·to a more system of insp.ectjoo. A ship under tb,e 13riti:;;h flag may not be sub­ merged beyond tke Jegallimi:t indicated by he:r: Plimsoll m{t;rk ; but the .same ship, if transferred to a foreign flag, -may be so submerged with impunity.

The 'welfare of the shipping industry being of fundamental.importance, yom Commissioners view its present position with a certaiR amount of disquietude. They believe, however, that there is reason to hope that while a still fu;rther reduction m:ay take pla.ce in the :relative sh-aille oi the woirlld'.s iby the the British -marine, its actual tonnage will go on increasing.

'fhe ov-er-sea tr-ade of the Commouweal,th is already c-oJu.sid.eraibd,e, aliil.d is each .Encouragement year inDreas-iRg rap-id!ly. . 'f.o this .as m_,lil!ch as possiib.Le £or the ,of the

Empire, appears to be n-ot o®-il:y our duty bu.t mutaa1ly ,advantageous. Gr.e.11it iBroitain is now our bes,t .cu-&toroer, and it is to .he.r w.e look for ;E1;1twe -ma,rlm:ts for -much of our produce. On the other hand, we buy largely from Great Bri,ta,.i.n, since under ,any we must always considerable quantities of we ought, whenever

possible, to encourage the Bnt1sh producer rather than the foreigner. 1

Your Commissioners are strongly of opinion that prefe-rential tr-eatment should be given to British ships trading with Australia, if manned by a proportion of British citizens or carrying a cargo of which a substantial proportion is · of British .origin or ma.n101facture; b;ut., in the absence of any detailed information, are not at this

stage prepared to commit themselves either to the suggestions forward by the Chairman. or to any definite scheme. As the matter is one the E.mpire as a whole, it is held by your Commissi()J(I.ers as ;pec.uliarly for consideration by the proposed Imperial Conference.





Carran, 162S6.

Your Commissioners have considered the Despatch of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, officially submitted in connexion with the serious constitutional questions which have arisen during their investigations. In order that the Imperial Conference, if held, might have before it the legal grounds upon which the proposed exercise of the legislative powers of the Commonwealth in certain directions is based, your Commis- .

sioners have obtained from the Secretary of the Department of the Attorney-General a memorandum by him on the letter forwarded from the Crown Solicitor to the Board of Trade (Parliamentary Paper No. 15, tabled lOth August, 1905). This, together with a summary of his evidence, will be found in Appendix E.


Summarized, the findings and recommendations of your Commissioners are as follow:-1. That the number of British seamen employed on British ships is declining.) 2. That unfavorable surroundings constitute the main cause for this decline.

*3. That the following improvements in accommodation are desirable:.-(a) 120 cubic feet of air-space per man. (b) Efficient ventilation in sleeping quarters. (c) Bathrooms, supplied with hot water for engineers, :firemen, and others

on steam-ships. (d) Adequate lighting of forecastles by day and night.

*4. That the scale of provisions as per Appendix A be adopted. · *5. That ships show their victualling bills for each voyage. *6. That cooks be certificated. *7. That seamen be entitled to receive two-thirds of the wages earned by them at any port where the ship calls for trading purposes.

8, That all seamen be engaged only through a Government officer-the Super­ intendent.


t9. That imprisonment for desertion be abolished. 10. That advance notes be abolished, and allotment.notes restricted to relations

*11. That a manning scale for officers (vide page 20) be adopted. · *12. That a manning scale for seamen, as proyided in the Bill, be adopted. *13. That a manning scale for engineers (vide page 21) be adopted. 14. That third-class engineers having sea service, on passing a practical exami­ nation, be permitted to qualify for higher grade certificates.

*15. That the basis of a manning scale for :firemen be 3! tons of coal per day per man. *16. That a committee be appointed to adjust anomalies arising under the proposed manning scales, such committee to comprise one representative from the owners, one £rom the crew, and a neutral Government expert.

17. That be not rated as A.B.'s unless they have had four years1

experience before the mast.

* Recommendations limited (a) Ships registered in Australia, (b) Ships licensed to trade on the Australian N>ast. (c) Ships continuously trading to any port in the Commonwealth, whose articles .are drawn

out in the and whose final port o£ discharge o£ crew is in the Common-

wealth. ·

t Recommendation limited (a) All desertions in Australia from any Vessels, (b) Desertions from Australian ships abroad.


18. That seamen be not rated as O.S.'s unless they have had one year's experience - before the mast. 19. That a scheme of compulsory insurance for seamen is desirable. 20. That the Commonwealth make laws to regulate Sailors' Homes, which should

be conducted wholly in the intere-sts of seamen. 21. That the Sea-Carriage of Goods Act remain as at present. 22. That all pilots (with the possible exception of those in the Torres Straits service) become public servants.

23. That pilots be subject to an annual examination as to physical fitness. 24. Thttt pilots'be liable to the extent of £100 for accidents caused through want of skill or neglect. 25. That the Commonwealth be exempt from liability for accidents to vessels

whilst in charge of pilots. 26. That the cabins occupied by persons suffering from consumption and other infectious or contagious diseases be fumigated and scientifically cleansed. *27. That in cases of serious accidents or sickness aboard, ships make for most

easily reached port where the necessary medical attention can be obtained. *28. That vessels with 100 passengers on voyages of five days or over carry a medical 29. That the Commo;wealth take over the control of the Quarantine system.

30. That all light-houses, beacons, and buoys (except those within the limits _ ofports) be taken over by the Commonwealth. 31. That the coastal trade of" the Commonwealth be reserved for ships on the Australian Register, or ships conforming to Australian conditions, and licensed to

trade on the Australian coast; ·

32. That pending the connexion of the railway systems of West Australia and South Australia British mail steamers carrying passengers between those States be exempt from the proposed reservation. 33. That subsidized foreign ships be prohibited from participating in the Aus­ tralian coastal trade.

34. That it be made illegal to give rebates of freight where such are conditional . on exclusive shipping by a certain vessel or vessels. 35. That no ship be permitted to leave an Australian port unless conforming to the standard of seaworthiness suggested in the Navigation Bill.

*36. That schedules of life-saving appliances be drawn up, and the standard conformed to. ·

*37. That all vessels (including ferry steamers) constructed after the passing of the Navigation Bill be fitted with water-tight compartments. 38. That all ships be marked with a load line as provided in the Merchant Ship­ ping Act, an exception to be made in favour of ships belonging to countries whose load lines are accepted by the Board of Trade.

39. That the present Imperial law reload lines be adopted; but power be given to the Minister to fix as (1) the seasons of the year, (2) the nature of the voyage, (3) the nature of the cargo may demand, when the ship may not be submerged below her winter mark.

40. That the survey of ships be intrusted to men who are experts in the matters upon which they are called to report. .

41. That there be adequate inspection of accommodation, provisions, drugs; life-saving equipment, and all that pertains to seaworthiness; and also of gear used in the loading and stowage of cargo. 42. That drivers of oil and electric launches be licensed.

43. That an Australian Royal Naval Reserve be formed.

* Recommendations limited to-(a) Ships registered in Australia. (b) Ships licensed to trade on the Australian coast. (c) Ships continuously trading to any port in the Commonwealth, whose articles are drawn out in

the Commonwealth, and whose final port of discharge of crew is in the Commonwealth.




4:4:. That arrangements be made with the State Governmimts to provide for

Nautical School ships at various ports in the Commonwealth . . 45; That the foliowing questions be considered by the Imperial Conference,

if held:-(a) The desirableness of extending preferences to British ship-owners and British producers. (b) The desirablene-ss of adopting uniform legislation, to extend the benefits

of the Workmen's Compensation Acts to seamen. (c) Load . Line :-(i.) Whether the North Atlantic mark should not apply to ships leaving Australia, vid Cape Horn. (ii) Whether it is advisable to have a light load line for ships in ballast..

We have the honour to be,

Your Excellency's most obedient Servants,





While ;not agreeing with all the reasons statep_ in the Report of the majority The Majority f th l . . d t b . h' h h d Repmt, or e cone uswns arnve ;:t,, or t Jl terms m w 1c t ey are expresse , we approve generally of the recop1mendations. As regards minor points of differe!lce, it is not con­ considered necessary to exception to the findings, but, in view of our dissent in

the following important matt"rs, we feel constrained to present a Minority Report :--MANNING.

We recognise that the safety of ships is dependent, among other things, upon • the crew, which should not o;nly be qualified by training and experience,, but adequatf:l in numbers to without being overtaxed, the work in meeti11g the ordinary emergencies of a voyage. In the evidence given before us we fail to find complaint

of undermanning or overwork of a general character ; indeed, in regard to the largfj:r proportion of the employes, their number in each vessel has been accepted as, fairly by their own representatives by those of the employers. A. special

instance of overwork by the officers of coasting steamers taking cargo at a number of loading places with a short run between was brought under notice. In such case,S where officers or men have to work cargo day and night, and to be on watch at E>Ra immediately after, we think there is serious call for regulation, and that is recommended

in the Report. I

As the various proposals subm.itted, and those adopted by the majority of rroyosals for Commissioners for determining the crew required for working vessels (particularly in reference to the stokehold) yield large variations upon the numbers now actually employed, both by increasing and decreasing the complement at present considered

necessary for particular vessels, the general principle requires critical examination. The labour required to operate engines and furnaces of a given power will necessarily vary with the character of such engines, and furnaces, the construction and internal arrangements of the ship and bunkers, and the extent to which mechanical aids are adopted. It is impossible to anticipate the further changes which may arise from

the development of mechanical devices-such as mechanical stokers, o;r the results which may follow a change in the form in which the fuel may be used. These considerations point to the futility of adopting. in an Act of Parliament, Futility Ri • ' • proposals; any general standard, such as tonnage, horse-power, grate area, or coal consumpt)-on, to determine the .crew required, even as a guide to a Committee intrusted with the

duty of deciding upon the special circumstances which will justify departure from. standard in particular ships. Such an Act of Parliament would require amep,dmerrt with every mechanical or structural improvement. Even on sailing vessels the sufficiency of the crew depends upon the rig, the

area, and the mechanical means provided for accomplishing some of the work. Of two such vessels of the same tonnage, carrying equal crews, one might be s:q.fficiently manned and the other dangerously undermanned. Not one of the standards suggested by witnesses offers any probability of cor­ rectly gauging existing requirements, and all are liable to be rendered seriously inaccurate

by the rapidity of improvements in construction and by-mechanical invention. As demonstrating the futility of any fixed standard to determine the men required we may quote the following figures extracted! from the Board of Trade returns respecting British vessels by the United States Commissioner of Navigation in his Report

for 1902 (pages 61-2), showing the steadily decreasing number of men needed per 100 tons of shipping. It cannot be contended that the vmrk of the seaman has become more arduous with the diminution in the relative numbers employed. ·Year. Crew. Yesseh;. Tonnage. Men employed per 100 tons.

1801 149,766 19,711 2,058,253 7"35

1820 174,514 25,374 2,648,593 6"59

1840 201,340 28,962 3,311,538 6'08

1860 294,460 38,501 5,710,968 5'15

1878 358,158 38,616 8,329,421 4'30


Stokebold m;nning.



In the year 1854 a definite system of measurement was adopted, and to that it was not the substitution of steam for sail which led to the fewer reqmred for each 100 tons, we give the following figures from the same source showmg a very similar reduction in both steam and sail.

Steam. Sail.

Year. Men per Year. Men per

100 tons. 100 tons.

1854 7'69 1854 3'97

1860 6'47 1860 3'48

1870 4'35 1870 2'79

1880 2'95 1880 2'32

1890 2'73 1890 1'96

1900 2'27 1900 1'62

Taking steam and sail together, 1,166 men were required in 1854 to do the work measured by tbnnage, which in 1900 was done by 389 men. · . .

As regards stokehold manning, the majority of the British Manning Commission recommended, ten years ago, that there should be one man for. every 2! tons .of coal consumed per twenty-four hours in tropical, and for every 3 tons Ill temperate climates. Mr. R. Grayson, Secretary of the Australasian Steamship Owners' Federation, when before your Commission, in answer to question 24975, stated that four steamers on the Australasian coast, built before the British Manning Commission reported, average one man for less than 2! tons, while eight steamers, built since 1899, require one man for each 4 to 5 tons of coal consumption per day.

From tables prepared by Mr. Grayson (question 24978) showing the present stokehold manning as accepted by the representatives of owners and men; the man­ ning necessa:ry under the provisions of the Commonwealth Navigation Bill as originally introduced; and the manning required by the latest Navigation Act-the New Zea­ land Act of 1903-the seriousness of the discrepancies can be readily seen. Fifty-four

passenger and 34 cargo steamers on our coasts are included in the lists. The result of the majority decision of this Commission (3! tons of coal per day per man) would be to increase the present number of the stokehold crew in the passenger steamers (in individual cases by 50 per cent.) and to reduce it in the cargo steamers (in an individual

case by 50 per cent.), or, taking passenger and cargo steamers together, to increase the present hands from 695 to 760, or nearly 10 per cent. Yet the 695 now employed are fifteen more than the original provisions of the Navigation Bill would have required, and 96 more thim the New Zealand Act of 1903 makes necessary.

As regards engineers the Report of the majority adopts a formula fixing the number to be carried, which is an amendment by 1\'Ir. Corby, Secretary of the Aus­ tralian Institute of Marine Engineers, on his own original proposal. By Mr. Corby's original proposal, as shown in the evidence of Mr. Grayson (question 25022), the engineers now carried on 88 of our coastal steamers would have been increased from 290 to 330, or by about 14 per cent. Yet the present manning is within two of the total that

would have to be carried under the original provisions of the Bill; and

exceeds by 33 the number necessary under the New Zealand Act of 1903. . That scheme would thus largely the number of engineers, an

obJect the proposer, a representative of the engmeers, stated was not desired; and have alter,ed, .up and down, the complement (vide Mr. Grayson's tables-ques­


said that with some few exceptions the present manrung IS fa1rly satisfactory to the Institute of Marine Engineers. . Mr. C_orby's amended scheme, which has been adopte.d, was handed in after the takmg of evidence was concluded, and the only examination it has had was a hurried one by Mr. Shirra, Chief Engineer, Surveyor, and Examiner in Steam to the Naviga­ Department .of New South !o whom it was submitted as the Report was

bemg finally by the The effects on the engine-room manning

could only be estimated by Mr. Sh1rra m rega!d to twenty of the 88 s.teamers previously tested. . shows a close approach m the total to the engmeers now carried,

but var1at10ns-mcreases and the complement on about

of twenty vessels. Mr. Shura, m with this scheme, says (see

C).- Twenty-five seems. the chosen ratio of n.h.p. to piston area from the

table giVen m _B, but th1s table shows inexplicable inconsistencies. Ship­ owners may reg1ster the1r boats of whatever n.h.p. they please, but if the Board of .. "" · '·"'-.; ..

· -- --·-- .. .. ·--- - -··· .:..- --. ''·---- ___ . ______ ,.____,

.f _.


Trade or this Department of Navigation is asked to settle the matter in any case, we use the divisor 30 for all classes of engines. It would be better to drop the unmeaning term "nominal horse-power," which is only preserved, like fties in amber, in legislative documents. It would be far more rational to class engines according to their piston

areas. . . We should not depart from Board of Trade precedent without

grave reasons, and 30 should· be accepted as the divisor; in my evidence before the Commission I recommend this. The discrepancies, compared with size of pistons in the given indicated H.P's. inSchedule B, show how impossible it is to make this quantity the basis of a manning scale."

· The divisor adopted by Mr. Corby is 25, not 30, and the Schedule B referred to is Mr. Corby's amended proposal accepted as a manning basis fn the Majority Report. The opinion of Mr. Shirra, the only opinion obtained on the scale recommended, sup­ ports our contention that neither that formula nor any other has made good its claim for adoption by your Commissioners. Itis true that the Majority Report accepts the

Committee of Reference which is approved by Mr. Corby yvhen he writes (as quoted under question 25018) "any scale adopted would be _unsatisfactory unless it was sub­ ject to reference in particular cases to some competent tribunal" ; but, as shown, the " particular cases " in a number of vessels declared by Mr. Corby to b'e, with 'some few

exceptions, satisfactorily manned at the present time; amount to about one-half. When this is so with engineers, whose numbers depend, to a large extent, on the power of the engines of any particular type, and can thus be more readily approximated by arith­ metic than can the crews of other departments, it shows how inadequate to meet the

varying conditions of steam-ships such schemes really are, and suggests that the Com­ mittee which would have, in the tests quoted, to deal with the manning of one-half the steamers should deal with the whole. The objection taken in the lteport to the Committee deciding the manning

without a legal standard, is that" It would be impossible to determine whether a ship · was seaworthyor not, if a definite of manning were not drawn up. In an inquiry following into the cause of a mishap to any vessel, or arising !rom its detention as being allegedly unseaworthy, there would be no mea ns of arriving at any decision

without a manning scale to provide a basis." We approve of the number of crew necessary to sufficiently man a vessel in all Approve of departments being fixed, but maintain that it should be done by the proposed Com- mittee, which can consider the important questions of construction, the mechanical appliances in use, and other controlling factors, as no arithmetical formula can, and

which has by the Report, in case of appeal, to be the deciding tribunal. The Report in the case of stokehold manning, recommends three standarde.--lst (prior to ascer­ taining the coal consumption), the fire-grate area, which it elsewhere condemns; 2nd, the coal consumption, when ascertained; 3rd, the Committee's decision as regards

particular vessels. Under this system what would be the possibility of properly deter­ mining seaworthiness ? If an inquiry were held when the vessel was under the first standard, her actual manning might be more than she would require when she came under the second, and yet she be declared unseaworthy; or might be less, and yet she be accounted seaworthy. The same thing might occur as between the second standard and the third. Then, as the tables already alluded to show, vessels considered by all concerned-employers and emplores alike-sufficiently manned now might, under the coal consumption standard, be found unseaworthy, and yet, under the very same standard, some of the vessels in the same list, carrying 25 to 50 per cent. less stokehold crew than is at present considered necessary, would be passed as seaworthy.

We cannot approve a system showing such fluctuating results, and prefer that Recom·. • a Committee, representing the employers and employes and the Department, which mendatwn. ·can take into consideration the structure, mechanism, and other matters which affect the requirements of a vessel, should decide the crew she shall carry. Such Committee

can also decide, much better than any fixed formula, the crew that should be tempo-rarily carried before experience of the vessel has provided data for a final decision.


The question of the reservation of the coastal trade is a subject involving the complete consideration of many interests. Unquestionably, when we have created a Court not which may decide the conditions ;u_p.der which our own vessels shall carry on the coastal and ha-y_e ('lared emp·hat:iyally in f('tvour of a White Australia, it becomes

41 I




I. [ i t:

British vessels.

Effect on Australian development.

Needs of the Australian producer.

Compelling vessels to sail in ballast.

Mail steamers,

Western Australian exemption.


to see the trade is not <11111exed by outside vessels run under

conditiOns or so manned as, by their continuous presence on our coast, to enda,nger the 'White Australia policy. While saying this, we would not exclude British or even foreign vessels from continuous coastal trading if they observe the conditions imposed on Australian vessels. But we would not attempt to apply th'ese conditions to vessels, a,nd above all British vessels, which call at ports in Australia at the beginning or ending of a long oversea, though they may carry some passengers or cargo betweEn the ports of call. · · ' ·

As regards British vessels, in our opiniqri, and we believe vm are supported by the balance of testimony in the evidence before us, there are grave national siderations involving t.he interest of the Empire as· a whole, as well as considerations respecting the material prosperity of the Commonwealth, which point to the extreme 1m wisdom of applying undue restriction. At a, time when the people of· the British Empire are seeking means to testify to the u:o.ity of national relationship, it would be more than regrettable if the Commonwealth of Australia excluded the ships of the rest of the Empire from the small coastal traffic (which is all vessels running under their circumstances can possibly obtain in their calls at one end of a voyage at a few of our without they conformed to conditions happily rendered possible to us, but

impossible to them. ·

The prosperity of the settled portions of Australia, and the continued develop­ ment of our productive resources throughout the unsettled remaindu, require as an indispensable condition frequent, regular, and economical communication from one part of the coast to another, a,nd fro,m all of these with other parts of the world. Any considerable diminution of this communica,tion, any laws which would tend to restrict the continued growth of that enterprise which has already been displayed in this direc­ tion, would ultimately affect seriously the whole field pf Australian labour. The estab­ lishment of direct communication between our ports and other portions of the world hy British and other vessels has been effected with a scarcely appreciable participac "

tion in the coastal trade. The tendency no doubt is towards increasing the number of ports of call in Australia; and, if the maintenance of the valuable services thus secured may require, as a factor determining economic success, the assistance of the proportionately small passenger business, and trifling cargo conveyance, wpich the cirpumstances of oversea voyaging permit between Australian ports of caH, Australian interests wo11ld s11ffer by refusing it.

It is also of great moment to the A11stralian producer that those ports which eannot furnish enough cargo for direct shipment a broad by cold storage steamers should be reached by such steamers extending their voyages from other Australian ports .. If to do this' they need the aid of a little inter-port traffic, it is be.tter they should obtain it than the extension be made impossible. By the provisions in t}le Majority Report the coast?-1 ship-owners who are reaping a ric,h harvest, are powerful

in .combination, and need no assistance, receive consideration which is not extended to struggling producers competing with their produce in the distant markets of the world, against all conditions of labour. The decision of the Report would even prevent a vessel which }las

her Cflrgo at one p(}rt from s.hipping goocls as ballast to he;r to her lo.;l>ding p.o,rt for abroad. In that case the producer would lose the opportunity of such inter-p.qrt shipment, as is impossible without a low freight, and other, local interests w-o11ld cer­ tainly suffer in some form for the vessel having to obtain and load useless ballast, and having the expense of disposing of it at her next port, while losing a freight, how­ ever small, between ports. This certainly seems one mode of compelling money to be thrown into the sea.

The rapid, regular, and economical transit to Europe of perishable cargo, so vital to certain Australian interests, can hardly be assisted by depriving mail steamers of the Australian 'inter-port passenger traffic which has patronized these vessels, not for economy, for rates have been higher than by local steamers, but for other advan­ tages. There seems no good reason why, when our coastal steam shipping is fortunately

doing well, we should reduce the power, as we must by reducing the mail steamers' revenues, to maintain or increase the rapidity and economy of conveyance of perishable goods, n<;>r why we should absolutely prevent our own people from travelling along our coast by the boat that best suits their convenience or comfort.

The proposal to make an exception for passenger traffic in favour of mail boats between Western Australia and S.outh Australia until such time as the railway systems


of these two States are connected, is a large admission of the. value to Australia of over­ sea shipping. Western Australia has some of the largest, fastest, and finest of the local steamers running to her State, yet she desires the use of the mail steamers. It is difficult to make out a case for Western Australia which will not apply with equal

force to Queensland, and with greater force to the Island State of Tasmania. The trifling extent ot the competition with our own marine engaged in the Trifling_ . t l d h . h h f h' ll' f f h c.>mpetttcon COaS a tra e, W lC. as come rom OVErsea S 1ps ca mg at a ew 0 our ports on t e with our own round voyage, is shown by the evidence, and even should it increase it can, in the mmne.

very nature of the case, hardly amount to tnore than a healthy check upon the possible monopoly referred to in the clause dealing with rebates. . It is O'J.r duty to consider, also, the enormous shipping business on which Great _mmpire Britain is so largely dependent. Extreme restrictions here, even if now in accordance mterests.

with the terms of British treaties with other powers, may re-act on the mother country, and the small advantage gained by Australian shipping may lead to unfortunate inter­ national complications for British shipping. We ought also to remember the effect on British sentiment of our attitude towards British visiting vessels. The very

character of our action, and the fact that it is directed against a nation which, in its own waters, places no such restrictions on its dependencies, may create friction and soreness between the people of the United Kingdom and of Australia, which would do much to prevent the growth of that friendly national feeling wliich the Common­

wealth should endeavour to foster at home and abroad. We therefore dissent from the main body of the Report. in so far that we would Nature oi not prevent vessels on oversea voyages from other parts of the world, and more par- dissent. ticularly·those belonging to Great Britain, or to countries which give our own or British

ships a .similar privilege on their coasts, from taking passengers or cargo between their Australian ports of call. But, if a ship desires to devote itself to our coastal trade it should be necessary for her to be transferred to the Australian Register or to con-form to the conditions imposed on Australian vessels ..


Whatever our individtial opinions as to the effect of attempting to encourage British producers and ship-owners by preferential treatment, we are at one in believing the matter should not be dealt with in the Navigation Bill, nor in the Report of your Commissioners,,

We con:sider it a subject far more suitable for another measure than for a suitab:e Navigation Bill. It is a question of Empire })Oliev, ·with international bearincrs a for another ...__, · · - · v . . ' measure. p0licy liable to an1endment fi-om time to time by arrangement or treaty ; and it is part of the. greater question of trade preference to Britain which is likely to·e the attention of our Parliament. As such, and dealing with British goods as

as ships, the desirahleness of its adoption should, we think, be taken into con­ sideration as portion of a complete policy, dealing with preference generally, on which the peuple and Parliament could decide. To anticipate in one direction is to corilp1icate.

But, even were it advisable that it should form part of the Navigation Bill Hasnotbeen l f

' ' tl t C . • • • . . l subject of .

we are strong y o opmwn 1a your onumsswners are not m a positiOn to inquiry.

report upon it, as evidence on the subject has not been calleu, and inquiry has not been made into the desirablenes::;:, the likelihood of success, or tltc possible indirect effects of the adoption of the recommendation. lJ nder these circumstances the decision come to is merely the expression of the personal opinions of some members

of the Commission, and not the outcome of inquiry. Even those of us who favom the principle of preference must strongly protest ngainst a Commission, appointed fur inquiry, reporting without i?quiry on such an important far reaching proposal. Evidence does not exist to show the probable or ]WSSible effect of the adoption

on the treatment of British shipping hy foreign eountries, and your Commissioners the Conference are quite in the dark in this and other Tespects. Our dissent to Hcsolution 9 of the .London Conference-noted in Appendix F-is not to its accuracy a:-; a strict definition of coastal trading, but is to the absence

of any qualification, such as that proposed hy the British ship-omwrs at the Conference declaring the expedieney of exempting oversea vessels from its appli­ cation.



The Conference has strengthened the conviction, already forced upon us by the evidence attached to this Report, that the prevention of such oversea ships (including mail steainers ), and more particularly British ships, from incidentally carrying passengers or cargo between their ports of call in the Oommonwealtl1, unless they comply with all Australian conditions, is disadvantageous to the general interests of the Commonwealth and of the Empirt>.

Some appreciation of the value of the. facilities offered to the people of Australia hy such ships is shown by the· 1·ecommendation of the majority of the Commissioners that an exemption be made in regard to Western Australia. 'Ve favour .. Western Australia receiving the full benefit of the facilities provided by these vessels, hut must dissent to the other States of the Common wealth being excluded ftom the benefit which she receives. We have grave doubts as to whether it is constitutional to license or allow certnin vessels to carry passengers or cargo from one State in Australia to another and to refuse to license or allow the

same vessels to convey cal'go or passengers between other States.



The recommendation in the Report of the majority of your Commissioners that it be made illegal for any Owner, Master, or Agent of any vessel to give rebate of freight or other advnntage to any shipper or consignee of goods if the condition be exclusive shipment by a certain vessel or vessels, is not warranted by the evidence tendered on behalf of. some principal shipping and produce firms. The witness, _Mr. Glassford, urged the great advantages arising from steadiness of rates of freight and reliability of general business operations ; this, and the

additional evidence of Mr. Grayson and others, does not allow me to recommend such an extreme step as the majority propose.


I dissent from the last paragraph of Resolution 1, " The Board of Trade certi­ ficates to he accepted as of the same eifect as the local certificnte," on the grounds that no standard of efficiency is provided for. Also from Resolution 17, load line, because I am of opinion that provision should be made for an additional load line mark for

ships carrying '' dead weight cargoes" from Austmlia to Europe, via "Cape Horn."


Our reasons for dissentiug to Resolution 6 a1·e :-That we tltink all ships should comply with all the required conditions ; but if it cnn he shown that the structural alterations are unreasonable, so far then as cubic and superficial capacity is concerned the ship might he exempted, but in the case of sanitary, hygienic, general,

and other arrangements no exemption he made under any cit·cumstances whatever, ·· ·





Handed irt by Dr. E. Robertson, Mel boume.


I Nutritive Constituents-Grammes.

No. Class. Calories.


I Proteids. Fats. Hdyrates.

I ---

1 U.S. Army Ration 120 161 4.54 3,851

2 U.S. Navy Ration 143 184 520 4,9!38

3 U.S. Marine Service 255 276 938 7,449

4 British Marine Scale Hl4 236 673 5,799

5 English Blacksmith 176 71 667 4,117

6 GerillRn Soldier-War Ration 134 58 489 3,093

7 American Football Team 181 292 557 5,742

8 Swedish Workman 189 110 714 4,726

9 Sandow's Diet (one day) 244 151 502 4,462

It will be noted that No. 3 (American Marine Service) has the largest nutritive value, with 7,449 calories. The next in value is the Board of Trade Scale, with 5,799 calories (No. 4). It will also be noted that in the American diets ( 1, z, 3, and 7) the fats exceed ihe proteids. This

is also true of the British Marine Scale. American authorities claim that fats should about equal the proteids. British and Continental authorities claim that proteids should exceed fats in a well-balanced diet. Note that the German soldier on a war footing has proteids greatly in excess of fats,

and that the potential energy is 3,093 calories. The American Army ration is not much greater than the German. It will be seen that the British Scale is a fairly liberal one, and that the American Marine Scale is needlessly generous.

Speaking generally, it may be laid down that more fat is required in cold weather than in hot. Fat should equal or exceed proteids in winter, but should be less in summer.


British Scale.-The articles in the British Scale having antiscorbutic properties are the fol.lowing :-Potatoes. Pickles.

Yams. Tomatoes.

Vegetables. Raisins


Peas. Currants


Beans. Figs

Jam. Apples

Milk. Onions.



ll II



!J ij HI If




; '






' F i


f J;;

! '



w ::


·ti: 'W ,j,


! 't !)1 J:, ..


f1' li ! ··· 1.'­f,•, ' I:

American S cale.-The ;nl ici f s in the American Scale having antlscot-butic properties are the fo llr11Ying :- -Potatoes. Dried Fruits.

Yams. Pickles.

Tomatoes. Vinegar.

Peas. Onions.


Jam and milk are m tlH! British, but not in the American Scale.

Vinegar is in the American, bul not in the British Scale. In connexion with antiscorbutics, it may be stated that the theory that scurvy is caused hy a deprivation of vegetable foods is now vigorously disputed. It is held by many eminent authorities that scurvy is caused bv ea ting partially-decomposed meats. The continued ingestion of the l-x)isons of decomposition results in the manifestation<: of the disease called s:: urvy. If this theory be correct, then as long as the meats are perfectly sound scurvy need not be f eared. Brine ·has the effect ot preventing

further decomposition, but it does not kill the posion-producing organisms, n Jr does it render harmless the poisons n:eneratecl prior to the meat being put .into the brine tub. Whatever the cause of scurvy, it will be judicious to insist on those articles known as antiscorbutics being reta med on the



Article of Food. (All in ounces. ) I i I Ill J ------1

1 : 11:

Corned Beef or Mutton Salt Pork Preserved Canned

Bacon Rabbits Dried Fish Bread

Biscuit Flour Rice Oatmeal

Sago Pearl Barley Potatoes or Yams Haricot Beans Split Peas Desiccated Vegetables

Tomatoes, Fresh ·or

Canned Onions Bananas (Peeled) Dried Fruits ..

Butter LaFd, Suet, o·r Condensed ( un·

sweetened) Cheese Sugar Jam

Syrup, Honey Tea Coffe3 Cocoa Pickles

Vinegar Salt Pepper Mustard


Curry Powder Water


11! 1!







12 4





{ , I c;:' 1 in Ounce•., pence. - ..

24 1 4.50

16 i 4.00




12 4














12 4






3§ i 13.50

1 3.00

28 12 84 28 32





112 8



16 8

16 8




16 21 14


l. 75 2



t! .2 .25 .25


tLl2 3.75 5.25 2.94 1.60 1.15

.70 .80 .25 3.01

l.OO .80 7.50

3.00 .32 2.00 2.50

6.00 1.00

2.25 6.00 3.28 2.62

1.50 .98 1.12 .87 1.87 1.50

.04 .19 .12 .23


97.26 is the total cost of rations for the week in pence. 97.26 7 = 13 .89>! = cost of rations per day-practically Is. 2d. daily.




Article of Fcod.

Salt Salt Pork Preserved nfeat* Bacon ..

Rabbit Fish (Dried Cod) Bread ..

Biscuit Flour ..

Rice Oatmeal Sacra Pearl

Potatoes Beans . .

Peas Vegetables, Desicca t e

Bananas Butter Lard Jam

Syrup Sugar Milk, Condensed Cheese Dried Fruitst

Weekly , .


. , Weight



Weight of Constituents in Grammes .

Protcids. Fats. i Carbo· I Hydrates. I

Calorific Value.

:H %.6 155.:& 1,674

16 7.3 . 5 300.0 3,09 1

36 262.1 1S0.8 2,846

8 20.8 140.0 1,390

28 170.0 39.7 1,{)66

12 54.4 1.8 236

8! 226.3 28.3 1,140.0 6,.321

28 114 .8 10.5 578.2 2,99 6

-32 100.0 10.0 676.4 .3,288

8 17. 6 179.2 814

8 .36.4 16.4 152.0 924

8 19\i . 5 806

4 5.7 1.1 93.0 415

11 2 66.5 .) .2 572.0 2,660

8 52 . 5 4 .8 121.8 800

8 54 .6 2.4 132 .5 818

8 17.0 57.0 308

16 4.5 22.7 112

8 4.7 22.5 112

16 6.8 .3.2 10.3.9 484

8 186.0 1,7.30

4 I· 9.3 .1 865

14 249 . .3 1,0.35

8 196 .0 804:

21 564.4 2,309

6 I 18.0 18.o 26.o 348

16 I 150.0 I 150 .0 10.'0 2,051

8 I 7. 2 .. 6. 2 143. 4 675

. --;57 .1,360."6 -40,973


___ I ___ ·---------'-----

79. 57 !I 223 194 I 7 48. l 5,853t

• Aver .. ge ol. balled a11d roast beef, boiled and roast mutton.

Average of analyses.

t - 15 per cent. = 4,973.

Subtracting 15 per ce nt. for waste and non-absorption the net nutritive value is-5,853 - 15 per cent. = 1,973 calories. 79. 57 oz. = 4lbs. 15.57 oz. ; practically 5lbs. of food daily.


When practicable and when prices are reasonable, fresh provisiOns should be substituted for preserved. Equivalent nutritive values are given in preceding pages for all scale provisions . •

The Bill provides for quality, 'but no standards are given. Perhaps it mav 'be advisable to standardize qualities where practicable. In the event of disputes there would then be some data for coming to uniform decisions. The standardizing could 'be done in a somewhat similar manner to drugs

and medical stores.

With regard to substituting general ly, if it can be shown that the article proposed to be su bstituted for the scale article is equal in nutritive value, then there can be no physiological objection.

If the scale be a varied one, there will be no necessity to put lime­ juice in tne scale. Lime-juice, however, should be carried as part of the medical stores.

47 li I r ·â€¢ l \



(Submitted by Captain Dahin.)


The Court of Marine Inquiry at Sydney.

No. 8 of r9oo.

In the1 matter of a formal inquiry !held at Sydney, before His Honour Judge Backhouse, assisted by Captains Daniel Dakin and Charles Edward Bird, into the circumstances attending the collision between the British steam-ships Brunner and Brighton. The Court, having carefully inquired into the circumstances attending the above-mentioned shipping casualty, finds that both vessels suffered serious damage from being in collision at Port Jackson on the 7th day of August, 1900; and that such serious daiJJage was caused by default of / the master of the Brighton, George Setterfield, in not observing Regulation 2 5 for preventing collisions at sea, in not navigating to the starboard side

of the fairway; and in not keeping a proper look-out; and by the wrong­ ful act of the said master in porting this helm and so bringing about the collision. ·

That the master of the Brunner, Archibald Henry, was to blame in not keeping to the starboard side of the fairway, but as such default was not the immediate cause of the collision, the Court does not feel called on to deal with his certificate.

That there was default on the part of the mate of the Brighton, David Francis, in not keeping a proper look-out, and in not returning to his post after reporting the Brunner to the master of the Brighton, but as such default did not cause the collision, the Court has no power to deal with his certificate.

And the Court orders that the certificate, numbered 536, and dated the 27th day of November, r89r, of the said George Setterfield, be sus­ pended for a period of twelve months from the: date hereof. The Court expresses the opinion that the hours worked by the master of the Brighton, the said George were too long.

Dated this 4th day of September, rgoo. (Signed) ALF. P. BACKHOUSE,



The Court of Marine Inquiry at Sydney.

No. 26 of 1901.

In the matter of a formal inquiry held at Sydney, before- His Honour Judge Backhouse, assisted by Daniel Dakin and John Mackenzie, into the circumstances attending the loss of the British steam-ship Moonstone, some of the crew of which are in New South Wales, and are competent witnesses as to the facts. The Court, having carefully inquired into the circumstances attending the above-named shipping casualty, comes to the decision following:-

r. The British steam-ship Moonstone left the buoy at Ocean Island, at which she had been taking in cargo, on the evening of the 26th aay Of July, 1901, to hang Off the island during the night fm safety, and when returning next morning struck a reef close to Sydney Point, the southern point of the

island, and became a total wreck. • 2. The weather was calm and the sea smooth.

3· The vessel at the time of striking was,in charge of David James, the chief officer, and he was the only person on the deck of the vessel. 4· The loss of the vessel was due to the default of the master,

Griffith Owen Williams, in not taking sufficient caution for the safety of his vessel, and to his wrongful act in having only one man on deck when his vessel was under way; and to the default of the mate, David James, in not keeping a proper look-out; and the Court finds that the default and wrongful act of the master directly contributed to the loss. 5· The vessel was provided with a sufficient crew, was well found,

and carried proper life-saving appliances.


The Court orders that the certificate of the master of the Moonstone. "Griffith Owen Williams, as master of a ship, numbered ozsos,

,and dated the zoth day of October, 1879, be suspended for a period of --twelve months from the 27th day of July last; and that the certificate of the mate of the David James, as master of a foreign-going

-ship, numbered 88oq, and dated the 13th day of February, 1874, be sus­ ,pended for a period of eighteen months from the 27th day of July last. Dated this 4th day of October, 1901.

(Signed) ALF. P. BACKHO"CSE,



The Court of Marine Inquiry, at Sydney . •

No. 10 of 19or.

_;In the matter of a formal inquiry held at Sydney before His Honour Judge Murray, assisted by William Jack and Daniel Dakin, into the cir­ cumstances attending the collision between the British steam-ship, Dovedale and the British ship Silz1er Cloud.

The Court, having carefully inquired into the circumstances attending •the above-mentioned shipping casualty, fmds-(r) That the British Dovedale and the British ship Silver

Cloud were in collision off Port Jackson on the night of Thursday, the 14th day of 1901.

(z) That such collision was brought about by the want of judgment of David ?11organ, the mate of the Dovedale, in allowing the engines of his ship to continue to go ahead at full speed after he had become aware of the green light of the Sih·er Cloud on his port bow, in disregard of Articles zo, z 2, and z 3, and of the dictates of ordinary prudence. (3) That by such collision the Silver Cloud suffered serious damage.

The Court adds a strong expression of opinion that the action of Cap­ -tain Darley, the master of the Dove dale, in providing only one certifi­ . cated officer for his ship, is deserving of censure. The Court considers that a ship of her class trading on this coast should carry three, or at

the very least two, certificated officers in addition to the master, and that, while the strict letter of the law has been complied :vith, a serious and inexcusable risk to life and property has been run in so undermanning ·this ship ; the Court is therefore strongly im.pressed with the necessity for . an amendment of the law in this relation.

The Court further expresses the opinion, in considering the master's action, that, while it is expedient to keep both the crew and the mechanism · of the ship in constant practice and efficiency by a frequent use of the hand-steering gear, as well as of the wheel at the ship's stern, it is not a

safe course, in such a comparativelv unwieldv ship as the Dovedale, to substitute the use of the hand wheel for that of the steam-steering gear especially at night, and off such a frequented coast as that where the -collision occurred, thereby reducing greatly the power of control over the

shin in case of a sudden emergency. The Court, considering all the circumstances of the case, and especially the very long hours the mate had to work, and taking into considera­ tion his former good record, which indicated his general care and attention to duty, has come to the conclusion that, though the collision might have

been averted by his adopting a different course of action, instead of keep­ ing his ship at full speed after he had first observed the light of the Silver Cloud, and although fie showed a want of judgment in acting as he did, he is still fairlv entitled to the benefit of the doubt as to whether such want . of judgment amounted to default within the meaning of section 470 of the

llfercantile Marine Act 1894· He will therefore, retain his certificate. As to the general management of the ship, for which the master is responsible, the Court is of opinion _that. if the steam-steering gear had been in use at the time, the action of the mate, though injudicious, might 'have averted the collision.

Dated the z6th day of April, I 901.


(Signed) C. E. R. MURRAY, Judge.





The Court of Marine Inquiry, at Sydney.

No. 12 of 1902.

In the matter of a formal inquiry held at Sydney before His Honour Judge Backhouse, assisted by Daniel Dakin and Charles Taylor, Assessors, into the circumstances a_ttending the collision between the British steam-ships K clloc and Dunmore.

The Court, having carefully inquired into the circumstances attending the above-mentioned shipping casualty, comes to the following:-(r)


The British steam-ships Kelloe and Dunmore were in collision. off Little Bay on the morning of the 13th day of May, 1902, when the Kelloe was on a voyage from Bulli to Sydney, and the Dunmore from Sydney to Shellharbour.

By such collision the British steam-ships Kelloe and Dunmore suffered serious damage, and the steap1-ship Kelloe was sunk.

Such collision was caused bv the default of George Aistrope, the second mate of the steam-ship Kelloe, in not observing the provisions of Article I 7 of the Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, contained in the Seventh Schedule of the Navigation Act 1901 (see Article r8 of the ReguhHions made· by virtue of section 418 of theM erchant Shipping Act r894), and in not seeing that a proper look-out was kept on his vesseL

The Court orders the said George Aistrope to pay to the owners and· master of the steam-ship Dunmore their costs of this inquiry, viz., the sum of Three pounds three shillings, and any witnesses' expenses which they have paid or for which they are liable.

Dated this 27th day of June, 1902.

(Signed) ALF. P. BACKHOUSR. Judge.


The Court of Marine Inquiry, at Sydney.

No. 17 of 1903.

I :1 the matter of a formal inquiry held at Sydney before His Honour Judge Backhouse, assisted by John James Simpson and Joshua Lewis, Fawkes, Assessors, into the circumstances attending the shipwreck of the British steam-ship Croki. -The Court, having carefully inquired into the circumstances attending the above mentioned shipping casualty, comes to the decision following:-

(r) The British steam-ship Croki, when on a voyage from the Man­ ning River to Sydnev, struck on Little Seal Rock on the· 13th day of September, 1903, and she then suffered serious damage. She aJtenvards was beached, and becarre a total wreck. (z) The night was a bright moonlight one. The sea was smooth.

and the wind light from the north. (3) The striking of the vessel was caused bv the default of her master, William Donovan, in not navigating his vessel with due care when in the vicinitv of Seal Rocks, and in not­

setting a course which would ;,lear the Little Seal Rock. (4) The vessel was well found, and pro•·icled with all the neces-. san· life-saving apparatus.


(5) Although at first sight it would appear that there was gross, negligence on the part of the master, the Court is of opinion· that, taking into consideratiOn the fact that he had been practically on duty involving a serious strain, mental and

physical, for more than hours without any sleep, it is.

not to be wondered at if his vigilance was somewhat relaxed, and if, unintentionally, he dozed when at his post. For the reasons set out above, the Court does not deal with the master';,_, -.:ertificate.

Dated at Sydney this 3oth day of September, 1903.




SCHEDULE OF ENGINEERS. Mr. James Shirra, Chief Engineer Surveyor, Department of N aviga­ tion, Sydney, was asked to compare the number of engineers required under (r) the proposal in t:he 1\avigation Bill; (2) Schedule A (submitted by Mr. Corby, q. 387 .3) : anu (3)_ Schedul" R (recommended in the Com­ missioner's Report, page xxv.). A reference to the evidence of Mr. Gray­

son (q. 24978) will show how these compare with the numbers now


I have the honour to report, re Schedules A and B, appended to letter from Secretary of Royal Commission on the Navigation Bill, that the effect of Schedule B is to reduce the number (minimum) of engineers requisite in the larger class of steamers, and also of the greasers; the

reduction affecting mostly steamers of over 400 n.h.p., compared with A. Tihe new statement of rule for calculating nominal horse-power makes practically no difference between the schedules, as 25 is the divisor used for 1;riple expansion engines in Schedule A also. The;re are no quadruple expansion engines now directly under the jurisdiction of the States or the

Commonwealth-though the Orontes, 111 acedonia, Narrung, and o'ther large· British steam-ships have such ; there is no use making a separate rule for them, as there is practically little difference between them, and the 4-cyl. triple engine which is getting popular. Compound engines for which the

mvisor is taken as 30 in Schedule A, are getting obsolete; a small size of' such engine, with pressures varying from 130 to rso lbs., is being made, but such may well be classed with triple engines carrying the same high pressure, and have the same divisor for nominal horse-power.

Twenty-five seems the chosen ratio for nominal horse-power to piston· area, from the table given in Schedule B, but this table shows inexplicable­ inconsistencies. Ship-owners may register their boats of whatever nominal horse-power they please; but if the Board of Trade or the Department of avigation is asked to settle the matter in any case, we use the divisor·

30 for all classes of engines. It would be better to drop the unmeaning· term "nominal horse-power," which is onlv pre-;erved, like flies in amcer, in legislative documents.. It would be far more rational to class engines acccrding to their piston areas. Thus, the Board of Trade, previous to·

1901, deciared the size of engines of a steamer on a lake or river, service­ in which \\·Ould qualifv for a second-class certificate, to be z,ooo circular inches piston in" rgor, and subsequently, this is made applicable to

sea-going steamers also, but is stated as 66 n.ih.p., which is z,ooo divided oy 30. Also, the New Zealand Act specifies piston area instead of horse­ power for limit of size with marine engine-drivers. We should not depart from Board of Trade precedent without grave reasons, and 30 should be

accepted as the divisor. In my evidence before the Commission (8/z/os), I recommended this. The figures I gave as nominal horse-power can easily be conveneu into piston area in circular inches, by multiplying them b) JO. ,

I also submitted a schedule showing minimum engineers to be carriecf This is reallv a minimum proposal, and must be considered in light of the remarks given below it--(See Minutes of T:vidence, Svdney, 8.z.os). The discrepancies, compared with size of pistons in the gi,·en indicated horse­

powers in Schedule B, show how impossible it is to make this quantit:' the basis of a manning scale. I ha,·e, &c., (Signed) JA\IES SHTRRA,

Chief Engineer SurveYor.


co'"'::l,_,ooroo::rt:J ::;.·:::;(DB, o..g '"'::r\l: M::;. 0.. 0 PC.p'-'o- ct>oa>....,. c ::r- cc.., ..0 0 ...... c-r'd • ' 0 (]> p c c'd t:r::r',... "' ,_,.,::t>p_.;::: (\"> J-ol· 0 c.:. o :::::> !-'·'-<: (i; "' .... 0 to ::r '-' ,..., ::l S ro ro ro :<; 0 "' s Ei ::;, if & 8 ::; 'd M- ..... c.. 1-1 1-i "' , "' "' 0 ,::;."0 ::+ . 0 > (!> • (l> ;::;. s ::l ... (p '0 8. """ a.. o s· ro (lq ,g .... ?:i ;!;. - c :::1 "' :;. £ .;r 8 s· 'd s c , (]> ()) g ,_,. :::; g_. ...... 0.. >+, ?>' '"'70: crq 00 n: ooe:_.. ;::!. -· @ ' '<. g- ...... ?.:1 (1) (D M- M- ........ Q <""'+ \V Q. ""i 00 ·("tl - >+> ro (ij 0" ?J to rn ;!:\. Z ::r. i:: .-t- X 1-i '-<: ::::::1 0 __. .P"' "' C) (1) s 0 [ IJq 0.. c "" u;; E.. 0"' ....,'d c (!) ...... ::r (!> ., V-' w O::G"' 0 ::r&:::; ?:l(tj N, 2· .... s 0 >-3 :::; "' o..>-+, ::l '"' ::J ('I) () .....,. >-3 2' ro M" § ::r "' ...,.,CJpBl'lo..nt=;(l "' (!) p :::;'"0 :::; 8 ::r p ...... 0.. ::l ::r ,_.. O..>o .... ::l ::r S"S'b. C6,.,;:;[g:,.,g(D 8"' P> f!?:;::ro o-'"'"0 o,.v:::; (D c: 0 ...... 8 ,_.. s o..."" - ..-: "' cs··< ...... s ::+.· 0 8 0... - ::6 cr:· CL r-r & ct ::b ,....... pJ tT' 0 (t) '" '-: (D r.n CD rt- i.-l 0


,._, 2:

>trl Zo >1-rj

>-3(/) ;.....trl

>>:? .._,..., L.,M

?:Jf:rj 00 t-<,_,

ZtJ:1 >trl <

?:J>-3 trl> wt:d trJt;




> f-0 1-d trl tJ H tJ


From Schedule Circular Nominal Horse-power. Minimum Number of Engineets.

Bas given. Inches of

Name. Piston By By SchedUle A. . Schedule B. in Are. a B. ofT. Schedule Schedule Draft Act. J. Sh!rra·s (sum of ltulc, s A of Draft. B, s -- evidenC>c. I.l!.P. N.H.P. squares). 36 Act. 25 Engineers. Engineers. Greasers. Engineers. Greasers. . --- --·-- ----- --·---·- ---- - ·--- ------- ·--· -- ----- --------l)assenger s.s. I( yarra (t.s.) .. '1,100 45\J 11,2(\l\ 376 450 450 7 7 6 7 3 4 Yongala .. .. 3,144 42H 10,732 358 429 429 5 7 3 5 :3 4 Wv>mdra .. 3,000 8,82(1 294 353 353 5 5 il '1 3 4 Bombala .. .. 4,000 405 10,1S8 337 405 405 5 7 3 5 3 4 Kalgoorlie .. 1,400 274 6,849 228 274 274 4 4 3 4 2 3 Pilbarra .. 1,500 253 6,:121 210 252 252 4 4 .3 4 :l Wodonga ". .. 2,600 347 8,G80 289 347 347 4 3 3 4 3 4 AHinga (c.s.) .. 1,440 202 4,0.30 1M 197 197 3 3 2 3 2 4 Gabo .. 1,400 20() (i,l\l(\ 206 20G 248 3 4 2 4 2 3 Cintrd 1,800 25H 7,765 259 25() 310 4 4 3 4 3 4 Barcoo .. 277 0,930 :431 277 277 4 4 3 ,, :4 3 Pateena .. 2,078 241 G,!J20 230 277 277 4 4 3 4 2 3 Burwah .. 1,150 .1(;4 4,G:lo Hi4 164 197 3 3 2 3 1 3 Uoogce .. .. 1,800 223 G,498 183 220 220 3 4. 3 :3 2 3 CJ.rgo s.s . Bovm·ic .. 1,600 26G 6,G62 222 26(\ 266 4 4 B 4 2 3 Winfield .. I, 136 236 6,401 213 2[)(\ 256 4 4 3 4 2 a Bar won .. 1,620 25(i 6,401 213 26G 25G 4 4 3 4 2 3 Ti1ne .. .. 1,436 2 30 5,472 191 217 217 3 4 2 3 2 3 '\loira .. 1,100 161 4,025 134 l(il 161 3 3 2 3 I :1 Tin ana .. 600 124 3,098 l03 124 124 3 3 1 3 l 3 "- --- --- ---- ---·- ---------··- --· -- ______ , _J 20 steamers .. I.R.P. N.H.P. Sum of s s s 71) 87 - 56 71) - 43 67 as given squares 30 ao 0£25 25 of cyl. _diameter Column (b) The given N.H.P. corresponds fairly fGr triple expansion engines to 8 or column (/). 25 (g) Engineers required under draft Act corresponds fairly to column (i), engineers under Schedule B. , (k) Is not meant as the ordinary working staff, but as the minimum possible; however, it. allows the Allingo. four engineers, against the three of other schemes, and every marine engineer will approve of this. N;i

It js- believed that by an expenditure of less than £s,ooo per annum, some soo boys could, within three years, be drafted into a Naval Reserve, whilst without any very great add1t10nal cost, a number of seamen might be ll1ClUCed to accepl retamers, and receive such practical trammg in gunnery and torpedo work as would tit them to do their part in defending our shores, snou1d me occas10n ever demand 1t.

It is recommended that we endeavour-(r) To offer inducements to Australian ship-owner5 to employ boys between the ages of 14 and r8, "l'lho are to be trained in the essentials of seamanship. Such to be enrolled in the

A.R.N.R. for a period of ten years. (2) To proVIde for a system of annual continuous training in sea­ manship, gunnery, and torpedo work for these boys on board the ships of the Imperial Squadron.

(3) To provide for a course ot similar instruction for all seamen between the ages of r8 and 45 now or hereafter employed on Australian registered sh1ps. Such seamen to be enrolled in A.R.N.R.


Boys (Australian or British) to be enrolled between the ages of 14 and 18 years-One boy for every I,ooo tons or fractional part thereof in respect of steam-ships.

One boy for every sao tons or fractional part thereof in respect of · sailing-ships. An allowance to be paid to the owner of every vessel in respect of each boy enrolled for a period of ten years in the Australian Royal Naval

Reserve-.£I5 for the first year. £7 ros. for the second year. £5 for the third year. All boys so enrolled to receive instruction in seamanship during their three years' service, and at the end of such period to have preference of employment as ordinary seamen.

Arrangements to be entered into with the Imperial authorities for 30 days' continuous training for every such boy on some ship of the Imperial Squadron, or on a Commonwealth warship,_ during which they are to be instructed in seamanship, ·gunnery, and torpedo work.

At the expiry of the three years, and during the remainder of the term of ten such other arrangements to be made to enable them to

receive not less than fifteen days' similar training. ·

In addition to provision for boys, all A.B.'s now or hereafter employed by any owner of

training for every subsequent year, until the expiry of the term of ten years, or until he reaches 45· A retaining fee shall be paid to every person over the age of r8 years of £5 per annum upon the completion of the armual training, and an

addit10nal £5 to every such person who shall qualify as proficient in gunnery and torpedo work, and a further SU[ll of £5 to every such person who shall qualify as an expert in gunnery and torpedo work.

There shall be paid to the owner of every vessel carrying a crew so per cent. of which is enrolled in the A.R.N.R. a sum equal to ro per cent. of the amount paid annually in respect of all tonnage and harbor dues paid to any State or the Commonwealth.

. . . . . . . . . .

No person enrolled in the A.R.N .R. shall be compelled to serve on a.ny ship outside the Commonwealth jurisdiction.


SUMMARY OF' :EV1DENCE AND MEMORANbtJM RE JURIS­ DICTION, BY HON. R. R. GARRAN. AREA OF JURISt>ICTION. r, there is no absolute limit of area provided that the law (a) is for the " peaee, order, and good government of the Commonwealth"; and (b) is not repugnant to an Imperial law applicable to the C<>mmoi'nYealth. F,I0492. E




2. Provided the above-mentioned requirements are complied with, then the Commol)wealth has power to. control Inter-State and external com­ merce, and this necessarily involves power to control vessels which, .tho\lgh not engaged in such commerce, use the Inter-State or national highways ..


3· With the concurrence of the King in Council, the Commqnwealth Parliament may, under section 735 of the Merchant Shipping Act, repeal (with certain exceptions) any of the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act relating to ships registered in Australia. Otherwise it may not ·directly

repeal or modify any part of that Act, but· may supplement its provisions bv others which are not repugnant to the Imperial laws extending to Aus­ tralia, e.g., if the Merchant Shipping Act in a part extending to'Australia provides that certain ships must carry three engineers, ·the Commonwealth

Parliament can require those ships, when within its jurisdiction, to carry four, but cannot make it lawful for them to carry two. ·


4· The powers of the Commonwealth incidental to the control of navig­ able highways, would give the Federal Parliament power .to :deal with such matters as lights, signals, rule of the road, licensing of officers, safety,. &c., on ships trading within.·the limits of any State, e.g., since

the ferry boats of Sydney use a Federal highway, they \Vould be under Federal law.


5· The Pa.rliament of the Commonwealth has power to eX!pres.sly repeal existing State navigation laws.


6. As a matter of law the Commonwealth has the same power to. deal with foreign as with British ships, though treaty obligations may affect· the exercise of this power. ·


1· The Parliament has also power to deal with State-owned

ships, when they engage in Federal commerce, or use a Federal highway.


8. I11 addition, the Federal Parliament may appoint Courts to hold inquiries on foreign boats lost after leaving the Commonwealth juril3.diction, though, with the parties and witnesses outside ourjurisdiction, it might be impossible to give effect to the law.


9· It has a limited 'power of control over Harbor Boards, and can to a certain extent regulate wharfage charges.


10. The Commonwealth Parliament has, in addition to . the powers formerly possessed by the States, full power to regulate the trade

of the Commonwealth as a \,hole--which previously, when it passed .beyond the limits of a single State, was practically foreign trade.


Royal Commission on the Navigation Bill has forwarded, for con­

sideration and reply, a Memorandum by Mr. R. E. Cunliffe, solicitor to the Board of Trade, dated 14th October, 1904, and has requested me to amplify the evidence already given on the legal standing and powers of the Commonwealth in regard to Navigation and Shipping.

2. The occasion of Mr. Cunliffe's memorandum is the Kew Zealand Shipping and Seamen's Act of 1903; but it deals with the powers of Colonial Legislatures generally in relation to merchant shipping. 3· J\[r. Cunliffe is impressed with the importance of preserving uni­ formity throughout the Empire in· respect 'of such legislation. He deah with the question as one of policy as well as of law; and his attitud., on the question of policy appears to lead him to a much D'lrrower·view of Colonial legislative powers than can, in my opinion, be supported.


4· ln this Memorandum, I deal solely with the question of law, which is. the only question referred to me. The subject has two main branches---( a) The positive legislative .power of Colonial Legislatures gene­ rally, and of the Commonwealth Parliament in particular,

with regard to Navigation and Shipping, apart from the Merchant Shipping Act 1894; and · (b) The extent to which that power is enlarged or restrkted by the provisions of Shipping Act,


5· A Cqlonial Legislature has power to make Jaws for the "peace, order, and good government" of the Colony-either generally (in the case ·of a Colony with a unitary Constitution) or with regard to specific subjects (in the case of a Colony with a Federal Constitution). The Commonwealth

Parliament, in particular, has power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to (inter alia) " Navigation and Shipping."

6. This legislative power has two limitations. The first is sometimes expressed to be that Colonial laws-except where ex-territorial operation is expressly given to them by the Imperial Parliament-only operate within the territorial limits of the Colony. This limitation is, however, nowhere

expressed in any Colonial Constitution. It appears to me that there may be cases in which it is necessary for the peace, order, and good govern­ ment of a Col.ony that it should be able to pass a law to operate ex-terri­ torially; and that the grant by the Imperial Parliament of plenary legis­

lative power for the purpose of such peace, order, and good government is wide enough to sanction ex-territorial operation in such cases. While ad­ mitting that the cases in which the necessity arises, and in which, therefore, the ex-territorial operation can be conceded, are probably rare, I would

prefer to state the first limitation in the words of the constitutional grant­ namely, that the operation of the laws of a Colony is limited to the purposes of the peace, order, and good government of the Colony.

7. The second limitation is that a Colonial law, which is repugnant to an Imperial Act which by express words or necessary intendment is applic­ able to the Colony--or repugnant to any order or regulation under any such Act-is, NJ the extent of such repugnancy, but not otherwise, void

(Coloni;1l Laws Validity Act). To create the invalidity, it is not enough that the Imperial law and the Colonial law both deal with the .same matter, and deal with it differently; they must be actually repugnant one to the other-inconsistent one with the other. The Colonial law may go further

than the Imperial law-may require compliance with further or more stringent conditions, but it is not therefore necessarily repugnant. More­ over, it is not enough .that the Imperial .Act is worded so generally that it is · capa.ble of being construed to extend to the Colony, or that it .is not in

express words limited to the United Kingdom. The application to the Colony must be either by express words or by necessary intendment, i.e., it must be incapable of being construed as not extending to the Colony.

8; Subject to these two limitations the Legislative power of a Colony with respect to Navigation and with respect to other

-is plenary. 9· It is necessary to emphasize this positive legislative power because it app_ ears to me that. in _the Memorandum under discussion it is largely overlooked, and it is assumed that Colonial legislative powers with respect

to navigation and shipping depend, wholly or chiefly, on certain express provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act I894, e.g., sections 735 and 736.


r o. Mr; Cunliffe, in his remarks, that 7 35 .an?

736 of the Jferclzant Shipping Act r894, together w1th sect10n 713, make 1t c:;lear ''.that from_ a. general point of view the Imperial Act does not con­ template that a Colony shall, as regards _the matters d_ealt the Act, do more than legislate (by way of spec1fic repeal w1th an 1mphed or. re­

cognised po_wer of new enactment) for ships registered in the Possession, or reg1.1late its own coasting." . rr. From these. remarks, as I understand them, I entirely dissent. Sections 7 35 and 7 36 are affirmative, not negative; they confer certain

specific legislative IX?w.ers upon Col?J1ial Legislatures, but certainly cannot be construed as depnvmg those Leg1slatures of all or any powers not men­ tioned:

55 I

'. ' '·

., f


r2. Section 735 confers a very special legislative power. It empowers a Colonial Legislature to repeal, as regards the Colony, .provisions of the Imperial Act, which extends to the Colony. That is a power which, apart from this provision, no Colonial Legislature would have. To construe the grant' as limiting in any way the antecedent powers of Colonial Legislatures in regard to shipping generally is opposed to all canons of interpretation.

13. As to section 736, it is not easy to discover either its exact purpose or its exact effect j though its history, so Jar as it appears on the Statute­ book, affords some guidance. lt is a re-enactment of section 4 of the Jl.ferchant Shipping (Colonial) Act 1869, which repealed sections 163 and ,)28 of the Customs Consolidation Act 185,3· The Act of 1853 embodied the policy of the old navigation laws. 152 restricted the

coasting trade of the United Kingdom to British ships. Section 163 did the same with respect to the coasting trade of any British in

Asia, Africa, or America; though section 328 enabled the Queen to relax this provision with respect to any Colonies upon an address from their Legislatures. The coasting trade of the United Kingdom was thrown open to the world in 1854; but the restriction as to the Colonies appears to have remained in force until the passing of the above-mentioned Act of r869.

From the terms in which sections r6J and 328 of the Act of 1853 were repealed by the Act of 1869, it appears that the main object of the new substantive provision was to enable the Colonies to legislate directl.v as to the vessels in which their coasting . trade should be carried on, It was clearl y intended to be an enabling, not a restrictive clause; to grant to the Colonies (subject to conditions) certain new powers of legislation, but not

to take away any existing powers. At the same time, it is not easv to see what new powers it conferred. Even before r869, a Colony, in virtue of its gener a] legislative power, could make laws to "regulate its coasting trade," provided that such laws 1vere not repugnant to any Imperial Act extending to the Colonv. The repeal of section r63 of the Act of r853 extended the powers of Colonial Legislatures by removing a direct statutorv

prohibition. But how does the substantive enactment extend their powers? ·It can hardlv he contended that it enables a Colony to pass laws repugnant to an Imperial Act extending to the Colony. It may · perhaps be argued (as was suggested by the Imperial Crown Law officers during the discussion

in Engbnd of the Commonwealth Constitution Bill-see Quick and Garran, n. 362) ·that it gives an ex-territoria l operation to the laws of a Colony j hut this is not expressed. However, the section was re-enacted verbatim in the Act of r894. It is hard to see what it adds to the powers of

Legisl atures. it is at least impossible to regard it as taking- anything­

away. It is a.(lirmative in form in apparent intention; and it cannot he supp..')sed that in the guise of a gift of power the Parlia.ment

intended to make a sweeping inroad upon the legislative pow ers of the wholE! of. the self-governing Colonies of the Empire.

r 4· The Merchant Sln·ppin_ e: A ct I 894 is not expressed to extend, as a whole, to the whole of the King's Dominions. Certain parts of it are expressed so to extend (e.g., Parts I.. .VIII'., XIII.) (:ertain other Parts are given a limited and specified application beyond the United Kingdom,

\V hilst other parts contain no general an plication clauses at all. Mr. Cun­

liffe, in his remarks as to the application of the several Parts of the Act, apbears . to infer, merelv from the absence of limiting words in particular Rections, that those sections were intended to aoplv throughout the British ·Dominions. Such an inference--if it is meant that the sections in question

extend to the Colonies wdhin the meaning of the Colonial Laws Validity Act -appears to me to be forbidden by the clear terms of that Act. I propose to deal in order with his remaxks as to the application of the several Parts.

rs . As to Part I., Mr. Cunliffe shows that this Part is almost wholly of Imperial application. It may be mentioned that the Commonwealth Bill d ces not deal (except in clause 417) with any of the matters covered in this P art.

r6. As to Part II., :Mr. Cunliffe draws from section 264 an inference in derogation of Colonial legislative powers, whidh appears to me quite untenable. H e sa.ys, in effect, that section 264 empowers the Legislature of a British Possession to apply·to British ships registered at, trading with, or being at any port in the Possession, any provisions of Part J !. (only)

which do not otherwise so apply j and he suggests that the section impliedlv limits the powers of Colonial Legislatures to exercising the powers specified, or at least that it is " a restrictin g rather than an enabling power." But Mr. Cunliffe does not quite accurately state the purport of the section; it does . not empower CQ!onial Legislatures to legislate in the direction men­

tioned, but declares that il such Legislature does so, the law shall have effe-::t tlrrous;hout the British Dominions as if enacied in the imperial Act. This is obviously an enabling provision; it enables a Colonial Legislature, in effect:, to pass an Impvriql law. No inference whatever cim be drawn

,, I



' I



i '



:1 : I I ! • . , ' ;


to restrict its power to pass Colonial laws. And, apart altogether from these considerations, it is submitted that the legislative powers of self­ governing Colonies cannot be whitt-led away, as snggested, by vague ''infer­ ences " and " implications." That is a state of affairs which was ended,

once and for all, by the Colonial Laws Validity Att.

I7. As to Part III., I do not altogether agree with Mr. Cunliffe if he means that, where the provisions of the Part extend to a Colony, the Colonial Legislature c.annot impose upon the owners of Eritish ships any further statutory obligations in addition to the obligations imposed by the

Imperial Act. It cannot impose any inconsistent obligations, but that is a very different

r8. As to Part V., Mr. Cunliffe thinks that certain provisions "on the whole, may be regarded as world-wide," or "appear to be general." In the absence of '' express words or necessary ihtendment,'' 1 see no reason to (loubt the powers of Colonial Legislatures to make different provision.

rg. As to Part VI., I do not see how the power conferred upon Colonial .Legislatures by section 478 can govern the application of the: rest of the Part to the Colonies,

20. As to Part XI. (Lighthouses), Mr. Cunliffe a!"guesc-from the pro­ visions enabling " Colonial !ig,ht dues " to be levied in certain " any Colonial legislation which goes beyond the al:xwecmentioned pro­ visions of the Imperial Act would be ultra vires." This would appear to

mean that a Colony which erected a lighthouse would be entirely dependent upon the King in Council and the Board of Trade for the imposition, collection, and application of light dues. I can see nothing whatever in the Imperial Act to support a contention which appears to me to involve

an extraordinary inroad upon Colonial powers of self-government.

2r. As to Part XIV., section 713 is referred to as being apparent1y of general application. It provides that the Board of Trade shall superintend " all matters relating to merchant shipping and seamen," and execute the provisions " of this Act and of all Acts relating to merchant shipping and

seamen." J\Ir. Cunliffe alludes in various passages to this section as sup­ porting his views of the restricted power of Colonial Legislatures, and appears to think that it gives the Board of Trade authority in the Colonies apart from Imperial legislation, expressly extending to the Coloriies. With

this view-if it is really am unable to agree.

22. Mr: Cunliffe thinks that section 72r (exempting from stamp duty certain instruments under the Act) is of general application. It appears to me that this section is merely aq exemption from duties imposed by the Imperial Parliament, and that there are no express words or necessary in­

tendment which justify its being construed to fetter revenue laws passed by Colonial Legislatures. · ·

23. With regard to the application of the several Parts of the Imperial Act to the British Dominions generally, it appears to me that the fact of some of the Parts containing a general application clause raises a strong presumption against the general application of those Parts in which no such application clause is found, and makes the necessity for " necessary

intendment " specially strong to. support a general application of any sections in those Parts. No such necessary intendment can be gathered from the fact that some sections are expressly limited to the United King­ dom, while others are not so limited. The Imperial Act of r894 is a

consolidation of laws rartging over a long period, and drawn by many hands-both before and after the passing of the Colonial Laws Validity Act of r865; and though much has been done in the way of harmonizing them, the Act bears manv traces of the different sources from which it was compiled. Inferences ·drawn from variations of language in different sections are therefore peculiarly untrustworthy. In considering whether a

particular a Part which does not tontain a general application

clause-is of general application or not, the only safe course is to look for the " necessary intendment " in that section itself. If it cannot be found there, then, ·in mv opinion, no amount of inference and no con­

siderations of the Clesirabilitv of uniformitv should influence the deter­ mination of the purely question·, whether the section extends to the Colonies, within the meaning of the Colonial Laws Validity Act, so invalidate enactments of a Colonial Legislature, which are inconsistent with



Secretary, Attorney-General's Department .

. I 5th January, I 906 ..





That. it should be. a suggestion to the Board •. of Trade that they should provide for the. issue of a. survey certificate in the case of non-passenger ves­ sels, and that the standards as to hull machinery, boilers, and life-saving appliances established by the Board of Tra;de an,d testified by current rates should be accepted for British ships in Austra.lian and New Zealand waters, the Board of 'Trade certificates to be accepted as of the same effect as the local certificates.

Passed unanimouslv by Conference.--Comrnission approved: Senator Guthrie dissenting. -2. ScALE OF PROVISIONS.

That the provision scale laid down in the Imperial Act of 1906 be recognised by Australia and New Zealand for use on British ships not registered in those Colonies. Passed unanimously. by approved.


That provisions on British ships which have already been inspected and passed Qy Imperial officers be exempt from further inspection in Australia and New Zealand, except .. upon complaint, or unless the authorities have reason to believe that such inspection is necessary.

Passed unanimously by approved.

4· ACCOMMODATION FOR THE CREW. That the conditions imposed by Australian or New Zealand laws, as regards accommodation, ventilation, and conveniences, should only apply to vessels registered in those Colonies or engaged in their coasting trade.

- Passed unanimously by Conference.-Commission approved. (Vessels to which this applies are defined in Resolution 9.)


That the condition imposed by Australian or New Zealand law as regards manning should only apply to vessels· registered in those or engaged in their coasting Passed unanimously by Conference.-Commission approved.

(Vessels to which this applies as defined in Resolution 9.)

6. ACCOMMJDATION CONDITIONS IN SHIPS ALREADY BUILT, That the · Governments of Australia and New Zealand, instead of imposing new conditions involving structural alterations as regards cubic and superficial space accommodation devoted to officers and cr.ew on vessels

built prior to the enactment of such conditions, will require only such existing vessels as have accommodation which, in the opinion of the local authorities, is in fact insanitary or unhealthful, to amend the same so as to bring it into a sanitary and healthful condition to the satisfaction of the local authorities.

, Passed by Conference: The Honorable W. M. Hughes and Mu J. Havelock Wilson dissenting. Commission approved: Messrs. Hughes, Gtithrie, De Largie, dissenting. ·

7· RAriNG .•

That no seaman should be pertn'itted to engage as A.J3. on boa.-d any British ship • who cannot show that he is entitled to that rating, and that the period of service qualification· should be three years. Passed by Confer(:'flce.-Commission approved.


That no person should be employed as ali officer on board any British. ship ·registered in Australia· or New Zealand, or engaging· iri the coasting ttJde of those Colonies who is not-( a) A British subject, and

(b) Thoroughly conv,ersant with the English language. Passed by Conference: The United Kingdom delegates abstaining from voting .on this Resolution. Commission approved.

(Commission recommends the extension c£ this to all persons employed on ships registered in Austraiia.)



That the vessels to which the conditions ·imposed by the law of Aus­ tralia or. New Zealand are applicable should be (a) vessels registered in the Colony, while trading therein; and (b) vessels wherever registered while t1ading on the coast of the Colony. That for the purpose of this resolu­

tion a vessel shall be deemed to trade if she take& on board cargo or passengers at any port in the Colony to be carried to and landed or

delivered at any port in the Colony.

Passed unanimously by Conference.-Commission approved: Messrs. Edwards, Thomson, Knox, and :Macfarlane dissenting. (Subject to exemp-tion mentioned on page 53.) •


A vessel engageJ in the oversea trade shall not be deemed to engage in the coasting trade merely because it carries between two Australian or New Zealand ports-( a) Passengers holding through tickets to or from some oversea

place; ·

(b) .Merchandise consigned on through bill of lading. to or from some oversea place. Passed unanimously by a·pproved.


No ship shall be deemed seaworthy unless she is in a fit state as to number and qualifications of erew, including officers, to encounter the ordinary perils of the voyage then entered upon. Passed unanimousq by Conference.-Corumission approved.


That it be a. recommendation to the Board of Trade in any Amending Act to consider the desirability of giving to masters, mates, and engineers the designation of " officers " in the Imperial Merchant Shipping Act and its Regulations, Without prejudice to any rights they enjoy as seamen.

Passed unanimously by Conference.-Commission approved.


That every possible encouragement should be given by legislation or otherwise to the employment of British seamen on British ships, provided that this resolution does not contemplate the imposition of restrictive. con­ ditions.

Passed unanimously by C:?nference.-Commission approved.


That the Board of Trade be urged to take into immediate consideration the question of eyesight tests, with a view to effecting an. improvement if found necessary. Passed unanimously by Conference:-Commission approvea.


That a current certificate issued by the Board of Trade as to efficiency of compasses shall have the same effect as local certificates. Passed unanimously by Conference.-'Commission approved.


That the adoption of uniform legislation is desirable with a view to extend the benefits of the Workmen's Compensation Acts toseamen, as. has already been done in the United Kingdom arid New Zealand. .

Passed by Conference : the representatiYes of the British ship-owners dissenting and recording the view that some system of compulsory insur­ ance for seamen should be adopted. Commission approved.

'17. LOAD LIN!,.

That the Commonwealth adopt the provisions of the Kew Zealand Act regarding load line. Passed by Conference: the British delegates abstaining from voting, on the ground that, as the New Zealand Act gives no power to alter the

Board of Trade mark imposed on any ship, the matter appeared one for the decision of the Commonwealth Government . . Commission approved : Senator Guthrie dissenting.




That for desertion be abolished in the country in which

the seaman is engaged, except in the case of a seaman whJ after negotiat­ ing his advance note wilfully or through misconduct fails to join his ship or deserts before the note is payable. Provided that in respect to desertion from ships other than those (a) registered in the Commonwealth; (b) whose final port of discharge of the crew is in the Commonwealth, deserters shall be placed on board such

vessels upon request by competent authority-in the case of a foreign vessel, the Consul of that country; in the case of a British ship, the

•captain. Passed unanimously by the Conference; Sir William Lyne not being present.-Commission approved.


That the desirability of the provision on board ships carrying passengers of an apparatus for transmitting messages by means of wireless telegraphy should be taken into con-sideration by the Board of Trade and the Austra­ lian and New Zealand Governments-.

Passed unanimously by Conference.--Commission approved.


That 1t be recommended to the Australian and New Zealand Govern­ ments in any future Merchant Shipping legislation to insert an express pro­ vision safeguarding the obligations imposed by any treaties in whiah they have concurred or may subsequently concur.

Passed unanimously by Conference.-Commission approved.


That it is desirable that the obligations imposed by Australian or New Zealand law on shipping registered in the United Kingdom should not be more onerous than those imposed on the shipping of any foreign country. Passed unanimously by Conference.-Commission approved.


That, with a view to uniformity, it be a. suggestion to the Australian and New Zealand Ministers that in exercising any powers conferred on them by legislation to make regulations with regard to matters affecting Merchant Shipping, they should have regard to the correspondi!1g pro­ VIsions of the Imperial Merchant Shipping Acts or Regulations made there­

under, so far as circumstances permit; and that, at least three months' notice should be given before any such Regulations come into force. Passed unanimously by Ctmference.-Commission approved.


That it be a recommendation to the Australian and 1\ew Zealand Go­ vernments that if conditions are imposed by local law on vessels incidentally engaging in the coasting trade in course of an oversea voyage, care should be taken that these conditions should not be such as to differentiate to their

disadvantage as compared with Colonial registered vessels. Passed unanimously by Conference.-Commission approved.


That the Governments concerned be requested to introduce legislation to enable effect to be given to the resolutions of the Conference in cases where legislation is necessary. :Passed unanimously by Conference.-Commission approved.

' • ' - : ---c' '..;;"";.o.' --·

tT!nted and i•uulishcd [;;·tho .00\"EUXAfF.NT of the CO)f)HiNWlULTll or t>y J. KEMP, Acting Ouvernmcut Printer fur the State of