i
G
Should the above scheme have been brought into operation under the powers referred to in (a) above it is obvious from the decision in The China Mutual Steam Navigation Co., Ltd. Maclay reported in 1918, I. K. B. page 331 that although the Board of Arbitration referred to in the Proclamation of the 3rd August 1915 might have powers to assess the remuneration on a requi- sition basis it clearly has no power to assess the remuneration and compensation under the above scheme consequently whether the above scheme has been brought into operation under the legislation referred to in (a) above or under other legislation not referred to in this letter or merely on the basis of negotia- tion our clients feel further justified in suggesting that His Excelleney might possibly see his way to communicate with the Home Authorities and obtain the necessary power to appoint a Board of Arbitration here for the purpose of fixing the remuneration and compensation to be paid to the owners under the above scheme, and in the event of such a Board being appointed, our clients consider that their interest should be fully represented on such a Board, and that they should have a fall opportunity of placing their views before such Board. In connection with this suggestion, our clients desire to state that they do not con- sider that the present members of the Sub-Committee here of the London Ship- ping Controller are in a position to fully or adequately represent our clients' Furthermore our clients interest or that they should be called upon to do so.
feel that a local Board of Arbitration is essential as local conditions must be taken into consideration.
Our clients desire us to state that it is not their desire or intention to oppose or hinder the Government in any way but to secure for themselves a just, reason- able and adequate remuneration and compensation under the circumstances.
This letter is written without prejudice to the owners' rights in every respect and must not be construed as an admission in any way.
We have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your obedient servants,
(Sd.) DEACON, LOOKER, DEACON & HARSTON.
The HONOURABLE COLONIAL SECRETARY,
4. On the 1st day of May 1918 our said Solicitors addressed the follow- ing letter to the Honourable Colonial Secretary :-
Sir,
Euel.
1st May 1918.
re The Hongkong Shipping Control Scheme.
We have the honour to enclose herewith copy of a letter which was received on the 25th April last by the Secretary of the Ship Owners Protection Association of Hongkong from the Secretary of the Shipping Control Committec.
The enclosed letter received the consideration of the Committee of the Ship Owners Protection Association of Hongkong this morning who have instructed us to state that in view of your letter of the 24th April last No. 2,186/ 1918 they prefer to address any communication which they may desire to make
either to Mr. Fletcher or to Mr. Carey because unless they have a representative on the Shipping Control Comtuitted they cannot see their way to make any communication to such Committee as they do not consider their interests are udequately represented or protected in regard to communications made to such: Committee at the moment and they are of opinion having regard to what has recently taken place that they are justified in the position now taken up by them.
The Ship Owners Protection Association of Hongkong desire to again put forward a request for representation on the Shipping Control Committee which the Ship Owners Protection Association of Hongkong venture to think now has the sympathetic support of certain members of the present Shipping Control Committee.
We have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your obedient servants,
(Sd.) Deacos, LOOKER, DEACON & HARSTON.
The Hox. COLONIAL SECRETARY.
5. The Ship Owners Protection Association of Hongkong which was and is an Association for the protection of our interests with reference to the afore- said Government control scheme were never permitted to have a representative on the Shipping Control Committee nor were we the individual shipowners represented whereas the Committee in question was substantially composed of representatives of Shipping Companies in direct opposition to us.
6. The said Steamships were then and are now on the Hongkong or Shanghai registers. The position being as follows:-
S.S. "Telemachus" S.S. "Phoumpenh"
S.S.
S.S."
8.8.
Haimun"
Brisbane'
Wollowra"
S.S. "Lienshing"
S.S." Manapouri "
S.S."Castlefield "
Hongkong Register.
"
*
*
11
1.
Shanghai Register.
7. Thereafter the said Steamships were taken under the said control and the Hongkong Government received in respect of their earnings large sums of money which sums the Government still retain against the will and consent of your Petitioners. Further your Petitioners know that the Home Government do not require the said moneys and have so informed the Hongkong Govern-
ment.
8. The said subs were not required in aid of or in connection with the defence of the Colony or of the Empire or used for the purposes of the prosecu- tion of the war now happily ended.
9. In the Financial Statement for the month of February 1921 publish- ed in the Gazelle of the 27th May 1921 under the heading "Liabilities" is the itemShipping Control Account $2,231,204.11.”
10. The retention of the said sum by the Government is not warranted by any Act of Parliament, Ordinance, Order-in-Council, Royal Prerogative or other lawful authority.
161
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.