HARASSING LAWS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 418, 29 January 1909, Page 5

HARASSING LAWS.

6 SHIPOWNERS GRIEVANCES. NEW ZEALAND VESSELS AT A DISADVANTAGE. DRASTIC RESTRICTIONS. (HI TJIiEGBAFH—PBESS ASSOCIATION.) AuoMand, January 28. For eome years paso owners of sailing vessels havo been complaining bitterly of the character of tho New Zealand shipping laws, which they claim are harassing and drastio as compared with those obtaining in the Commonwealth, and which in consequence place Now Zealand registered, vessels at an. unfair disadvantage iu competition with Australian-registered vessels. Ono owner of two sailing vessels has already transferred his register to Sydney, and another large shipowner,, who has 20 sailers trading tin the. Tasman Sea, has intimated that unless the New Zealand restrictions are modified on tho lines of the Australian laws ho will forth,with transfer all his boats to the Sydney register. ' The chief grievance is that Australian-reg-istered ships are subject to fewer restrictions, pvon white in New Zealand waters, and the' " effect of this is depressing on tho New Zealand owner, who has to pay much more for the running of his ship. It is claimed iu fact that the ,restrictions that are being added fiom time to time make.it impossible for Now Zoaland ships to be run at a profit in competition with Australian-owned vessels.! Annoy ins and Harassing. With a view to obtaining information on the subject, a reporter waited on Mr. J. J. Craig, the , largest owner of sailing ships in \ the, . Dominion. Mr. Craig said the New' Zealand restrictions were- annoying and harassing at every turn. Shipowners were about disgusted with them, and tho awards .. of tho Arbitration Court with regard to wages had about added tho last straw to the already ovor-bnrdened owner. > • , "New Zealand laws," ho said, " compel us to employ two more men than they do over there. Sydney recognises Lloyd's certificates, 'and the 1 Now Zoaland Government does not, ,but insists on , its own surveyor being em-' ployed , when a vessel goes into' dock. Of couise, we have to compete along with Sydnoy in ships, and if we have theso restrictions in Now Zealand we cannot compete , favourably. ' ' ' "It would be a great loss to Now Zealand if tho sailing ships were knocked out. Supposing tho Now Zealand Government tried to get tho Sydney people to como up to their standard, tho sailing ships would > bo converted into hulks. Wβ would have to 'take n long 'jump of 1200 miles to got away' from the New Zealand restrictions. , "It is not a combine," continued Mr. Craig, "wo have gone into this independently; ' and of our own free will. I "was talking to Mr. 6. T. Niccol, who has passed his two vessels on to tho Sidney Register, and complained to him of tho disheartening restrictions which wore built up round; tho New Zoaland shipowner. He advised me to do what ho had done, and after thinking the matter over, I came to the conclusion it was tho only course left open to mo. --The Matter Placed Before tho Minister.'' ■ "I immediately acquainted the Minister for Marina of my decision, explaining to him that tho shipping laws now in force here wore impossible. ~ " Reluctantly." concluded Mr. Craig, " I am coming to this decision, and if the Minister cannot see his way clear to bring our 'shipping; In ws more into lino with tho"se ot Australia' there is nothing left for mo but to transfer my boats to Sydney. I have now all tho nocossary papers made out and ready for mailing, and am only holding back t-oseo if tho Minister will dp. anything in i the matter. It 'does not pay to own ships in New Zealand these days.l , ,, ( v " j Tho Position, Outlined. , Another prominent Auckland shipowner gave a orief aud lucid outline of tho position. >■■•*. " In the first place," he. said, " tho manning, .scale in New. Zealand is ridiculously high. The most serious objection we have, . however, is the regulation compelling us tc return a man -who has been signed off to the port at which he .was signed. It often happens that men havo to. be got rid off for disorderly habits or some offence, and it ia a groat hardship that these men can como tc us and demand their passages back to New Zealand. According "to the laws on tho other side, you can 6ign a man off at any 'port in the Commonwealth or New Zealand '"and if ho desires to get back to his port oi embarkation ho has to find his own way. It - is unjust that,the owner should bo compelled to return a man to Now Zealand. The Now Zealand Government is the only Government in the world that will not recognise Lloyd's certificate, and this is also a hardship on shipowners. Then a Bill has been introduced making all New Zealand registered vessels liable for compensation in New Zealand." This, we tike, it, moans that in the event of an accident to any of the crew in Australia, we would bo liable for damages, not only there, but in New Zoaland, paying twice oyor, as it were, The injustice of this is'obvious. In Australia they are doing all they possibly can to oncoura'ge the shipowner, I -while hore in New Zealand they, arc doing their very best to harass us." ■■ ' Statement by Hon. J. A. Millar. ■ ' I Tlw Minister for Marino'(Ron. J. A. Milj lar), on being interviewed on the subject l to-night, stated that the Commonwealth Navigation Act, which had been passed by' 'the federal JParhaimnt two years ago, and whioh has since been, hung' up at Home " awaiting the Royal assent, is similar to the Now Zealand Act, and in some respects is even more stringent than the one against which local shipowners are now makiiig complaint, , Thero was no reason to believe that this Act would not jeceive tho Royal assent, aud the ' looal shipowner would thus derive no benefit by transferring their ships to the Aus-_ traliai register. .furthermore, if ship-' owners endeavoured to evade the New Zca«. land shipping laws by such means, legisla*; tion would have to be passed -to make it , unremunerative tor them'to do so.. ' '