:
;
HONGKONG DAILY PRESS, FRIDAY, AUGUST 4TH, 1922
LEGISLATIVE
HONGKONG
COUNCIL.
(Vontinued from pege :-)
--In these ciroumstances and as a test case a statement of claim was filed on the 5th December, 1919, by the Shipowners Protection Association through the own ers of the Steamship Wollowra for the recovery of $596,672.34 the profit retained by the Government in respect of the use of that ship.
12--On the 19th day of January, 1929, the then Honourable the Colonial Secre- tary, being aware that this was not an isolated claim but a test claim brought by one only of your Petitioners to test the legality or otherwise of the action of the Government of Hongkong, made the following statement in the Legislative Council (1920 Hansard p. 8): -
19-Your Petitioners desire to protest against the compensation tendered by the proposed Ordinance stating that the same is wholly inadequate.
"The owners have come to the con- elusion that the remuneration offered by the Government is not only wholly inadequate but must result in a heavy lose to the owners."
20. Your Petitioners desire to further point out that negotiations have for some
The use of the word "Government" in time past been proceeding with the Gov- this letter is somewhat equivocal, and in ernment of Hongkong and a tentative our reply We made it quite clear proposal was made to your Petitioners that it 129 the Imperial Govern- which met with Your Petitioners apment, and not the Hongkong Government. proval but notwithstanding such approval which was responsible for this scheme. the Government have after consulting the The Government's reply, which was dated Unofficial Members of the Councils with- April 15th, said:-- drawn their proposal.
21.-Your Petitioners therefore urge that the Bill be so modified as to save the rights of all your Petitioners to prosecute their claims unimpaired in the Courts or in the alternative to distribute the afore- said sum of $2,231,204.11 rateably amongst your Petitioners. For in its present form the Bill is in the opinion of your Petitioners unwarranted, unjust, inquit-
* With regard to the European Conable and unfair and represents an attempt munity, I will deal first with the proto tax ships not registered in this Colony. posal 1 laid down before the Council
And your Petitioners will ever for building a hotel and flats in Kow
pray, etc. loon. We had money for the work, or Dated this third day of August, 1922. thought we had, and things had reach
OBSERVATIONS BY COUNCIL. ed the stage of architects being on the
Mr. ALABASTER, in one of his comments, point of making preliminary plans, when the owners of vessels requisitioned referred to the quotation in the petition nader the local scheme bethought them from a speech by the present Officer Ad- selves that there was no reason why the ministering the Government, and said:--- profits made under this scheme should he devoted to improvements beneficial to the Colony, such as providing hotel and housing accommodation and also
extending facilities for lucation
among the various classes of the com- munity. They saw no reason why the money should be devoted to those pur- poses, but thought that the money should come back into their own pockets I must leave the community of this Colony to judge which is the better way of disposing of profits, which may be considered war profits, and whieb would have gone at home into the Im perial Exchequer, The Government in
The speech shows that after the war, in 1920, the Government was still retain-
ing these profits, made out of shipping control, and that they were proposing to spend them on purposes in no way con-
neeted with the, war." He continued:
learned Attorney-General pointed out On the first reading of the Bil the
that at the time when the ships were first
brought under control the whole Empire was fighting for its national existence.
You were informed at the meeting held on the 28th March that this Govern. has definite instructions to see
ment
that remuneration of colonial register vessels is not appreciably higher or lower than that of competing vessels registered in the United Kingdom.' The remuneration payable in respect of the latter class of vessel is, it is understood, under discussion: but this Government is advised that the rate actually in force is appreciably lower than that now offered to your clients. In the circumstances this Government is precluded, by its instructions, from offering more favourable terms than those which have been put before you; but it will watch closely the progress of negotiations in the United Kingdom, in order than any concession made there may be introduced also in the local scheme."
227
5
leave the adjustment thereof to a later date as your Petitioners considered that their hips were required for furthering the interests of the British Empire in the late war and understood that moneys received by the Hongkong Government by reason of such action would after making adequate compensu- tion to the owners be remitted to Eng- land and used in connection with the late war.
In clause 12 of the Petition it is stated that on the 19th January, 1920, the thera Colonial Secretary made a statement ** to the use to which the money should h put. I would point out that there is ak large gap between the two dates.
When the scheme came into force this Government stated quite clearly that we were merely agents and any money that accrued was going to the Imperial Government. We then began to look into the details of the scheme and there was nothing at the time to show what the out. come would be. It was not merely a question of war risk. That was quite a minor point. The total sum we spent on war risk was $44,000. As a matter of fact, it was a question of the whole liability; anything might have happened: it was a question which way the war went, and the Government did not see why as agents it should take on this responsibility unless it was covered. We put the point to the Home Government and the Home The next paragraph discussed the losses Government asked us to take the whole which they said would be incurred under risk. We accepted that and in the circum- the scheme, and in our reply we said :-
stances we could not pay over the receipts "This Government will, however, wood-until the result of the control from the ships until we were out of the closely watch the working of the requisi-scheme were known. We did not finally tion scheme, and I am to assure you wind up the scheme until March, 1919. that the interests of the owners will We then put the position before the Home receive its sympathetic consideration." Government and they allowed us to re- We then received the letters of April tain the profits which had been made. I any things had to be done for which no strict legal justification could be found, 19th and 1st May, 1918 (reproduced in want that point to be quite clear. The the occasion being urgent and the condi- the petition). In the first we were asked scheme was not run with any intention tious new. The comment of your peti- among other things under what legisla- of using the money accruing from it for tioners on that is that the monie, which tive authority we were acting. We re-
the purposes of the Colony. you now held have not been uld, "the_plied on May 14th as follows:-
The COLONIAL SECRETARY added: The purpose of protecting our nating XIST
a-petition to the Council was received by ence. They are not asking for damages,
me only shortly before one o'clock to-day they are not asking for the monies you
I do not propose to go through it in any have spent, but they are asking to have
sense in detail. which they say you illegally took. The
I mentioned that the back the monies you have left over and
Government was in entire sympathy with the owners and open to assist them as learned Attorney-General stated that the
far as possible and I should like to take great majority of shipowners in the 2. With regard to the question of re- this opportunity to read the penultimate which the Government offered, which vere United Kingdom accepted the terms
muneration to owners, this Govern-
paragraph of my final report informing ment, as you are aware, is acting under the Government of the conclusion of the Blue Book rates. That was not so. They
the instructions of His Majesty's Gov-work under the scheme. were compelled to accept those rates as ernment. His Excelleney has made re- presentatious by telegram on the sub- the result of a Bill passed through both
ject. Houses of Parliament early in the war, 13.-Subsequently on the 25th August, and not as any part of post-war legisla 1920, the Government consented to the tion. The Attorney-General also pointed case being postponed until the return of out, and he made a great point of this the then Acting Colonial Secretary-Mthe risk of any dangers to the ships due in his speech, that the Government took Fletcher--to the Colony. On the 6th
to the operations of war. June, 1921, the Crown Solicitor by letter that is this: that the Government very Our reply to to your Petitioners' Solicitors stated that the condition of postponement until Mr. wisely insured our ships with under Fletcher's return was then still insisted writers and paid, as premiams, part of on by the Government.
the profits that they obtained by running our ships. We are not asking for the
view of the action taken, which may in time come before the Courts, do not Geel in a position to spend any of those profits on the proposals until the Courts bave finally dealt with the matter. Therefore the Colony has been deprived of what it urgently needs--hotel accom- modation and money which might have been advanced for the purpose of build- ing houses when the scheme of building flats was given up. The University also has been deprived of a quarter of a. million of dollars and education generally of a sum of five lakhs of
dollars.'
concerned.
The
asking for the money left over. learned Attorney General stated that at one time the Government did offer the collections from this requisition fund if Imperial Government the whole of the they would accept the war risk, and the Imperial Government refused to do so. Why? The Imperial Government obvi- ously did not wish to accept responsibility and throughout its career, entirely illogi for an action which was in its inception cal and unjustified. The Government at Home would have accepted no further risks than the Government did here, for they would have insured their ships and paid the premiums out of the very large profits they made. It is now proposed, we speech on the first reading of the Ordin- learn from the learned Attorney-General's
ance, hot to spend this money originally intended on hotels, flats.
14. Your Petitioners learn that it is the intention of the Government to intro-return of those premiums; we are only duce a Bill into the Legislative Council to prevent the recovery of the said money. by your Petitioners." Separate actions have now been commenced in the Supreme Court of Hongkong on behalf of all ships 15.-Your Petitioners are aware that it is not unusual after wars for Acts to be passed protecting persons who have acted in good faith and in the supposed execu- tion of their duties from pains, penalties and punishment for actions not warrant ed by the law, but your Petitioners point out that your Petitioners' claims have never been for damages but are merely for the return of moneys standing to the credit of the Shipping Control Account which were not required for the purposes of the war and which were obtained by the use of their ships. They desire res pectfully to point out that the effect of the Bill it passed would be to authorise the seizure in the year 1922 at a time when shipping is depressed and freights that purpose and to state now that we will are low of the moneys of British Com-
use this money instead of other money panies who are competing with alien com-
which would have been allocated to the panies which were enabled to build up redemption of war loan in order to make Reserves during the war, through not being financially controlled. Your Peti-
it appear as if this money will in some tioners state that not only is shipping now
way be connected with the war, is, I submit, window dressing. It does not depressed and freights low but that it is
alter the character of the goods at all if practically impossible to operate their ships at a profit. The Steamships Castle.der to make them appear more attrac you re-arrange them in your window in field and Manapouri have already been laid up and unless some financial assist these people remains.
The wrong that has been done to Their ships were ance is forthcoming many more will have taken, the Government made profits and to be laid up.
the owners have been reduced to very dire
16.-The result of the control caused a
substantial financial loss in the case of
ая was
redeem part of the war loan. The money
universities and other schemes but to
was not collected by the Government for
tive.
straits as a result of that and they do ask that, either they be given these moneyɗ
GENTLEMEN,-I am directed ta knowledge the receipt of your letters of the 19th April. and the 1st May, regarding the Hongkong Shipping Con trol Scheme, and at the same time to express regret that they have remained so long unanswered.
3.-As to the question of legal authority, the ships have been requisi- tioned on behalf of, and under instruc tions from, His Majesty's Government, who have instructed this Government: to superintend their management. in these circumstances this Government must refer you to His Majesty's Gov- ernment on the point of legal authority for the requisitioning.
4. With regard to the request for a local Board of Arbitration, this Gov- ernment has definite instructions that the remuneration to vessels under the local scheme is to approximate to that paid to the larger and more important class of vessels on the China Coast, which are under the Imperial Liner Requisition Scheme. It would, in the opinion of this Government, be inadvis- able to suggest that the two classes of vessels should be dealt with separately. As I have stated above, representations have already been made to the Home Authorities on the question of remune- ration.
The thanks of the Government are above all due to the owners of the ships. upon whose loyal and patriotic co-ope ration it has been able to rely from the beginning to the end. It must be re- membered that the owners Found them- selves deprived of a very large part of their earnings, at a time of maximin freights when their competitors were making enormous profits; and there has been not one complaint. The Ship- owners Protection Association, whose title explains its object, has maintained most cordial relations with the Govern- ment throughout, and has given very great assistance. The Association's Chairman, Mr. S. T. Williamson, "put his experience and advice wholly at the Government's service, and he did much to solve difficulties and to smooth away misunderstandings. It may be recorded that, in spite of the many points of law which arose and the in- evitable differences of opinion, every question in dispute. was invariably settled in a spirit of friendly compro- mise.'
All I wish to do is to emphasise the 5. It would seem that the owners, in point that this Government has been pressing their request for a representa merely an agent in the matter: that it the instructions of the tive on the Shipping Control Committee, I acted under are under a misapprehension as to the Imperial Government which it has not functions of that Committee. The Com- been able to vary one jot or tittle. As uittee have been chosen, as an inde- you are all aware the Imperial Govern- pendent body having no connection with ment has passed an Indemnity Act and the requisitioned ships to advise the the question was put to us whether we Government on technical matters in should come under that Act, or have a connection with the ships: the Govern-local ordinance to fit the local conditions ment having no one in its service who It was decided that, on the whole, a is conversant with the details of the local ordinance would be the better shipping business. The Government is method. always ready to consider sympatheti. I do not quite know the point in the cally any representations that the petition about myself but it was in the owners may wish to make: but it does summer of 1920, when I was acting not consider that any useful purpose Colonial Secretary, that the Folloura would be served by putting an owner action was filed. It suited both sides not on the Committee. The question of the to go on at the time. I was going on employment of the ships for the needs leave in 1921 and as I was the only person of the Colony is one on which the Gov- who had intimate knowledge of the erument is advised by the Vital Reworking of the scheme, it was agreed by quirements Committee, and Mr. H. P. both sides to defer action till my return. White has been invited to accept a sent upon that body. instructions from the Imperial Govern On the subject of remuneration our
several of the controlled ships and the back, or else that they, at any rate, bement were quite definite. We made repre- |
officially audited accounts showing this loss have been submitted to the Hongkong Government and are as follows:-
S.S. Manapouri
S.S. Castlefield
S.S. Brisbane
$42,359.67. 19,134.44. 89,017.54 S.S. Pheumpenh 10,488.53. S.S. Telemachus 36,319.62
S.S. Haimun
13,667.38
allowed to prove their right to the return of these moneys by action in the Courts.
COMMENT BY THE COLONIAL SECRETARY.
The COLONIAL SECRETARY: I would ask permission to comment briefly on this petition, in no spirit of hostility to the petitioners, but simply to make clear the Government's position in the matter. It may, perhaps, be most simply explained by reading the Government's replies to the letters which appear in the petition. The first is that of 11th April, 1918, in
17.-Your Petitioners desire also to point out that the needs of the Govern- ment for housing and education should be met by the community at large and not by what amounts to a special levy on certain small shipowning Companies which it is said:- large proportion of whose shareholders are resident elsewhere than in the Colony. It appears to your Petitioners that the Government of Hongkong are attempt ing to tax a small branch of the com. munity of this Colony for social improve. ments by indirect legislation, many of the contributors being entirely unconnected with the Colony of Hongkong.
18. Your Petitioners desire to point out that the only commercial and indus- trial interests in this Colony which were put under Government Control and whose profits were impounded by the Govern- ment during the war were the shipping interests; whilst all other commercial and industrial interests including Docks and Marine Insurance Companies both of which made large profits from shipping operated under Blue Book rates permitted to take and retain their profits.
were
sentations about the rate of exchange and the cost and age of these vessels which were between 27 and 43 years old, but our instructions remained the same. We were to treat then on the same lines as the
The Indemnity Ordinance was introduced while I was away and the point was raised money had been delayed owing to my b that action in this matter of the shipping
sence, and the Bill was accordingly held over until my return. We had been negotiating and now the Government finds it necessary to bring forward this Bill.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thereupon mov- ed that the Council go into Committee to consider the Bill clause by clause.
In Committee the Attorney-General moved verbal amendments to clauses 2 and 3 which had been printed on the
margin of the new print of the Bill and these were agreed to
On the passage of the Bill through Con- mittee being reported to the Council, His EXCELLENCY announced that it was pro- posed to take the third reading of the Bill on August 17th.
His EXCELLENCY THE OFFICER ADMINIS- TERING THE GOVERNMENT put the motion for the second reading of the Bill and vessels of the Indo-China Co. and the declared it passed.
With regard to China Navigation Co. the point of the representation of the owners on the Shipping Committee, of which I was Chairman, there were two members, Mr. Sutherland, of Messrs. Jardine, Matheson & Co., and Mr. Young, of Messrs. Butterfield & Swire They were appointed by the Shipping Control, not by this Government, and it The owners have now had the was thought inadvisable to have the advantage of considering the informa. owners of these ships on the Committee tion which was imparted by the Assist. which was a purely advisory Committee: ant Colonial Secretary at the meeting but I think the owners will agree that f at the Sanitary Board Office held on the consulted them on every possible detail. 28th March last, when they were in-Our most remunerative charter-the formed that the Government propose to Wollowra--was made on the advice of pay tramp Blue Book ratés, as to one Mr. Williamson, Chairman of the Ship- third thereof at an exchange of 2/- to owners' Protection Association. In the the pound, and as to the balance at the first paragraph of the petition it is said rate of exchange of the day of payment, that plus 2/8 per ton for Eastern service, and 5 per cont. on the net profits in consideration of the services of the owners in running the ships on behalf of the Government.
"The owners instruct us they have also had a number of meetings amongst themselves, at which the Government's proposals have been most carefully con- sidered and discussed.
In or about the month of March, 1918, the Government of Hongkong notified your Petitioners of their deci sion to bring the said Steamships under Hongkong Government control. Your petitioners whilst protesting in every possible way did not oppose the action of the Government of Hongkong at the time, being contented, having paid under protest the moneys demanded, to
The Council then adjourned until that date.
A meeting of the Finance Committee was afterwards held. The report of the
to proceedings will be published in morrow's issue.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.