Second Shetland Truck System Report Part 340

14,454. What is the rate of insurance?-I think it is from 5 to 6 guineas per cent. I may mention that the Greenland trade was always considered to be a great nursery for seamen. A great many of our naval reserve men now, the majority of whom could compare with similar cla.s.s in any part of Great Britain, commenced their career in the Greenland trade; but now these stringent Board of Trade regulations have utterly prevented, or nearly so, agents from taking them.

14,455. Is that because it has lessened the agents' power over the men?-No, it is because the men can only engage for one voyage; while almost the whole of the s.h.i.+ps go to the seal fis.h.i.+ng first, and come home, and then go back to Davis Straits.

14,456. Do the men ever engage for both voyages at once?-They have done so for the last year or two but it is not legal.

14,457. But they did it formerly?-Yes.

14,458. And they have resumed the practice within the last year or two?-Within the last two or three years the young hands have come to know that they cannot be forced to go both voyages, but that if they choose to leave at the end of the first voyage they do so. Of course an agent, when giving him an outfit for the sealing voyage, knew that nearly the same outfit would do for the whaling; but he cannot run the risk of giving that outfit upon one voyage merely, and therefore he cannot engage young hands.

14,459. I thought you said they had begun within the last year or two again to engage them for both voyages?-No. I say they have given it up within the last few years, because the young hands came to know that they could not be compelled to go both voyages if they chose to leave at the end of the sealing voyage.

14,460. Then that is another reason for ceasing to employ young hands?-That, in my opinion, is princ.i.p.al reason.

14,461. Are these young hands not anxious to get employment for both voyages?-If they have to rough it very severely in the first voyage perhaps they get cured of going, and wish to stay at home.

14,462. But the abstracts you have produced show that the amounts of goods in 1866 and 1867 were very much in the same proportion; so that that is not consistent with the general proposition you stated, that the agents have restricted their credits to the men very much since these regulations were enforced?-As I said before, I made up these two lists in this way, that one was for the last year when the agents could settle without going before the s.h.i.+pping master, and the other was for the following year when they were compelled to go.

14,463. The abstracts you have produced, if they are to be taken as representative cases, rather show that the system introduced in 1867 made no difference at all?-I merely took these two years as specimens of what was done before and after the new system was introduced. I can prepare statements for other years if you think it necessary.

14,464. Perhaps the explanation may be that the 'Narwhal' was the case in which the greatest amount of cash was paid before 1867, in your experience?-I did not fix upon the s.h.i.+ps in that way. I merely took them for the reason I have stated. The first man's account in that list shows that of 28, 11s. 3d. which he had to receive, he got 27, 15s. in cash. What I meant to show by that was, that the agent had no control over the man's cash, but that when he asked it he got it.

14,465. How many s.h.i.+ps had you in 1866?-Two; the 'Narwhal'

and the 'Erik.'

14,466. Did the men in the 'Erik' receive as large a proportion of cash as those in the 'Narwhal'?-I could not say positively unless I had the book, but I think they could not have had so much.

14,467. Would they have a good deal less?-They would have considerably less, because the vessel returned clean. The voyage was utterly unsuccessful.

14,468. Then, taking your experience while in Mr. Leask's employment before 1866, should you say that the men sailing in the s.h.i.+ps for which he was agent generally received as much cash as the men of the 'Narwhal' in 1866?-I think on an average they would; but of course that would be in pretty successful years.

14,469. I am not speaking about the actual amount of cash which they would receive, and whether it was larger or smaller, but would they receive the same proportion of cash and of goods as is shown by your memorandum?-Scarcely.

14,470. Would the proportion be considerably less?-I am hardly prepared to say.

14,471. Are you prepared to say that since 1867 the men in the s.h.i.+ps under your charge have got the same proportions of cash as against goods as are stated in the memorandum with regard to the 'Arctic'?-Nearly. I shall furnish a statement for a year or two in order to show how the matter stood then.*

14,472. How many vessels had you in 1871?-I had none in 1871.

In 1870 I had two-the 'Narwhal' and the 'Arctic.'

14,473. Have you a separate book for each year?-I have for each s.h.i.+p. I should wish to make a remark with regard to the report of the Accountant of the Board of Trade. Enough, perhaps too much, has already been said on that subject, but I think his report is couched in rather exaggerated terms, and, to a cursory reader, is calculated to convey a very erroneous impression. To a careful reader it is very different, I must acknowledge, but with a cursory reader it might have that effect.

14,474. Then you don't go so far as Mr. Robertson has gone, and say that the statements in it are utterly erroneous?-No, I cannot do that.

14,475. You merely object to the general impression which it conveys?-Yes; but I decidedly object to that. I would also say that in my experience, which is nearly as long as that of any one in the agency I never knew of an agent intentionally putting off time in settling with the men. When I was in Mr. Leask's employment, before the pa.s.sing of the Merchant s.h.i.+pping Act, when the men were landed and got what cash and goods they wanted, they would generally ask at what time they would be settled with, and we would tell them that in the course of a month, by which time we got the returns ready-that is, the [Page 363] s.h.i.+p's accounts for wages and oil-money-we would settle with them at any time.

That was the universal practice.

14,476. Formerly you did not settle with the men until you had got funds put into your hands by the owners-No; and we generally got these in the course of four weeks.

14,477. Do you know of any case in which a settlement was refused on the ground that you had not received funds from the owners?-No; I do not recollect of any such case.

14,478. Is there any foundation for this statement in Mr.

Hamilton's report: 'Any man who carried his custom to any other shop than to that of the agent employing him, would run the risk of being a marked man, not only with that particular agent, but also with all the others, among whom the news of his contumacy would soon spread; and as there are more men than there are berths, he would probably never get any employment again.' Has a man had any difficulty in getting employment because he had carried his custom away from a particular agent?- I don't think so. If there was such a case, I think it must have been only one.

14,479. Was there one case?-I say I think it could only be one case.

14,480. But do you know of any one case?-Having left Mr.

Leask's business, I consider it treading on rather delicate ground to speak about that; and I would not like to be pressed. Of course I must always remember in giving my evidence that I am on oath, but I would not like to be considered as equivocating.

14,481. I think you are giving very candid evidence; but you ought to tell if there is any foundation for the statement that the men had been refused employment because they had carried their custom elsewhere?-I am only aware of one solitary case.

14,482. Was that because the man had gone away and got an outfit or supplies elsewhere?-I am not aware of a man being denied a berth because he had taken an outfit elsewhere. I think the report of the Accountant is incorrect in that respect, because I have known no case in which a man has been refused a berth because he had taken his outfit elsewhere.

14,483. What was the one case to which you referred just now?-I cannot condescend upon the particulars which led to it specially; but there was one case of man being engaged, or partly engaged.

He had been with the same master for some years before, but some little difference arose, and the man was prevented from going the voyage, and did not go to it. I cannot say what was the particular cause for that.

14,484. What was the name of the man?-Thomas Manson, Bressay. That has been the only case of that kind, in my experience of the Greenland trade.

14,485. The practice in engaging seamen, I understand, is that the men go to the agents and intimate their desire to be employed for the voyage?-Yes.

14,486. The agent has not the power of making legal engagement with the men, but the engagement is finally made by the captain?-Yes.

14,487. Do you go on board the vessel with the men for the purpose of having them engaged, or is the engagement generally made by the captain on sh.o.r.e?-There have been a few cases of engaging men on board s.h.i.+p, but very few.

14,488. But it is done at a meeting between the captain, the agent, and the men?-Yes.

14,489. I suppose the agent, where there are a number of men, has some voice with regard to their selection?-Unquestionably.

14,490. Are you aware whether any effort has been made by agents, either yourself or others, to secure engagements for the men who had larger accounts or larger debts in your books?-Of course there have been a few cases where an engagement has been got for a man who was in debt.

14,491. Do you know of any case where the captain has objected, or complained of the efforts made by the agent to get such men engaged?-No, I don't recollect of any such case.

14,492. Did you know a Captain M'Lennan who came here for men?-Yes.

14,493. Did he make any objection of that kind on any occasion?-No.

14,494. Did he not complain of it being done?-Not to my knowledge. I never heard any such complaint, either from him or from the owner on his behalf.

14,495. Were you at one time agent for a vessel of which he was master?-Yes, in 1870. He had his men sent south to him in the previous year. We had him for two years.

14,496. Were you not in business at all in 1871?-Not as s.h.i.+pping agents.

14,497. Had you applied to have the agency for Captain M'Lennan's s.h.i.+p in 1871, before you gave up the business?- No; we had her from 1866 till 1871, when we gave her up voluntarily.

14,498. Was no complaint made at all that you had endeavoured to engage men who were in your debt or who were running accounts with you?-No.

14,499. In your business, who was in the habit of settling with the men at the Custom House? was it yourself or a clerk?-It was invariably myself. In fact it was the same individual who had to appear every time. The s.h.i.+pping master would not allow one person to come now, and another person to come then.

14,500. You have already stated that, so long as you were engaged in the trade, the amount of your account was deducted, and only the balance was handed over to the man in presence of the s.h.i.+pping master?-Yes.