NEW ZEALAND SHIPPING LAWS.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVI, Issue 10059, 29 January 1909, Page 4

NEW ZEALAND SHIPPING LAWS.

(Pbji Pkess Association.) Wellington, January 28. In connection with the telegram from Auckland concerning the transfer of the sailing vessels from the New Zealand to the Australian register, enquiries made at the Marine Department showed that there was no information of any more than one Auckland firm proposing to transfer its vessels to the -Australian register. _ Wellington is not affected, as there is but little, if any, sailing tonnage on the local register. In Auckland there are more sailing vessels belonging to that port than to any other in the Dominion. The objection raised by the Auckland owners to the New Zealand legislation would probably be to the provisions regarding the minimum crew, employment of boys, deck cargo, and the workers' compensation for sickness and accidents legislation, which applies to maritime employment as well as to shore work. Registry in the Commonwealth would, however, bar a vessel trading in- New Zealand between coastal ports, say, from the Kaipara, to Wellington, on the Australian l-ates of pay, if they were lower than those of New Zealand. The passing of the Commonwealth Navigation Bill would, however, put New Zealand owners registering in the Commonwealth on much about the same footing as they are already with regard to payment of wages, equipment, minimum crew to be carried, and other provisions in the New Zealand law.

Auckland, January 28.

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 the awards of the Arbitration Court with regard to wages had about added the last straw to the already overburdened owner. "New Zealand laws," he said, ''compel us to employ two more men than they do over there. Sydney recognises Lloyd's certificate and the _ New Zealand Government- does not, but insists on its own surveyor being employed when a vessel goes into dock. Of course, we have to compete along with Sydney in ships, and if we have these restrictions in New Zealand we cannot compete favorably. It would be a great loss to New Zealand if the sailing ships were knocked out. Supposing the New Zealand Government tried to get the Sydney people to come up to their standard the sailing ships would be converted into Jiulks. W e would have to take a long jump of 1200 miles to get away from the New Zealand restrictions."

"It is not a combine," continued Mr Craig. "We have gone into this independently, and of our own free will. I was talking to Mr G. T. Niccol, who has passed his two vessels on to the Sydney register, and complained to him of disheartening restrictions which were built up round the New Zealand ship-owner. He advised me to do what he had done, and, after thinking the matter over, I came to the conclusion that" it was the only course left open to me. I immediately acquainted the Minister of Marine of my decision, explaining to him that the shipping laws now in force here were impossible. Reluctantly I am coming to this decision, and if the Minister cannot see his way clear to bring our shipping laws more into line with those of Australia there is nothing left for me but to transfer my boats to Sydney. I have now all the necessary papers made out ready for mailing, and am only holding back to see if the Minister will do anything in the matter. It does not pay to own ships in New Zealand these days." Another prominent Auckland shipowner gave a brief and lucid outline of the position. "In the first place," he said, "the manning scale in New Zealand is ridiculously high. The most serious objection we have, however, is the regulation compelling us to Teturn a man wlio has been signed off to the port at which he was signed. It often happens that men have to be got- rid of for _ disorderly habits or some offence, and it ;s a hardship that these men can come to us and demand their passages back to New Zealand. According to the laws en the other side, you can sign a man off at any port in the Commonwealth or New Zealand, and if he desires to get back to his port of embarkation'he has to find his own way. It- is unjust that the owner should be compelled to return a man to New Zealand. The New Zealand Government is the only Government in the world that will not recognise Lloyd's certificate, and this is also a hardship on ship-owners. Then a Bill has been introduced making all New Zealand-regis-tered vessels liable for compensation hi New Zealand. This, we take it, means that in the event of an accident to any of the crew in Australia we would be liable for damages not only theTe but in New Zealand, paying twice over, as it , were. The injustice of' this is obvious. In Australia they are doing all fhey possibly can to encourage the ship-owner, while here in New- Zealand they are doing their very best to harass us." The Minister of Marine (the Hon. J. A. Millar), on being interviewed on the subject to-night, stated that the Commonwealth Navigation Act, which had been passed by the Federal Parliament two years ago", and which has since been hung lip at Home awaiting the Royal assent, is similar to the New Zealand Act, and in some respects is even more stringent than the one against- winch local shipowners are now making complaint. There was no reason to believe that this act would not receive the Royal assent, and the local shipowners would thus derive no benefit by transferring their ships to the Australian register. if ship-owners endeavored to evade the New Zealand laws by such means legislationwould have to be passed to make it unremunerative for them to do so.