1923-08-29 — Page 5

Page

THE HONGKONG DAILY PRESS, WEDNESDAY. - AUGUST 19TH, 1928.

THE SHIPPING DISPUTE.

MR. ERIC MOLLER'S REPLY TO

HONGKONG'S DEFENCE.

SINGAPORE INDEMNIFICATION CASE IGNORED" IN HONGKONG'S STATEMENT.

"Mr. Eric Moller of Shanghai discussses in aleven columns of the, X.-C. Daily News of August 21st the Report on Shipping Control in Hongkong" 1917-1923 prepared by the Hon. Mr. A. G. M. Fletcher, U.M., and recently published "By the Hongkong Government.

tion.

Mr. Moller then quotes a letter, dated March 13th, 1018, and signed by Mr. Clande Severn as Colonial Secretary stat ing that it had been decided to bring under Government control all steamerk flying the British tag. "which have not been requisitioned for imperial service. } and which are not under the contrul of 1. M. Ministry of Shipping in London."

HONGKONO'S DIRECT RESPONSIBILITY,

This was unt at all n satisfactory replý | in existisaco, as already shown by me in

to our inquiry:

Eirstly: As I have already mentioned, there was no signature attached to the

this communication..

plaint and claim against the Hongkong | Aly foundation for my original com Government still stands in the three words which which opened this communication: PRINCIPLE.” “EQUITY.!” AND LEGALITY. In "Principle": It was not und it in not right, that a Government should take pecific property of one of its nationals to make money out of much property There is not the during war time.

lightest doubt that the chartering of these vessels to ordinary Chinese charterers was done with the substantial iden of!

Charter for the Government's account

Secondly. This said Charter Party was document entirely for vessels requisitioned under the British Control Scheme at home, and the insurance quoted therein was provided for under one of the finest Insurance schemes ever effected and brought about into use It was a War Scheme brought about by the greatest insurance experts that Great Britain routil produce. It was a scheme that took into consideration making money out of them. That feel ever present, and every possible point. The rates undering and idea was this scheme rose and fell according though it may have run band in band the barometie pressures of the marine with the idea of keeping track of nil risks, and the results of the warship British vessels still in the China Sea, and and submarine attacks, etc., and it was placing them under restrictions and completed in such a manner that it was thereby permitting" far better vessels ta Aprile to all those concerned, and eventually resulted in a very satisfac- tory balance to the British Government. We have had it acknowledged by the Colonial Government, that the Home Gov ernment would have nothing to do with even-the results of the commandeering of the vessels, and would neither take interest in its profits, nor be responsible for the risks attached.

These facts speak for themselves. - They are not refuted by the Hou, Mr. A. G. M. Fletcher in his report, and he is entirely silent on this subject, which permits me to contend that he acknow ledges the correctness of my statement.

irregular and unsupported by the requi,

OUR CLAIM FOR REPRESENTATIVE ON "CONTROL SCHEME.

יי

released for war purposes, it does not justify the Government's action or prove that the commandeering and r2. Kultant profit-making was A necessity. Supervision, etc., could just as well have been done by keeping in close toach with these few British owners, who wers at all times ready to assist the Government in our country's crisis.

Mr. Moller then cites the case of the We are unable to reproduce the letters. Mangouri which involved him, in Bolfpara, in full but we give below an extensive heavy" loss and of the s summary of its contents :---

which, after being put on a run to Java As to be expected the responsibility for the beneft of those interested in the and burden of the counmandeering of the Vessels has been transferred to the Hongkong agar business, was shoulders of the Feste Government, and tually under the instructions of and

In Equity "I bring this point up though I am quite satisfied that the with the consent and approval of the

because as a Shanghai shipowner, I say origination of the scheme came from that Hongkong Control Committee, fixed to The natural result was that the owners that it was not the just or right thing, direction, the report is not at all con vincing as regards the eventual and old clients of ours, for the Amoy had to look to the Colonial Government that my vessel should be taken by the for the insurance of their vessels, and we| Hongkong Government so as to imperil executive responsibility, as in a position Ranguon coolie trade, at $110,000 for six do know that the Hongkong Government the whole of my business, whilst not one like this, one must be guided by the ponths' time charter, and it is from this had no prepared scheme and that they in- lccal Hongkong industry such as Docks, official documents which record the situn-date onwards that we claim the vesselsure the vessels for thus first quarter of Insurance, Hotels, etc., was called upon

started out on her illegal profiteering three months under a premium of to contribute anything towards the war. career, which will always aintain was $18,716.41 We have it, that after the In Legality: I bring out the strongest site authority, but which was most satis-xpiration of the first three months, it point of all. The Hongkong Government factory to the suffers of the Hongkong was ascertained by the "Expert and had no authority under any Act of Parlia Vital Commission " then sitting, that the ment, Ordinance, Order in Council, or ang Government, there being just hit

risks in proportion to the high premium other lawful authority to take our vessels $600,000 clean for their Recount".

paid were not satisfactory, and that, ns and use them for trading purposes^and the inenma now being derived by the thereby accumulate substantial and huge Hongkong Government from the rechar-profits for the Colonial Government. ...... tering profits was very substantial, the, We were fully aware of this " almost aforementioned Committee decided they inanediately after our vessels had been could easily take upon their shoulders, the taken, and we eventually instituted pro resignsibility of the entire insurance egedings against the Government in 1919 | tu zecure a return of the profits that had which was attendant to their scheme. there was no schemes brought about in perty.

I believe I am correct in stating that been made by the illegal use of our pro Hongkong in a like manner as that at home, or as suggested in Charter Farty The Indemnity Ordinance was brought T.99, and that there was no notice given juta existence to offant and bar our way, to the owners as to how their vessels were in the absence of other legal proction: covered. The owners could and did feel it was finally passed in August, 10:22, and in the dark as regards war risks on their year-1023. entirely justified in stating that we were eventually did its deadly work the next vessels.

I am absolutely positive that I was While on this subject of war risk, anware, during the month of November, considerable amount of importance has 1920, of the idea of the possible eventual We look upon this point as a very 'sei !- | been attached by the Attorney-General, enactment of the Inderanity Ordinance în The Requisitioning. Scheme of 1917

an Imperial Government Scheme,ous que, and I contend that if our request the Government of the Colony of Hong Hongkong.

Ennot exactly remember how I be whilst the flangkong Control Schem had been granted, it is more than pos kong, and eventually a few days ago by was, so to speak, an afterthought really sible. in fact, quite certain that, this must the Hon. Mr. P. H. Holyoak, to the at-eanie aware of it, whether it was advanes created, presumably with the idea of unfortunate controversy will never have tendant war risks attached to the Colony information or leakage which so often keeping an eye on any loose British tou would have been in touch with the gen-

taken the serious aspect if did. We through the requisitioning of our vessel, cecurs in enses like this, but I am inclined Dage in the Far East in ease of necessiteral situation from the very comment the profits ander the Control azheme din legal advisers, as being the ly The latter gentleman, as a reason why to believe it was a suggestion from our atal facilitating the movements of requisimet, and at the same time our Mr. .should remain in the hauls of the Gur possible solution of the difficulty for the tioned vessels,

The only Jaca! Hongkong proclamation T. Williamson, the Chairman of the Shpernment, states that;

Government. owners. Protection Association, wond TE is one of the axioms of trade that published, was in the Hongkong Gozelte on August 5th, 1914, bringing into opera have been able to sit on such corumittes having put aside a reserve fund for

mpre ar less definite object, when that tion the Order.io Council of October 16th,

risk runs off (in insurane, parlaffee) what 1806, where it is provided:

profits results, it is a perfectly anturt! thing for every commercial company," or a Gavernment, to claim as a proht on its not results."

This was the official toenment under which the vessels were commandeered, and I must contend." proceeds r. Stoller, that the only responsible party to whom we can look is the longkong Government. If such is not the case, why should our legal action, as eventually "brought against the Hongkong Govern recognizable or heep defeated by them, and why should a special Indemnity Act have to be created by the Hongkong fiovernment, to release them from their -obligations and responsibility for this

profiteering.

ment, not have been thrown ut as un-

The official documents, commandeering our boats under the Hongkong Control Scheme did their duty in guiding us as to whom we had to look to, as those in that we considered it only right that we authority. And, it was in this connection should have a representative on the Cocu mittee of the Control Scheme, as we were placing at their disposal Some £279,00 value of tonnage, and, to put it quite frankly, did not feel at all fatisfier that contr of our cuastal competitors, the one vessels should be placed under the presentatives of Messrs. Butterfield and wire and Messrs. Jardine, Matheson and Co., Ltd., who were on that Coramitter.

29

representing the shipowners, arti would have been able to handle tlie vai

on situations with the Government The Governor may require any per- on to supply any animals, vehicles, ships, thantier that this unfortunate boats or other personal property belong pition wonki have been averted. ing to or under the control of such per

on to the Government, if ench property The required in aid of or in connection with the defence of the Colony, and, in default of the person supplying the same, may seize and take possession of and retain such animals, vehicles, boats or other personal property for such pur.

JUNE."

The wording of this proclamation is. vory-alear, and apart from it there was never in existence any Act of Parliament Ordinance, Order in Council, or other lawful authority which periäitted" the Hongkong Government to profiteer and take unto themselves enormous profit at the expense of the shipowners, by sub- letting such British-requisitioned vessels to ordinary Chinese Coast charteréve.

Immediately the Hongkong Control Scheine came into operation, that is on April 19th, 1018, our solicitors definitely wrote to the Hongkong Government, re- questing to i informed as to the legisla. tive anthority under which the above scheme was being carried out, and asking for some enlighteninent on the subject, and to this letter they received the

THE INDEMNITY ORDINANCE. *

No one can deny that this was the only prettion the Government, could raise against our claim, and the use ther eventually made of it appeared in the Rongkong Supreme Court as recently as July 25th, 1921, when judgment was given by Sir William Bees Davies in favour of the Hongkong Government; but with cost in favour of the owners, whereby our claim which was commenced in 1019, was fully and definitely thrown out of Court under the Indemnity Ordinance so re- eently passed.

At our meeting on August 20th, 1920, I will agree that there was no suggestion in the Colony of an impending Indemnity Ordinance to avoid the legal proceedings really instituted in the Coloby, sinte

1019.

At that meeting, all those interested in the Shipping Control crisis, were aware of the legal proceedings against the Crown at Singapore, then believed to be drawing to an early close.

I am positive that in November, 1920, I was aware of the possible impending announcement of the Indemnity" Ordin-

ance.

In early December, 1920, our glicitors communicated with Mr. Sharp, K.C., then representing the Government, alkout carrying on with our action, and the separate paragraph on this point reads:

We shipowners feel it very badly, that nur vessels. shoild have been controlled Take thapas granted. but might I take by our competitor's, We feel it very "the liberty of pointing out that the whole badly that everything we hail was taken of the premium that could possibly be from us, and that it was claimed that incurred for the insurance of nur vessels every other large British vessel had also in Hongkong local companies for a period been taken. But the Shipowners' Proter of 12 months could not have been more that tion Association in Hongkong were fully in the vicinity of 2150.000 Besides, we aware that large British steamers trading must remember that hostilities actually un the Yangtze river, owned by Messrs ceased in November, 1918, which was far Butterfield and Swire, and Jardine,, short of the above allowed period of 12 Matheson and Co., Ltd., were running months, as much would have terminated in without control in any shape or form, and March, 1010, ... that also certain sea-going vessels were Inder such circumstances, making full pushed in to the river trade, which, under allowance for any premium likely to then ruling circumstances, seemed open incurred, I cannot but note that the Hong to eriticism. Those familiarly acquainted keng Government would have been entire with the river rau, during the year 1918, ly Felieved of all their anxiety and rez are well aware of the names of the vesponsibility if they wished to be so relieved. sels running, and the high freights ruling by the spending in premium of a small on the Yangtze river that year, Such margin of the profits that accrued if they topmage undoubtedly must have brought had cared to do so. in a very heavy income to owners, and

OUR MEETING OF AUGUST 3RD, 1920.. no one is aware of this position better,

A great deal has been made of the decl than the Colonial Secretary of Hong- kong and this fact, coupled with thesion and what actually took place at that memorable meeting. Correspondence and internal advantages of running regular notes have been called up from third Extract from solicitors' letter to Messrs. lines at that time. permits me to point parties who were not present, and to clear A. R. Burkill & Sons, Shanghai: out that insuficient weight was given to

Hongkong, December 11, 1920, "As to the question of legal authority, our claim to have a representative on the all feeling on this point I think the nicest

"On reeipt of your letter we saw Mr. the ships have been requisitioned on Control Board. Uion glancing through way I can put it, is to say I shall agree half of, and under instructions from, His Fairplay of June 7th, 1923. I find that the with Mr. Fletcher's suggestion that when Sharp and he informed us that he could Majesty's Government, who have in-nett income of the Indo-China Steam leaving that inceting. I untierstood it was not consent to having the residence of structed this Government to stiperintend Navigation Co., Ltd., during the year by mutual agreement that we should post Mr. Fletcher taken de hene esse before his their nagenent. In these circum-1018 was £587,550.00, giving a rate of copone the legal proceedings, then about to departure on the 31st inst. for several stances this Government" must refer you per cent interest on their fleet of steam take place, until Mr. Fletcher's return reasons, among which were that Mr. Fletcher alone knew the full detail ni to His Majesty's Government on the painter and a comparison of the nett profits from Europe. of the legal authority for the requisition-which would have accrued to the Govern Fletcher and particular emphasis on the cerdings during the war with refernner to

Under clause of his report, Mr. the Government's instruction and pro Ling

mout on thie gigantic fleet in comparison This Guvernment has definite instrue with my fleet of old craft would be very point of the ne, by me of the word controlled and requisitioned ships, and Tmmediately, so much so that he in that it is, essential that the Government tions that the remuneration to vessels interesting reading. `.' under the local scheme is to approximate. It is not my intention or desire to pass of over eight nionth afterwards. I do Hongkong while the case was being heard, timates that this word eqvera a period should hire Mr. Fletcher actually in to thint-paki to The larger, and more im- portant class of vessels on the Chiuia criticism or display any feeling what not wish to go ove old ground but and therefore on behalf of the Goveri- Coast which are under the Imperial Liner pay, in the above remarks, and I would Fletcher will only glance at any statement, could not consent to our varying the

must set this straight, and if Mrmont. Mr. Sharp informed is that h Requisition gheme."

merlooked the all important word ment, vit, that this action should not he he will note that he bas omitted and agreement we had made with the Govern

"Almost" before immediate, which quite brought on in the absence of Mr. Fletcher, alters the position, the words which We therefore, have no recourse but to let In the report of the Colonial Secretary used being such as might fairly be said to this action stand over antil, the return he states':

over the period from end of August to of Mr. Fletcher, as the Government will December the same year,

not allow us to withdraw from the post-

Governinent's reply:

sorver towards any person or say corn-

when this letter comes before their like those interested to hear this in mind notice:

WAY RISK.

"That owners claim they were not informed that war risk was covered the Government and they erre no small cost in respect of such risk”

I am leaving this somewhat to Mr.

Barkill to answer, but a few words on part to clear the situation I consider would not be out of plnen ";

my

|

of that meeting was the knowledge of the Mr. Eric Moller in August Inst.

To my mind the most important featuretion we took up under instructions from pending Singapore Supreme Court action,

(Sd.) DEACON, LOOKER, DEACON which had been brought by the Enstern,

&HARSTON...... Shipping Co. against H.M. Attorney It is reported that London became General for the Straits Settlements, in aware of the necessity of an Indemnity 1013.. for a claim on a basis entirely Ordinance for Hongkong in December, similar to that of our own case against 1020.

COMMUNITY

TABLE-PLATE

PRICES

ARE DOWN

20%

CALL OR 'PHONE FOR NEW LIST.

*PHONE 1741.

LANE, CRAWFORD, LTD.

COTYS'

نماید

Parisian Perfume Essences.

Emeraude,

Origan,

Ambre-Antique, Jasmin & Lilas, etc.

LANE, CRAWFORD, LTD.

ENGLISH

DANCE

3293 ROSE OF RIO GRANDE. Fox TROT

DUMBELL

TY THE SHALIMAR 3284 WITHOUT YOU.....

3285(CHINA BOY

Be that as it may, this explanation, we are informed, was entirely misleading and Annecurate for there, was not in existence any lawful or legal authority which per- smitted our vessels to be commandeered Cand/or requisitioned for any purposes, except in connection with the war, pr. for the aid and defenen of the Colony, ak

We were absolutely satisfied about our righta on this point and forthwith insti tuted proceedings in 1910 against the Hongkong Government, for the recovery of the profits which had accrued to thent..

I

am not going to lay great stress on the points as to whether the vessels were commandeered or requisitioned in the Aid,

On July 18th, 1918, the Shipowners' the Hongkong Government. This action It is reported that a despatch to thin and Defence of the Crown Colony of Protection Association wrote to the was known to be in existence by all those effect, arrived in the Colony of Hong. Hongkong, or for the more careful super Hongkong Government to inquire the interested and judgment was expected at Long in February, 1921. vision of the loose British tonnage, or

nature of the war risk and the redress (no distant. date. The knowledge of this The first official jutimation that I can for the purposes of assisting other bettor the owners would receive, at the hands pending action influenced my mind very trace of the suggestions of the Indemnity an tonnage to take up more important posi- of the Government, in case of loss. On seriously at this interview, and it is in- Bill becoming a serious matter, is address. . tione, na the all-important outstanding July 23rd, the Hongkong Government re-teresting to note that the Singapore to our solicitors and is under date of fast remains that our vessels were, used plied, inviting our attention to clauses No. Supreme Court delivered judgment, with the following: for the purposes of, deliberate profiteer 11 and 15 of there official Hongkong costs, in favour of the plaintiffs, the (0 June, 1921-x parte letter);. ( ing nad ne instruments for enabling huge Colonial Reqninition Notice (already re- Eastern Shipping Co., Ltd., at Singapore trading profits to he poured into the cof-ferred to) of March 13th, 1919, which inti- on. Aug. Bud, 1921, and though there is po fers of the Hongkong, Government. For: mated that the Government would accept note or record whatsoever throughout Mr. such action there has never been any legal | all war risks under clanne Ma, 19 of Char- Fletcher's leagthy report touching on this authority or

ter Party 2.

all important julgment, it is nevertheless

Crown Solicitors Office, Court of Justice, Hongkong, 8th Jung, 1921.

(Continued on page 7.).

MYBUDDY

COLUMBIA RECORDS

3286

WHEN WILL I KNOW..For-Trot DEAREST

PALE VENETIAN MOON

3281 HAVE YOU FORGOT-

TEN ME?

SHEBA

***

3929 BUILD A STAIRWAY TO PARADISE

ANDERSON'S

TELL C. 1322.

Powell

TELEPHONE 0. 346.

Itd.

FRENCH SILK FOULARDS

NAVY AND WHITE

BLACK AND WHITE

BROCADED

CREPE-DE-CHENE

^ IN A FRETTY RANGE OF COLOURS

SATIN CHARMANTE

IN THE LATEST COLOURINGS.