BILLS OF LADING

Hokitika Guardian, 11 June 1920, Page 4

BILLS OF LADING

CARGO PILLAGING. f AUSTRALIAN & N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATI )N LONDON, June 8. The sub-committee of the London Chamber of Commerce reports that it is impossible to obtain a simplification of bills of lading owing to the diversity of the conditions of different trades. The sub-committee approves of the Australian and New Zealand increase in the shipowner’s liability to £2OO per package, and recommends that it be adopted for all general cargo trades. The sub-committee reports that the pillaging of cargo has become intolerably acute. Underwriters now only pay 75 per cent of the claims on this account, even for additional premiums. The pilferage is said to bo chiefly due to the lenient sentences imposed on offenders. The sub-committee recommends jpiprisonment without the option, of a fine. [A request from the Associated Chambers of Commerce for recommendations regarding the amendment of bills of lading came before the executive of the Wellington Central Chamber of Commerce on Tuesday. The president (Mr A. Leigh Hunt) stated that tile Chamber bad placed its proposals before past conferences of the Chambers. They included the elimination from the hill of lading of anything in tho nature of “ bluff.” It was an offence in other countries for a shipping company to insert in the bill of lading clauses that were ultra vires at common law, hut in New Zealand, unsuspecting consignees were often prevented from claiming their rights by th.e provisions of the bills of lading. The • shipping companies had added clause after clause. They had,, even declared themselves to be not responsible for the unseaworthy condition , of the vessel or for damage by vermin. The people who were paying freights had a right to a just bill of lading.]