Sessional_Paper_1927 — Page 70

66

"Not resisting Pirates is an offence by a statute of the reign of Charles II. (22 and 23 Car. II. c. II) whereby the master of any vessel of a burden not less than two hundred tons, and furnished with sixteen guns, is forbidden to yield his cargo to pirates or any force without resistance, on pain of being rendered incapable to take charge of any English vessel afterwards; and if the ship be released, and anything given by the pirates to the master, such gift and his share of the ship are to go to the owners of the goods. And any ship of less burden or force than beforementioned is forbidden to yield to a Turkish pirate, not having double her number of guns, without fighting: "an extra- ordinary instance of the courage and skill", observes Abbott, "which the legislature of those times attributed to English seamen, and which the exploits of succeeding genera- tions have so often and so gloriously exemplified."

"Sec. 6 of the same statute provided that if the mariners or inferior officers of any English ship, laden with goods and merchandises as aforesaid, shall decline or refuse to fight and defend the ship when they shall be thereunto commanded by the master or commander thereof, or shall utter any words to discourage the other mariners from defend- ing the ship, every mariner who shall be found guilty of declining or refusing as afore- said, shall lose all his wages due to him, together with such goods as he hath in his ship and suffer imprisonment not exceeding the space of six months, and shall during such time be kept to hard labour for his or their maintenance."

The principle underlying this law still holds good, though the circumstances have altered. No reasonably possible action by the Navy can prevail unless it is supported by full precaution and determined action on the part of all those who may be open to at- tack. Service on the China coast must in these troubleous times be held to include the risk of piracy, and to presuppose a determination to resist. That this assumption is no mere pious hope is shewn by an extract from the record of a meeting held at the Colonial Office to consider piracy on the China coast on 10th July, 1924. At that meeting there were present besides representatives of the Colonial Office, Foreign Office, the Admiralty, the Board of Trade, and the Hong Kong Government, the following

Mr. T.W. Moore, C.B.E., F.R.G.S... Secretary, The Imperial Merchant Service Guild.

Mr. D. Bramah, C.B.E.

Mr. J. Watson,

General Secretary, The Marine Engineers Association.

Secretary, The Marine Engineers Guild of China. (Representing also the China Coast Officers Guild).

The relevant section of the minutes reads:-

<<

'As a preliminary to the consideration of this suggestion, there was some discus- sion as to whether the Guilds had any objection in principle to the defence of a ship from within. The representatives of the Guilds made it clear that they had no such objection in principle and indeed accepted as axiomatic the duty of the master and officers to de- fend their ship."

The same spirit is shewn in the letter from the Secretary (China Coast Officers' Guild) to the Secretary "Sui An" Piracy Commission, dated 13th December, 1922, which contains this sentence, "That every vessel should have 'Action Stations' for repelling at- tack by pirates, and exercise therein at regular intervals, such practice being recorded in Log Book."; and of the letter from the Marine Engineers' Guild of the same date, which covers very detailed advice on the best use of possible defensive measures, such as grilles, steam pipes and hot water hose, and the Commissioners have no reason to think that the views of the two Guilds have been altered by more recent events.

It is reassuring to note that the officers of the s.s. "Sunning" have proved that the compliment conveyed to the Mercantile Marine in the quotation given from Abbott is still justified, and that officers are still prepared to elect for service on the China coast with all its risks and added responsibilities.

The memorandum criticising the Minority Report, (Appendix III) deals very fully with this question of piracy from without.