F
Enclosure 5
27th January, 1886.
THE INSPECTION OF COPPER ROTTOMED
TESSELS.
Hon. W. KESWICK Your Excellency, I think it would be well if I made a few remarks before asking the question of which I have given notice in order to make the meaning of the ques tion more clear. The two wooden steamers belonging to the Hongkong, Cauton, and Macao Steamboat Company have lately been required by the Marine Surveyor Lo dock annually. Previous racent times-- quite recent-these boats wor required so to dock, and it has always been co sidered that wooden vessels which are coppered, when ex- amined, unless some accident occurred, or the vessels were found to be in any way defective. were not required to dock for inspection, the frequent docking of wooden vessels being looked apon as injurions to them. The case of iron steamers is, of course, different. It is neces- sary that thoy should be docked and cleaned, certainly once year, if not more frequently. I cannot imagine that the Merchant Shipping Ordinance which was passed in 1879 or the earlier Ordinance previous to 1875 were intended to apply to such vessels as those I allude to, which trade in other than ocean waters, running on a river and coming into this harbour~~- running more in the character of ferry boats. I do not think it was intended that the Ordinance should apply to them. However, it is now con- : sidorod by the officers administering that Or- dinance that it does apply to these vessels with out any fresh legislation having taken place on the subject. My question is to ascertain on what principle or for what object there has been this change. With your Excellency's permis- sion I will read the question of which I have given noticerann
A difference in interpretation having been given to the law regulating the survey of coppered vessels since April, 1884, and a practice having been intro- daced since that date, which is at variance with that which was fallowed for at least as far back as 1879, will His Excellency the Officer Administering the Government state why the change has been made, and a new, and, it is believed, unnecessary procedure adopted P
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-AS this question involves a matter of legal interpretation I am asked by his Excellency to reply to it. I would state in the first place, in answer to my hon. friend, that according to the information which has been obtained by the Government he is misinformed on a matter of fact. There has not been, as is assumed in the question, any change in the interpretation of the law regulating the survey of coppered vessels since April, 1884, and no now practice has been introduced since that date at variance with the practice followed as far back as 1879. I may explain precisely what the practice is, and how it originated, and what changes have taken place in the practice. The survey of ships since the beginning of 1880, when the Merchant Shipping Ordinance of 1879 came into force, has been regulated by subsection 8 of section 5. That section applies to ships of all descriptions coming within the meaning of the Ordinance:
The owner, agent, or master of every steamship or vessel propelled by steam boing within the waters of the colony shall, where such ship or vessel comion within the meaning of this section, cause the same to be surveyed by one or more of the Government Sar. veyors; and such surveyor or surveyors shall there- upon, if satisfied that they can with propriety do so, give to such owner declarations as follows"--
Then
C. 0.
RECE
5003
221
Then follow the grounds upon which the do. claration may be made, amongst which is that the hall of the vessel is sufficient for the service intended, and in good condition. I should say that from the beginning of the year 1880, when the Ordinance first came into force, down to-I think the beginning of 1883-the Government Surveyor under this Ordinance was locally ap pointed. In 1883 the Government Surveyor was appointed from home, who has from that time down to the present, conducted the business of surveying. Both under the old system- that is to say when there were locally ap- pointed officers-and under the more recent system by which the officers were appointed from home, their services were carried out in accord- ance with the directions given to other surveyors by the Board of Trade-the regulations made by the Board of Trade for those carrying out aur- veys of a similar character in the home ports. The old surveyors gaided themselves by these instructions, and the present Government Sar- veyor has guided himself in like manner by the same. There has been no change whatever in the law 01" the interpretation of the law by which they have endeavoured to guide them- selves. As regards the practice which they havo instituted, inquiries have been been made, parti- cularly with reference to the Canton Steamboat Company, which, I believe, is especially concerned in the question before us, and the following facts have been supplied us by the Government officials responsible for the performance of these services. The Kiukinng was docked in July, 1881; it was docked again in October, 1882, that is to say, some time slightly over a year from the first.
Hou, W. KESWICK-That was not for the ordi- nary Government survey; it was for re-coppering. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-In 1883 it was not docked, it was allowed to go over that time. It was laid up in May, 1884, and remained laid up, I believe, until August, 1884, and then it was docked and surveyed before being al- lowed to resume running. The Kiungchow was docked in 1881, it was docked again in 1882, and docked again in 1883. It then left this line, and ran between Canton and Macao, and we had nothing more to do with it. The White Cloud. I believe, arrived here in 1881, and she was not docked in 1882 because of the pressure of work, and for the convenience of the Company. That is the report furnished to us by the Government Surveyor. She was docked in 1883, docked in 1881, and docked in 1885. Those are three ships, I understand, belonging to the Company and illustrate the rogularity and uniformity of the procedure, subject to certain allowances. I will state the case of another steamer subjected to the same rule. It was docked in 1881, docked in 1882, docked in 1883, and docked in 1884.
Hon. P. RYRIR-May I ask the name of that steamer ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-Yes, the Pingon. I may say that the Board of Trade Regula- tions, by which these Government Surveyors guide themselves in carrying out the law, des- eribo docking as the proper method of satisfying themselves as to the state of the vessel. It is not a more gratuitons demand made by the Sur- veyors, it is really done in accordance with the regulations.
Hon. W. KESWICK-I beg to give notice that at our next meeting I shall again bring for- ward this subject, and move a resolution.
KI
Mar.
A
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.