The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

An Analysis of the Situation Faced by British Ship Owners Due to the La Follette Law VER since the seamen’s bill E loomed on the horizon of pros- pective legislation, mercantile in- terests in Great Britain have oscillated between hopes and fears as to its final form and destiny. -Now- that the act is un fait accompli, shipping people on this side of the Atlantic, being obliged to submit to the inevitable, are still more or less perturbed as to its ultimate effect upon the carrying trade. The measure is stated, in its preamble, to be: “An act to promote the welfare of American seamen * * * and to pro- mote safety at sea.” Did the measure not stray beyond the limits of most worthy objects the owners of foreign shipping could have nothing to say, but a law which interferes so much with the rights and liberties of the personnel of _ the ships of other nations cannot fail to arouse the adverse commentary of the maritime interests thereof. It is, per- haps, beyond the mark to criticise legis- lation other than our own, but it may be of interest to American readers, nevertheless, to learn the views of the outsider whose interests are involved in the enactments of their state. Inviting Trouble Section 4 is the first portion of the act affecting foreign shipping. One wonders if American legislators have ever considered that they were inviting trouble in the ports of their own country when they enacted that a sailor on board other than American ships which have lain in port five days still have the right to demand half the wages he has earned during the period since the vessel was last in port? It is the experience of those associated with the mercantile marine of this coun- try that whenever ships’ crews handle a portion of their wages—as for instance in the case of the advance given be- fore sailing—no small proportion of the money finds its way to the gin shop in not a few instances, and failure to join or desertion frequently ensues. The British board of trade has taken extraordinary precautions to discourage the seaman from laying hands upon his earnings and squandering them when he is away from his native place. When, therefore, a port of discharge is not the seaman’s home port, he is granted special facilities for sending money orders, obtained at the shipping office, free of charge, home to his wife or rela- tives. Many people connected with shipping on this side are speculating as to the effect of giving seamen in American ports, in the middle of a long voyage, an opportunity to thus squander their substance. It may be that the answer will lie in the future experience of the United States local courts of correction. One thing seems clear, however, the relatives of British seamen will be the sufferers. Advance of Wages While it has been the rule of Amer- ican law to prohibit an advance to sea- men on account of wages at the com- mencement of a voyage it is a familiar practice of British routine to grant ad- vance notes for half a month’s wages, An official of one of the im- portant British steamship associa- tions has prepared the accompany- ing survey of the LaFollette sea- men’s act and its probable effect on foreign ship owners. While em- phasizing the fact that the full effect of the law can not be de- termined for some time, he points out the collisions that will inevitably occur between this law and _ the regulations of other nations. The author gives particular attention to the question of wages, and con- cludes that the LaFollétte law will encourage the seamen to squander their earnings. payable three days after the ship sails, which the seaman may either leave with his relatives or negotiate prior to sailing in order to furnish outfit, etc. As may be readily seen this practice has its drawbacks, and is capable of much abuse by the seaman. But that is scarcely the point. By section 11 of the act the law which makes it illegal to provide for the advance payment of wages, and like- wise to issue allotment notes to any but certain specified relatives of seamen, is made applicable to foreign ships visiting United States ports. While it seems in- conceivable that the fines and penalties attaching to the infringement of this regulation will be inflicted in respect of advance notes which have been given to seamen engaged at a British or con- tinental port, or in respect of allotment notes granted, as in the usual British practice, to persons outside the limits prescribed by the act, it does seem that when taking advantage of section 4 and claiming one-half of the wages earned, the seaman will be under no obligation to give credit for the advance which, in all probability, will have been made to him at the British or continental port of 317 engagement. This anomaly will, no doubt, be capable of adjustment at the final British or continental port of dis- charge when the wages account is made up, but it is conceivable that there may be cases in which the balance due to the seaman will be insufficient to cover the original advance. But wherein the application of this law will definitely and directly hit the British shop owner is in the event of an action in the United States courts by the seaman for the recovery of wages. The section reads: “The payment of such advance wages or allotment shall in no case except as herein provided, absolve a vessel or the master or the owner thereof from full payment of wages after the same shall have been actually earned, and shall be no defense to a libel suit or action for the recovery of such wages.” The United States court, under the circumstances, would not recognize the validity of any advance or allotment made at a foreign port. Qualification of Personnel Section 13 enacts that no ship shall be allowed to depart from any port in the United States unless she has on board a crew (1) not less than 75 per cent of which in each department thereof are able to understand any order given by the officer of such vessel; nor (2) un- less 40 per cent in the first year, 45 per cent in the second year, 50 per cent in the third year, 55 per cent in the fourth year after passing of the act and there- after 65 per cent of the deck crew, ex- clusive of licensed officers and appren- tices, are of a rating not less than able seamen. : With regard to the first portion of these requirements, so far as the lan- guage test is concerned, a somewhat im- portant question arises as to vessels car- rying .Chinese or Lascar crews. Is the Serang, or head man in charge of Asiatics, to be considered an “officer”: for the purpose of this section of the act? If not, a very serious position is created for British vessels carrying this class of crew, a large number of which visit United States ports. Without some authoritative ruling on this point there is certain to be a disparity of practice at the various ports which will neces- sarily create a preference by foreign ship masters, who will avoid those ports where the collector of customs is not disposed to show a reasonable amount of laxity in his reading of the section. SNS em ee MEE ELD ETT ON Tan he Ne Ne eT RE RE SEOs i Se ANS Te Ree ae) PLE Ne TAT Pate