ENGLAND'S MERCANTILE MARINE.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 131, 2 June 1873, Page 2

ENGLAND'S MERCANTILE MARINE.

TheXondon correspondent of the Australasian writes : — ■- A subject of the first importance has been brought under the consideration of Parliamebt by Mr Plimsoll, the member for Derby, who has obtained tho appointor I . a Royal commission to inquire into the condition of our commercial marine, and certain practices connected with it. The questious he raises vitally affect the honor of one section of tho community, and are supported by disclosures so scandalous that it has been impossible to resist inquiry. If he speaks truly, the lives of For remainder of neivs see fourth page.

thousands of seamen are sacrificed to the recklessness and cruel creed of shipowners aqd merchants. ?•■■; Mr.,.. Plimsoll has for a long time past directed?, attention to this subject, and been occupied inthe collection *of facts. Just before the opening of the session, .fie published and widely distributed '" a book i entitled Our Seamen—An Appeal. which he dedicated "to the Lady graciousaridkind,who,Bee3ngalaborer working in the rain, sent him her rug to wrap about his shoulders "-—that is, to the Queen. It is a volume prepared with the utmost care, bristling with facts and figures,; and, to make the case clearer, fortified by photographs of documents and by other illustrations bearing on the argument. It first proves, from unimpeachable, authorities, that a vast number of shipwrecks occur which might be prevented, especially in the coasting trade and on the shorter voyages, from overloading, from undermanning, from known unseaworthiness, from the use of old ships fit'only to be broken up, and other causes; it shows also that the underwriters take each only so small a risk on each ship that they have no strohg motive of inquiry, and that the temptation to over-insure and defraud is common, and it points out that the present law is unequal to the protection of tbe seaman, who prefers the perils of the sea to the legal risks he has to run in order to defend himself. Mr Plimsolls indignation, in which every reader must to some extent share, sometimes leads him apparently to impute to design what is more probably due to selfish recklessness and fierce commercial competition. In one passage his allusions assume a very pointed form. Mr Plimsoll is understood to have entered the House of Commons chiefly with the purpose of bringing this subject forward. He relates how he met a member in the lobby, who had threatened to oppose one of his bills "Do you exppct your bill will come on to-night ? " said this man. " Yes, I hope so." "I am sorry for that, as I have a dinner engagement; but I should' not like to be absent." "I- think you should not be absent," was the reply. " Why ? " said ; the other sharply. "Because," . said Mr Plimsoll, " I may have to tell the House of a man whose name you ? -will hear in any coffee, or 'exchange in Yarmouth, Hull, Scarborough, Whitby,, Pickering, Yßly the, Shields, Newcastle^ Sunderland, or in any port on the north-east coast, as one notorious for excessive and habitual overloading, and a reckless disregard for human life, who has lost ,' seven ocean-going' steamers, and drowned more than a hundred men in less than two years, and whose name I have myself seen as one of those whose ships insurance brokers at Lloyd's at length warn the underwriters they will not ship gbods in before the underwriters will take a line upon them, and I may have to tell the House that that man is the member for -." Mr Plimsoll adds in his book, *'I thought the man would have fainted. He answered, never a word." He gives some other details, and describes a subsequent encounter with another member, but does not mention any names. Identific^tioii j however, would not be [difficult to |hbse familiar with the northern ports, or with the records of the House of Commons. Accordingly, early in the session, one shipowner in the House, to whom no suspicion attached, called attention, in the interest of other shipowners, to the book, and raised the question of privilege, moving— " That to accuse in a printed book members of this House of grievous offences, and threaten them with further exposure if they take part in its debates, is highly reprehensible and injurious to the honor and dignity of this House." Mr Plimsoll at once offered the most ample apology, expressing his regret that in the earnestness with which he sought help for the helpless, coupled with his inexperience, he should have left anyone room to doubt that for the House he entertained the very highest respect. The Hobse instinctively showed that it did not consider the subject one for further discussion. There? was a little scene when another member arose, who thought himself personally implicated, but the resolution was withdrawn. A court of law is the, proper ; court of appeal against such charges, as far as they concern any individual; and it was stated in the House that actions for libel had been commenced by two of the memberß to whom reference is made. Surely Mr Plimsoll must desire that .every charge should be substantiated or abandoned. He has himself taken care to explain that he does not accuse the great body of shipowners, but only a fraudulent few. As soon as it was known that legal proceedings would be taken, Mr Plimsolls friends came quickly to his help. Cheques were, sent him. unsolicited from various quarters, and although he protested that

> jhe was prepared to stand his ground alone, 'he -was at last persuaded to allow a defence |fund to be formed, but only on one condition, tbat he and Mrs Plimsoll should be allowed to contribute £1500 (the preparation and distribution of his book having already cost another £1500), and that ail ithe money subscribed above the necessary expenses should be divided among the orphans and widows of shipwrecked seamen. It is probable that a large sum will be raised.