70
stress the following points :-
(a) Piracy is bound to be more prevalent if pirates know that ships' complements will not oppose or resist them.
(b) Unless a pirated ship will co-operate by sending out an alarm by W/T, it is almost impossible for the Navy to come to her assistance before this is too late. As suggested in paragraph 17e and W/T Operator should have authority to send out an 3.0.S. on his own initiative; it would generally be possible to get this out before the pirates gained control.
Recently Commander Harada of H.I.J.M.S. "SAGA" called on the Commanding officer of H.M. 3. "SEAMEW" and asked several questions regarding British anti-Piracy measures. He asked for a copy of the regulations issued to British Merchant Ships trading from Hongkong as regards -
(1) Pitting of grilles.
(2) Mounting of guards.
(3) W/T communication with ships or shore stations.
Whether shipping companies were bound by law to carry out these regulations and who pays? Could Japanese ships be included in the scheme? He asked about Sino/British Anti-Piracy oo- operation. He stated that he had seen a Chinese yacht (presumably the "MO FUNG") at the mouth of Mirs Bay, working in conjunction with one of H.M. Submarines off Mirs Bay, and he wanted to know if this was so and why.
He suggested that the Indian and Russian guards were of little use and that if ships had Japanese guards there would be no more piracies.
He also enquired regarding the HongKong Naval
Volunteer Force.
He stated that he had to make a report on AntiePiracy
to his admiral.
I must confess that I agree about Japanese guards with Commander Harada, who is well known to me, and whom, from what I have seen of him, I should judge to be a very able and determined officer. British guards would also stand no nonsense. I feel, however, that it is a terrible reproach to our shipping companies that Butterfield & Swire should send 70 school children in January, 1935, up on the Northern run with only 5 Russian guards and incomplete grilling protection, notwithstanding their experience in June, 1934, when their s. 8. "SHUNTIEN" was pirated on the Northern run, and in 1933 the s.s."NANCHANG" was pirated at Newchwang to the north-westward of Port Arthur.
I am in agreement with Sir John Brenan and
Commander Grace, without being an armchair critic, that the. British officers should resist the capture of their company's ship, and I advocate the provision of British guards in place of Russian or Indian guards in important ships.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES IN SHIPS.
19.
A difference of opinion exists as regards the effectiveness of protective measures such as guards and grilles. The initial responsibility for all protective measures rests with the shipping companies. Their reluctance to adopt various measures seems to be mainly on grounds of expense. The companies hold that their economic position prevents the exclusion of Chinese passengers and the employment of British guards. For
the same reason, the amount of European supervision which can be exercised is limited.
I have repeatedly, during the past two years, expressed my opinion very strongly in regard to the necessity for efficient grilling of ships and the provision of effective guards, and I feel that the time has come when the shipping companies should be forced by legislation to correct this matter, as was done in regard to the provision of lifeboats after the loss of s,s. "TITANIC".
Page 70Page 71