country. This was a distinct step towards the independence of the tribunal for dealing with Inquiries into wrecks. It is true that by Section 241 of the Act of 1854, the Board of Trade had still in some cases the power to appoint a special tribunal for the investigation of alleged incompetency or misconduct of masters and mates (which might of course arise in connection with the loss of ships), and they also retained their power of inquiry in certain cases by an inspector appointed by them under section 14 of the same Act (), but practically Inquiries into wrecks were committed to magistrates, and Inquiries into incompetency or misconduct, not causing wrecks, to the Local Marine Boards ("). The Investigations conducted under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854, continued to aim at the same general objects as those above noticed in connection with the Inquiries under the earlier statutes. CONSIDERATION OF INQUIRIES BY THE SELECT Change in Tribunals. Select Com IN following out the history of Inquiries into shipwrecks, it is necessary to mention that the subject has twice been formally investigated since 1854, viz.: 1st, by the Select Committee of the House of mittee of 1800. Commons appointed in the year 1860, at the instance of the late Mr. W. S. Lindsay, to inquire into the state of Merchant Shipping, and the operation of, among others, the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854; and 2ndly, by the Royal Commission on Unseaworthy Ships, appointed in the year 1873. System of Inquiries examin ed; complaints the subject. The Select Committee of 1860 devoted considerable attention to the system of holding Inquiries, and of witnesses on several of the witnesses made complaints of the mode in which they were conducted, and of the constitution of the tribunals. Those complaints were, however, met by rebutting evidence, both generally, and in the particular instances which were brought forward. (*) See post, page 39. () Report and Evidence of Select Committee on Merchant Shipping, 1860, pp. 540 and 541. Misapprehen sion as to the primary object of Inquiry. Sir T. H. Farrer advocated the transfer of power of punishment from the Board of Trade to the tribunal of Inquiry. Report by Committee of 1860 as to the results of the legislation since 1835 and the in Board of Trade. tervention of the The primary object of the Inquiries was adverted to in the evidence. In examining Sir T. H. Farrer, the Permanent Secretary of the Board of Trade, upon the subject, the Chairman, Mr. Milner Gibson, stated that there had been some misapprehension upon this point, and that the Inquiries were not undertaken with the intention of instituting a prosecution against anyone, but with a view to ascertain the cause of loss for public information and benefit ("). Sir T. H. Farrer emphatically assented to that view, declaring that the Board of Trade had always contended that the punishment of an offending master or mate was a secondary or incidental object, their chief care being to inquire into the cause of the loss with the view of ascertaining whether anything could be done to prevent such losses taking place in future (1). Evidence was also laid before the Committee by Sir T. H. Farrer of the advantage which might arise if the tribunal conducting the Inquiry, instead of the Board of Trade, were to pass the sentence upon the master or mate, the Board of Trade having power to mitigate or remit the punishment. It may fairly be said that the more or less experimental legislation between the years 1835 and 1860, had on the whole been judicious and beneficial. The Committee of 1860 reported in express terms to that effect, declaring that from a public point of view, as regarded the protection of life and property, the intervention Of the Board of Trade had had a salutary effect, and had been sanctioned by public opinion. But the Committee stated, on the other hand, their opinion that "as the law had by very exceptional legislation armed the Board of Trade with power to institute Inquiries into wrecks and casualties upon the decision of which depended not only the question of culpability of the parties implicated, but practically also the liability of the shipowner, it became of the highest importance for the due administration of justice to all parties that those Inquiries should be conducted with the strictest impartiality; and that the official weight and influence of a powerful public Board should not be brought to bear unduly against any (*) Report and Evidence of Select Committee of 1860, p. 536. (b) Ibid. person implicated, and this especially should be avoided in cases where claimants have a deep interest in fixing criminality upon the commanders of the vessel" ("). The suggestion of Sir T. H. Farrer that the tribunal investigating a case should, instead of the Board of Trade, inflict punishment upon masters and mates, was carried into effect by the Merchant Shipping Act Amendment Act, 1862, the provisions of which will be hereafter noticed ("). The powers of the tribunals were also extended by the same Act to the cancellation or suspension of the certificates of engineers (), and power was given to the Board of Trade to remit or lessen punishment (a). Another provision of this Act prescribes the service upon the certificated officers of a ship, of a copy of the report or a statement of the case upon which the Investigation is ordered (), thereby putting them on notice of the subject-matter of the Inquiry. Changes intro duced by the Merchant Shipment Act, 1862. ping Act Amend Royal Com In the year 1873, a Royal Commission was appointed mission of 1878. to make inquiry with regard to the alleged unseaworthiness of British registered ships, to inquire into the system of Marine Insurance, the state of the law as to the liability of shipowners for injury to those whom they employ, and the alleged practice of undermanning ships, and to suggest amendments in the law. The Commissioners investigated in detail the whole system of conducting Inquiries into wrecks. The evidence ranged over a wide field, but it is only necessary for the present purpose to make a brief reference to it. The Commissioners issued two elaborate reports as the results of their labours, and upon this particular subject of Inquiries into wrecks they made numerous recommendations, some of which have been carried into effect by the Merchant Shipping Act, 1876, and the Shipping Casualties Investigations Act, 1879 (f). Complaints of witnesses as to Complaints were freely levelled by numerous witnesses against the then existing mode of conducting Inquiries. (*) Report of the Select Committee of 1860, pp. xvi. and xvii. (b) 25 & 26 Vict., c. 63, s. 23, sub-sec. 1, see post, page 60. (e) Ibid, sub-sec. 2. (4) Ibid, sub-sec. 4. (e) Ibid, sub-sec. 6. () See practical results of reports of Royal Commission, post, page 25. Object of Inquiries. Reports of the sioners on the Royal Commis subject of Inquiries. the Inquiries. The Commissioners themselves reported that the "tribunal did not command public confidence, the mode of procedure was said to be dilatory and expensive, the power of the Court was ill-defined, and in some cases could not be enforced." The principal aim of the Inquiries was again declared to be the discovery of the cause of loss in order to obtain lessons for future safeguards. Sir T. H. Farrer re-asserted this principle, stating that in the opinion of the Board of Trade the question of "guilty or not guilty" ought in these Inquiries to be subordinate to the question "what was the cause of the loss "(). Mr. F. J. Hamel, the Solicitor of Customs, by whom the Inquiries had been conducted for twenty years, emphatically declared the same thing. His evidence was as follows: "If there is one thing more than another that I have impressed upon every gentleman in my department during the twenty years that I have had the conduct of these cases, it has been this, that he is never to go into Court as a prosecutor at all, that he is merely to go into Court for the purpose of getting out the facts, with no animus whatever against anybody "(). At the same time, as has been seen, the importance of investigating the competency and conduct of ships' officers so far as they bear upon the results of an Inquiry, and of awarding punishment, if necessary, was urged by the Select Committee of 1836, and has been recognized throughout the subsequent legislation. The Royal Commissioners themselves having in their preliminary report said that the Inquiries had suggested improvements, contributed to the greater safety of navigation, and had been beneficial to shipowners and seamen, in their final recommendations strongly endorsed the above views in the following terms: "It is a matter of public interest with a view (*) Report and Evidence of the Royal Commission on Unseaworthy Ships, vol. II., 1874, p. 50. The evidence given before this Commission by Sir T. H. Farrer, Messrs. Gray, O'Dowd, and Hamel will repay a careful perusal. (b) Ibid, p. 294. ** to the preservation of human life that these Inquiries The Commissioners were of opinion that by these Inquiries the causes of disasters at sea would be more fully disclosed, and attention would be called to matters connected with navigation by which the dangers of a seafaring life might be diminished.(a) The Reports of the Commission recommended alterations in the constitution and procedure of the Courts holding the Inquiries, and practical effect was given to their recommendations by the appointment of a Wreck Commissioner ("); by the requirement that Assessors of special skill or knowledge shall in every case assist the presiding authority; (C) by the enactment that in cases where the cancellation or suspension of a certificate is likely to be involved, two at least of the assessors shall have experience in the Merchant (*) Report and Evidence of the Royal Commission, vol. II., 1874, p. xii. The two Reports are set out in the Appendix, page 225. (b) 39 & 40 Vict., c. 80, s. 29, see post, page 62. (c) Ibid, sec. 30. |