CO885-(25-26) — Page 233

MINUTES.

226

93

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

C.O.

Reference :-

885/25

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

Mr. Tennyson also reported the final arrangements for the voyage of the 8.8. "Hamm with coal from South Africa to Australia. As regards the cost of the voyage of the s.s. Apolda" from Mauritius to Australia, the Committee agreed that if the ship went in ballast the Transport Department should be asked to pay the charges from the date of the discharge of the cargo in Mauritius.

6 Railway Material ex “Erymanthos.”—The Secretary reported that, with the approval of the Chairman, the two complete locomotives forming part of this material had been withdrawn from the sale at the request of the War Office. Messrs. Churchill and Sim had been asked to state whether their sub-brokers saw any objection to the War Office being asked to pay £3,000 (ie., the reserve) for the two locomotives. The Secretary also reported that the remainder of the material had been sold for £3,800.

7. 8.8. "Diana."-The Secretary reported that a telegram had been received from Nigeria asking whether the ship might carry cargo on the return voyage from Lagos to Port Harcourt. The underwriters had not seen any objection, and the Governor-General bad, therefore, been informed that he was at liberty to arrange this.

The Secretary also read to the Committee a despatch from the Governor- General reporting that the damage done to this ship by her collision with the "Baro "

was so slight that neither the seaworthiness nor the efficiency of the vessel had been affected, and that it was considered that no claim could, there- fore, be made upon the underwriters. The Committee concurred that no claim should be made.

8. Insurance of Cargoes.-The Committee considered a letter from Messrs. Glanvill, Enthoven, and Company, with regard to the premium payable in con- nexion with the insurance of cargoes at Alexandria. It was agreed that the pay- ment of premium for the cargoes shown on Schedule No. 3 should not be deferred any longer, and that £356 148. 7d. should be paid on this account without waiting for remittances from Alexandria.

The Committee discussed certain correspondence which had taken place with His Majesty's High Commissioner for Egypt with regard to the insurance of the cargoes ex the 8.8. Achaia" and s.s. Paros." It was decided that a letter should be sent to the Foreign Office repudiating the claim of the Bonded Warehouses Com- pany, and pointing out that the insurance originally effected by the agents of the Deutsche Levante Linie was apparently void ab initio, as having been effected on behalf of an enemy, and that in any case it could not remain valid after the date of seizure. The Foreign Office should also be asked to obtain a full report from Alexandria as to any cases where premium had actually been paid to the Warehouse Company.

C

9. Conrad," C.S. 65.-The Secretary stated that he had received a letter from Colonel Leslie reporting the loss of this ship as the result of an attack by a

submarine.

10. Responsibility of the Committee for the Accounts of the Admiralty Coasting Trade Office. Mr. Barstow reported that he had now written to the Accountant-General of the Navy stating that, in his view, no responsibility attached to the Committee in respect of these accounts. He therefore considered that no action need be taken by the Committee with regard to writing off any losses incurred by that office, etc. The Committee directed the Secretary to inform Colonel Leslie accordingly.

11. 8.8. "Frisia.”—The Committee considered the draft of a letter to the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company with regard to the accounts of this ship. The letter was amended in various respects, and it was decided that it should not be sent off until the Committee's case had been prepared, in order that the Chairman might first discuss the matter verbally with the Company, with a view to a direct settlement of the matter without reference to arbitration.

The proposed claim to be submitted to the arbitrator was also considered by the Committee in draft, and various amendments were made. In particular the Com- mittee considered that the Board of Trade should be asked to state what would have been a reasonable crew for a ship of this size, having regard to the custom usually adopted in the trade, and should also be asked whether they could state what kind of demand existed for the services of lascar sailors at the time when the ship was awaiting the discharge of her cargo at Liverpool.

12.

8.5.

Edna."-The Secretary informed the Committee that he had received a letter from the Director of Transports suggesting that it would be better if the empty barrels, drums, etc., ez this ship at Dublin should be sold directly by the Committee. It was decided that the Board of Trade should be asked to instruct the Receiver of Wrecks at Dublin to arrange for the sale and credit the Committee with the proceeds.

2638

IL-APPENDICES.

APPENDIX A.-REPORTS.

SIXTH INTERIM REPORT OF THE OVERSEA PRIZE DISPOSAL COMMITTEE. MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS,

THE Committee beg to submit the following report upon the question of the "Payment of fees or other remuneration to officers of Prize Courts and other officers performing services in connexion with matters of prize," which forms question (a) in the Treasury letter of the 10th July, printed as an appendix* to this report.

2. This question appears to us to depend largely upon considerations which do not arise in connexion with the other points raised in the Treasury letter, and we, therefore, think it best to make it the subject of a separate report.

3. During the wars of the nineteenth century the Vice-Admiralty Courts were always commissioned to act as Prize Courts, and the fees taken in the Prize Court, like those taken in the Vice-Admiralty Court, were always paid to the Judge, Registrar, and Marshal of the Court for their personal use by way of remunera- tion for the services rendered by them as officers of the Court. The Vice-Admiralty Courts were, like the Prize Courts, Imperial Courts, the Judge and other officers of which could be appointed by commission of the Admiralty, and such a Court could be established in this manner even in a territory possessing ⚫ responsible government. This arrangement was, however, found to be inconvenient for various reasons, and the Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act, 1890, transferred the jurisdic- tion of the Vice-Admiralty Courts to the chief Court of the Oversea territory in such a way that that jurisdiction, though retaining its Imperial character, might in future be exercised by the principal civil Court of the territory and its officers without the necessity of the Judge and officers of the Court being constituted a separate and distinct Court for the purpose. There are now no Vice-Admiralty Courts remaining in the Empire.

4. One result of the transference of the jurisdiction to the Colonial Courts of Admiralty was that the fees taken in the Admiralty jurisdiction of the Oversea Courts ceased to be payable to the Courts' officers personally as remuneration for services rendered by them as officers of an Imperial Court and became applicable in the same manner as were the fees taken in the ordinary civil jurisdiction of the Court. An end was thus put to the rather anomalous arrangement by which officers who were paid salary on a whole time basis by the Oversea Government were also employed and paid by the Imperial Government.

5. The Prize Courts Act of 1894 (Section 3, Sub-section 4), following the line of policy which prevailed when the Vice-Admiralty Courts were always con- stituted Prize Courts, directed that all fees arising in respect of prize business transacted in Oversea Courts should be fixed, collected, and applied in like manner as the fees arising in respect of the Admiralty business of the Court.

6. After the passing of that Act, therefore, fees taken in Oversea Prize Courts ceased to be payable to officers personally and became applicable in the same manner as fees taken in the ordinary civil jurisdiction of the Court.

7. We find that the change introduced by the Act of 1890 in regard to fees was plainly brought to the notice of the Oversea Governments under the jurisdic- tion of the Colonial Office. Those Governments were expressly advised, in a

* Page 98.