THE NAVIGATION CONFERENCE.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8784, 11 April 1907, Page 2

THE NAVIGATION CONFERENCE.

Press Association.—Copyright. London, April 10. Tho Navigation Conference resolved. that no ships shall trade on the Australian coast without a license. The Colonial Office suggested that .the license might take the form ofa tax sufficient to prove a serious handicap. Mr Hughes explained that the Royal Commission entertained no such intention ; it only proposed to charge a small fee to cover official expenses.

Discussion was ro-oponed on Sir Joseph Ward’s motion respecting the right of the Australasian Governments to fix tho wages of crows shipped in the Commonwealth and Now Zealand for Fiji and tho Pacific Islands. Mr Hill agreed that tho colonics could exercise jurisdiction in their territorial waters, hut ho was unable to entertain the extension of tho principle beyond. Sir William Lyne desired a line of demarcation indicating what was within tho coastal trade of the Commonwealth and New Zealand.. Mr Lloyd George remarked that since the proposal was really an alteration in tho Colonial Constitution it was preferable that the resolution should be referred to the Colonial Conference. Sir Joseph Ward accepted the suggestion. He was very desirous to protect colonial shipowners against unfair competition outside. Sir Lloyd George explained that'ho had not expected his remark to be taken literally. He only meant to indicate tho difficulty of legislating.. Mr Hughes moved that the Conference approves of the principle of the manning scale being applicable to all vessels registered in the United Kingdom, Australia, aud New Zoa--1 land.

An interesting discussion resulted from tho Board of Trade expert incidentally revealing that the Department insisted on a certain minimum of officers and crew before recognising a vessel to be seaworthy. Mr Thomson insisted that it was necessary to produce an equitable manning scale. Mr Hughes suggested that there were competitors who did not comply with the colonial law. I Mr Lloyd George ruled that Mr Hughes’ motion was out of order that the Australian conditions be applied to all ships engaged in trading to and from any port of the Commonwealth and the islands of , the Pacific.

Mr Hughes thereupon raised the question of the scope of the Conference, claiming ’.that Mr Lyttelton’s invitation contemplated a conference with very wide powers. How was it possible, ho said, to*scenre uniform legislation when the President indicated that there would bo no fresh Imperial Navigation Bill for many years. If that was so uniformity was only possible by restricting tho freedom of Colonial legislation, and tho appointment of a committee to adjust the anomalies. Sir William Lyne thought that'tho previous resolutions secured for the Australians what they wanted. Tho shipowners contended that as to efficient manning the element of the seaworthiness of every ship ought to be judged on its own merits. At Mr Lloyd George’s suggestion, Mr Hughes’ motion was amended pn the lines in the clause of tho original Commonwealth Bill that no ‘ship he deemed seaworthy unless in a fair state regarding tho number and qualifications of the crew, 'including the officers, to encounter tho ordinary perils of tho voyage. This was carried. Sir'J. G.jWard moved, recommending that the ' Board of Trade in any amending Shipping Act give masters, mates, and engineers the designation of officers'Avithout prejudice to ‘any rights they enjoy as seamen.—Unanimously carried. Sir William Lyuo moved that every possible encouragement bo given by legislation otherwise to the employment of British seamen in British ships in preference to foreigners. Mr Lloyd George suggested that it would be"better to omit tho last four words sinco they involved an international question. The suggestion was accepted, and the resolution carried, with the addition -of the words to theresolution—rand : *contemxd'al,os Ji-ho Lmpqsitiou of restrictive conditions. Mr Hughes Insisted on -tho clear understanding |that the Common, wealth had the right to make such restrictions as Parliament thought fit to all ships registered iu or trading within the Commonwealth jurisdiction not limited. Mr Lloyd George thought the resolution pnly implied that it was possible for the Imperial action to enlarge the employment of seamen by means of subsidies as incentives to shipowners to employ apprentices. Sir J. G. Ward’s motion, asking the Board of Trade to publish a form of bill of lading safeguarding the rights of the shipper, shipowner, and consignees, was carried. Mr Hill’s "amendments as to legis,lation restricting the liberty of .contract ou charter parties and bills of lading as unnecessary and uudesir,ablo, was defeated ou a vote, th Imperial delegates abstaining from voting. Sir J. G. Ward, in deference to Mr Lloyd George’s suggestion, withdrew the Suez Canal Council resolution in view of introducing it at the Colonial Conference, after cousulta; fiqn with Mr Deakin.