A. :>\

26

KKPUKT OF PROCEEDINGS OK THE CONFBBBNCB.

feel they are there. Before 1 left, a case came into court in connection with just such a ship as this. Part 4 of the Hill on which we sat. Clause 185, says : " This part of this Act shall apply to (a) all " British ships, and (6) all foreign ships carrying pas- " sengers or cargo shipped in any port in Australia "to any port in the British Dominions," and it is proposed to add to that Subsections (c) and (d). Well now, that applies to unseaworthy ships, unsafe ships, lifesaving appliances, and dangerous goods. Mr. COX : May I put a concrete case which occurs to me. A ship is registered in the Port of London; she goes out on a round voyage to Australia, and goes from one Australian port to another picking up passengers and goods ; she then gets to Sydney, then she clears for Valparaiso, and she comes back to Australia. While in Valparaiso, she has violated some of the conditions prescribed by the Australian Act, is she liable to be prosecuted when she gets back to Australia for what she has done ? Hon. W. M. HUGHES: I should not say so. It all depends. Mu. COX : But doesn't it go as far as that? Hon. W. M. HUGHES: Our jurisdiction begins and ends on foreign ships while in Australia, and on Australian registered ships wherever they are. I presume our jurisdiction is the same as the jurisdiction of all countries; that is, it extends to all ships within the territorial waters or on Australian ships wherever they are. subject, of course, to the law of other nations. That, I presume, is the law with regard to ourselves. Mr. CON : Not unless it has been come to by the Colonies, because it has been laid down that it applies to territorial waters. Hon. W. M. HUGHES : Yes, as regards accommo dation. If the ship had certain accommodation while in our waters, and in other respects manned as we require, I cannot see how when she got to Valparaiso she could do anything against our law. Of course, she could stop up the ventilation. Mn. LLEWELLYN SMITH : I suggest you have really got all you want under (6) "Licensed to trade "on the coast." The CHAIRMAN : We are getting on to discuss 4. 1 ih.n't want to restrict discussion, but we are discussing 4 under 3. Hon. DUGALD THOMSON : Practically the recommendation of the Commission agrees with the intention of Sir Joseph Ward's motion in limiting the application to ships such as appear in the footnote, that is, (a) ships registered in Australia; ib) ships licensed to tiade on the Austialian coast; and (c) is objected to because of its indefiniteness, and we are asked if we have not all that is necessary under (b). Hon. W. M. HUGHES: Quite so. There was the ship "Century" (Howard Smith). She was registered in the Port of London; she was engaged in the coasting trade ; she would not be a ship registered in Australia, and she would not be a ship licensed to trade on the Australian coast. Hon DUGALD THOMSON: Then she would not trade. Hon. W. M. HUGHES : I do not know whether she would or not, because there might be no licence at all. or no licence to issue in the case of such ships—that might be a ship owned in Australia and registered in London. Mb. NORMAN HILL : Sir Joseph Ward's motion covers those engaged, as a matter of fact, in the coasting Hon. W. M. HUGHES: If we were'to decide what coasting is, I think it would be better. The CHAIRMAN : This is the motion :— "That the accommodation, ventilation, and conveniences of ships owned in Australia or New Zealand, hi- engaged in the coastal trade, be subject to the loeal shipping laws,"

Hon. W. M. HUGHES : Owned or engaged? The CHAIRMAN : That covers your point Hon. W. M. HUGHES: Rut what about registered? 'The CHAIRMAN : It doesn't matter about registered. Hon. W. M. HUGHES : It does matter, because it might not be owned. 'The CHAIRMAN : Well, say "owned or registered." Mu. NORMAN HILL: Isn't "registered" better than " owned " ? The CHAIRMAN: Would you prefer "registered" to " owned " ? Hon. W. M. HUGHES: No; use the three—"own,-el "or registered or engaged." Hon. DUGALD THOMSON : Why should a vessel registered in Australia be subject to different conditions ? Hon. W. M. HUGHES: Strike out "owned," and put "registered or engaged." After all, it does not matter to us who owns them. And the law cannot healtered by anything we do. There is only one other point; I understand what Sir Joseph means, it is lust simply to say "the law applies to these ships." It does not say it does not apply to others. Hon. DUGALD THOMSON: It does apply without any resolution of ours to those ships under the New Zealand Act. It would apply under our Act if we passed it : but the intention is that it shall only apply. Sir JOSEPH WARD: I don't think we should put "only." Mn. NORMAN HILL: You are seeking to impose on our ships the conditions which yon hold over the ships under your jurisdiction. Sir JOSEPH WARD : I think it had better stand as it is. Hon. W. M. HUGHES: I think it would be well to pass that resolution as it is, and then to discuss when the proper time comes what is coasting trade, and if it be found that some ships have escaped, or might escape, th.- conditions which should apply to them under that resolution, a rider could be put to that to make it quite clear. But I understand that the meaning is this, that it applies without doubt at all. It is a declaratory motion: there can be no doubt it applies to ships registered or engaged in the Australian trade. Hon. DUGALD 'THOMSON: But we have to go Further; we have to decide if we an- to apply it to vessels which visit Australia, but do not coast. Sir JOSEPH WARD : That comes under 4. Hon. DUGALD THOMSON: No; the definition of casting cones under 4, but that does not sav whether vessels which are admitted not to be coasting shall bemade subject to these provisions. The CHAIRMAN I I think Mr. Thomson is right there. The definition of coastal will come in later on. But before we come to the definition, I think we ought to decide whether these conditions are to be imposed upon vessels that cannot possibly be said to be engaged in coastal trade. Take a vessel which carries cargo and passengers from London to Sydney, and does not engage in the coastal trade. Sir JOSEPH WARD : Then it would not apply. Hon. W. M. HUGHES: Why not? Siu JOSEPH WARD: We will come to that later. riii CHAIRMAN : We will come to the definition later, hut subject to the definition I thought it ought to be made clear that these conditions shall only apply to the conditions of the coastal trade or vessels registered in Australia. Hon. W. M. HUGHES: No, it is the other way round. The point is, not that it shall only apply to those, but that it does apply to those and some others. Whether it shall apply to those others will be determined when we have decided what coastal means.