CO129-314 - Public Offices - 1902 — Page 517

S. 41.

Insist

on

the exclusion of

this and other provisions wh: amendment

operate

Ch

of the Infernal Merchant Shiffing

Act.

5. 13. Say that they must specificall exempt ships which cruff with the provisions of

the donflical Art Insect British or Colonial a suppertes GBT.

5.19141

-(5) call attention to fact that BY obsecontion's havent been dealt with.

5.37.

реугоў

of the

M.

it

Say that this sein sofon an afflies & ships of the claw speapres tplace, outside the waters

is not in confirment with the Impigal act & shoacendingg

be limited.

Draft. Alone

inconson Hove Picilestradot 26/8

send copy of dess. (in print) t

By T. 24

alum pusapo

It is necessary, now, to refer to certain points in which, after consulting with the Harbour Master, I omitted to adopt the suggestions of the Board of Trade."

As regards sub-section (2) of section 3 of Ordinance 36 of 1899, the Harbour Master reports as follows:-

We are dealing with two different kinds of Registry—

(a) By British subjects;

(b) By others.

512

The reason why (a) is not left to the provisions of the Imperial Act is that it is desired to give the status of British ships to a number of small craft whose owners being British subjects desire to go outside our waters without being put to the expense and inconvenience of providing Certificated Masters, &c., and of being hedged round with all the safeguards of Part I. of the Imperial Act.

The desirability of (b) was recognized as far back as 1855, and it formed a part of Ordinance No. 4 of that year, and has been re-cnacted from time to time since then.

(b) has not been availed of probably because---

(1) Of the expense ($25), reduced by Ordinance 36 of 1899.

(2) Of the necessity for having certificated officers, now made easier by Orüin-

ance 36 of 1899, e.g., by permitting certificates of lower grades.

In order to obviate the difficulty raised by the Board of Trade as to sub-section (2) of section 3 of Ordinance 36 of 1899 repealing, by implication (without express power for that purpose) the provisions of section 1 of the Imperial Act of 1894, I beg leave to point out that by virtue of the amendment effected by section 35 of the present Ordinance: so much of the provisions of The Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, and of any acts amending the same which are in force in England and are inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance are repealed"; and it is hoped that the above amendment will cure one of the main obstacles mentioned in the Secretary of State's despatch of the 12th April last to the granting of the Royal Assent to Ordinance 36 of 1899.

The principle of allowing persons who are not qualified under Section 1 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, to own British ships to have their ships placed on a Colonial Register has been conceded in the past by the ordinances of this Colony, but it is stated that such registration is likely to have a more extended operation owing to the reduction of expenses and the relaxation of the requirements as to certificated officers, and it is proposed by Sub-section 9 of Section 3 of the Ordinance No. 36 of 1899 that the British flag may be used on board any such ship but in view of the possibly more extended operation of this right of registration it becomes important to consider whether any complications are likely to arise if the number of ships so regis- tered becomes large, for there are no limits put on the voyages of such ships to China, and I cannot help feeling that the waters round China are likely in the present con- dition of affairs to become a fruitful ground for international complications.

My preceding observations deal more especially with the points already raised by me which have not been met by the provisions in the amending Ordinance.

Having regard to the provisions of Section 735 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, I think it must be conceded that there may be local reasons f sanctioning a partial repeal by the Legislature in British Possessions of some of the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, but strong reasons should be forthcoming for allowing this to be done and the repeal should be limited to ships registered

hat Possession.

It is a question how far the ships belonging to persons who are ot British subjects see Section 3 (2b) should be allowed to fly the British flag, and it is for consideration whether if there be a Hong Kong flag the difficulty might not be got over by allowing those vessels to fly that flag though it will probably be felt that the Home Government would have eventually to extend the same protection to that flag that they extend to the British flag.

With reference to the first Section of this Memorandum I am to state that it appears to the Board to be undesirable that persons who are not qualified under Section 1 of the Merchant Shipping 'Act, 1894, should be empowered to own British ships.

21