95

A.—sa

HKI-OKT OF PROCBEDINOS OF THE CONFERENCE.

Mn. BELCHED : I am going on to other matters if you will let me continue. I say that is altogether inadequate, and what 1 say in connection with the matter also is this : that there is absolutely no provision made to see that the minimum which may be necessary for ca.li ship is observed or established. Now we have that on the word of the responsible official of the Board of 'Trade in the remarks which he made some days ago in respect to the granting ..f certificates to vessels. It was then stated yerj clearly and distinctly that to survey all the ships that come nuclei the- purview of the Imperial authorities would necessitate an army of inspectors. Now what I want to know in connection with this manning scale, or basis, or whatever you like to term it, is, who is going to administer il ? At present there is no provision made for administration at all, because il was stated by Mr. Norman Hill that the question ..I the manning of the ship in his opinion should be left (and so far as I can see. it is to a very large extent left) as bet ween the- owner of the ship and the seamen. I say that it is not right that it should be left at that stage, for this simple reason, that the crew of the ship only meets the owner of a ship as a rule just immediately before the vessel sails. The men, before they go on board the ship at all, have to sign an agreement which lakes them on their voyage, and they do not know until they get on hoard that ship, what she is like, how she is fitted, or what the nature of the work on board of her is likely to be, and they cannot very well, if then sign this agreement, without transgressing some of the principles of the Shipping Act. refuse Io go into that ship without the risk of being put in gaol. 'There may he an honest difference- of opinion between the nun and the owners as to whether the ship is seaworthy or not with the number of hands she has on board, and who is going to step in? Whom have you to appeal to in connection with that matter to know if she is seaworthy or otherwise in so far as manning is concerned ? 'Thk CHAIRMAN : 'These are Ihe instructions: "In "case of any such vessel failing to have a certain number "of deck hands, in addition to the master and mates, the Superintendent or the Deputy-Superintendent should "draw the master's attention to the fact, and imme- " dlately report the ease in writing to the Resident '■ Detaining Officer or Surveyor of the Board of Trade." Mn. BELCHER : That is all very well, but I still say there is no provision in existence to say what number of men that 7.(1110 ton ship shall carry. The CHAIRMAN : No. Mn. BELCHER : That is the whole point-to whose discretion is that to be left? These are the reasons that I see for saving there is no adequate provision made for the- establishment of what you are trying to lead us to believe is to be tin- minimum scale. I say the minimum is not given effect to if you are going to take the two eases which you have mentioned. If six men are sufficient, and the Board of Trade apparently think it is. to man a 700-ton ship. I say six men are not sufficient to man a 7.000-ton ship, and that is where the necessity of a scale comes in. You must have the gradations through the whole gamut of the vessels from the smallest to the largest. Io define (he number of men who must lie carried on those vessels. Unless you have that, I say your minimum is no use : there will be a possibility of vessels going to sea constantly undermanned in the future, and the provisions which you say will meet that will not. in my opinion, do anything of the kind. Now it has been stated also, which bears out my contention—this has come from the report of one of your own officers —that there was some years ago a considerable amount of friction between the Board of 'Trade officials and the owners of ships as to the number of men that they were carrying. That shows most conclusively that there was a disposition on somebody's part to run a ship with less than what was thought to be a safe number of men. That is likely to be repeated again unless you lay down your gradations and say what number of men each ship shall carry. Now with regard to the net registered tonnage in New Zealand, and the manning being based on the net regis t creel tonnage. T have heard something here to-dav which somewhat surprises me as to the manner in which the net register of a ship is arrived at. I do nol know what alterations have been made recently by the Board of Trade with regard to the measu..ment of ships. whether there has been any at all or not. but the British

shipowners appear to be very adverse to the manning of (hi- deck on the- registered tonnage. On what other l.asis are you going to man a vessel, if you are'not going to take tin- registered tonnage? I do not know of any other basis which can be taken for the manning of the deck at all. I think the British authorities will be cm safe ground by adopting a somewhat similar plan to what they have in New Zealand; and while I am on this point I would like to ask this question : With regard to the minimum which has been mentioned here for the British vessels, assuming a vessel goes to Australia or New Zealand under charter Io run on the coast, and she has some kind of acknowledgment or certificate from the British Board of 'Trade officials, that she- is fully manned in accordance with (he British Board of 'Trade requirements, will it be permissible for the Australian or New Zealand authorities to step in and say, " Your vessel must "be manned in accordance with our requirements"? That is a point which will have to In- borne in mind, In,,.use we have gone this far with regard to the issuing of the certificate to a vessel, that, provided she comes up to the requirements in regard to certain things, thai she will lie- allowed to trade there, but that principle has not yet been extended so far as the- manning is con reined. Mn. HAVELOCK WILSON : Yes, it has; we pass,-,l ,i resolution. Mn. BELCHER: With regard to this registered tonnage. I should like to know, as a matter of information, what there is behind this matter which is not quite apparent to me just now, I am under the impression, from the remarks which fell from the shipowners, that there is something in connection with the registered tonnage where an alteration has been made from the previous system of measuring a ship. If there has been any alteration 1 should he glad to know it. With regard to the mechanical appliances which have been referred to by the shipowners for the easing of work in the stokehold. 1 know a good deal about a ship's stokehold, and I do not know of one ship yet where there is any meehaiii cal appliance that in any way eases the work of the men. 'There may be some of them in Britain here, but I do not know of one. either in Australia or New Zealand, where the mechanical appliances have made the work of the men in the stokehold any easier. The ejector does not do so. It does not ' make a man's work any easier : it may. in some instances, shorten his work a little, hut the fact remains that the ashes have to be got rid of just exactly the same by the ash ejector as if pulled up by hand/ So far as I he manning of the- stokehold is concerned, I do not know which is the most scientific way of arriving at a definite conclusion as to how it should be done. New Zealand, as you know, has adopted the principle of indicated horse power. It has. gene-rally speaking, in New Zealand, worked out fairly satisfactorily; but this fact remains, that in a great many of the vessels in New Zealand the number of men carried in the ships is in excess, and considerably in excess, of the minimum laid down in (he schedule'. But there is no getting awav from this fact.—that the essence of the whole thing, the essence of all the work which has been done in the stokehold by (he trimmers and the firemen—the essence of the whole work is shown in the machine which is being driven. That is where the ultimate results go to—into the cylinder; and I do think myself that the horse-power is one of the best systems under which the stokehold should be managed. That is always a known quantity— the indicated horse-power. Hon. W. M. HUGHES: Do you say it is better than coal consumption? Mn. BELCHER : I would not be prepared to say it is better than any system of coal consumption, but I do say that the horse-power can be ascertained by mechanical process ; it can be ascertained within a very nice point of what the vessel is actually indicating. And the reason why I suggest the horse-power as the basis instead of coal consumption is this : that the latter necessitates the setting up of a committee; and I maintain it will be a most difficult matter indeed for the committee, especially in Britain here, where the ships are so numerous. to ascertain the exact coal consumption of every ship thai is sailing out of Britain. For if the minimum manning is to be on the coal consumption, then there will have to be accurately ascertained the amount of coal that is consumed by each ship, and there is a possibility that with a great many of the ships which are at present in