« 이전계속 »
before them statistics of one such country, which shows that in 8 per cent. of the collisions reported, the master got away without being known. In these instances there was loss of life upon some of the vessels so abandoned; some of them went down, and all suffered damage.
" It would seem, then, that any effective measure which might prevent such a practice, or make it less frequent, would not only be in the interest of humanity, but also aid in securing justice in regard to the rights of property. The committee, therefore, are of opinion that in case of collision between two vessels, the master or person in charge of each vessel, should be required, so far as he can without danger to his own vessel, crew, or passengers, to stay by the other vessel until he has ascertained that she has no need of further assistance, and to render to the other vessel, her master, crew, and passengers, such assistance as may be practicable aud necessary in order to save them from any danger caused by the collision; and also to give to the master, or person in charge of the other vessel, the name of his own vessel, and of her port of registry, or of the port or place to which she belongs, and the name of the ports or the places from which and to which she is bound.
“So far as the committee can learn, the laws of those countries which have taken action upon the subject are to the above effect, substantially agreeing in defining the duties of masters, although the infraction of the law is differently dealt with in the different coun. tries.
" In expressing the foregoing opinion the committee are unanimous, but a minority think the Conference should indicate what, in their opinion, the penalty of failure to comply with the duties prescribed should be. The majority, however, do not deem this necessary, believing that the consequences of disobedience to their laws can and will be properly taken care of by the several governments, without suggestion from the Conference.
" For the information of the Conference, the enactments of Great Britain upon the subject, which prescribe severer penalties for disregard of the duties imposed than those of any other nation, are appended to this report. (See Appendix A.)”
Now, Mr. President, in regard to this section
Captain RICHARD (France). Mr. President, I rise to a point of order. It was established by one of our rules that no report and no amendment should be discussed unless forty-eight hours had elapsed between the presenting of the amendment and its discussion. Now quite a number of reports have been distributed among us. In order to be able to discuss them it will be absolutely necessary that we have time to read them. I certainly would have no objection to discuss the amendment itself were not a question of principle involved which it is important to observe. We are at this moment on the point of discussing one of the reports with which we were furnished this morning. Therefore, if we discuss this one we may be led to discuss all the other reports. I have no special objection to discuss the amendment itself as it was presented some time ago, but the Conference having previously decided that this amendment should be taken up for discussion simultaneously with the report on Life-Saving Systems and Devices, pursuant to the role with which our discussions are governed, we should not discuss it until at least forty-eight hours after the said report has been presented.
The PRESIDENT. The delegate from France desires the matter to lie over.
Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, I have no objection to its lying over if any delegate desires it.
Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, I apprehend that there is some slight mistake here. I did not understand that the learned delegate for the United States wants to discuss this report at all, but he proposes to discuss his amendment. This amendment was postponed until this report should be handed in, and unless there is something.in the report which would make it undesirable to discuss that amendment, or something against the principle of that amendment, I do not see why we can not discuss it, as we have had it before us for a fortnight. I understand that there is practically no difference of opin. ion about it, except with regard to the last three or four lines, and I apprehend that that would hardly be pressed without there was a reason. able possibility that the powers would agree to it. I am sure that everybody will agree in this: That it is very undesirable for any of us to attempt to carry any resolution against the sense of a considerable portion of the Conference, because it would be a waste of time. As I say, the amendment of the learned delegate for the United States has been before us some time, and now surely we can express our opinion upon it, especially as we have no reason to suppose that anything can occur to change our opinion with regard to the matter.
Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, if the gallant delegate from France desires to have the amendment laid over, of course I must assent to it; but I do not think the difference between the committee or the gallant delegate from France and myself is so essential as to make it necessary to postpone. But that, of course, I leave absolutely to the gallant delegate from France so far as I am concerned, and if he desires the amendment laid over I shall at once assent.
Captain RICHARD (France). Mr. President, 1 look upon this matter simply as a measure of precaution. We can not refuse to discuss the amendment of the honorable Mr. Goodrich, which was presented a fortnight ago; bat, in order to discuss this amendment, Mr. Goodrich commences by reading the report of the Committee on Life-Saving Systems and Devices. But this report can not be discussed until forty-eight hours have elapsed. If we discuss it now I think that we enter upon the wrong course, and that, after having violated our rule once, we will hereafter be more easily led to violate it again.
Under those circumstances I ask that the discussion upon the lifesaving systems and devices and the amendment of Mr. Goodrich, be both adjourned forty-eight hours, not because we have not the right, when necessity requires it, to discuss the amendment–inasmuch as it was presented a fortnight ago—but because the Conference has decided that it should be discussed simultaneously with the report, and that, by reason of such decision, its fate is irrevocably cast with that of the re
I, therefore, think that we should await the discussion of the report of the Committee on Life-Saving Systems and Devices.
Mr. VERNEY (Siam). Mr. President, I desire to make one remark not only as regards this amendment but as regards all of the amendments which have been put over until the reports have been put on the table. I would ask the Conference what that means? Surely the fact that it has been laid over and put on the table means that the members of the Conference should have an opportunity of reading the report before they discuss the amendment, otherwise what is the use of referring any amendment until the report of the committee is laid on the table! I have not bad the opportunity which the learned first delegate from Great Britain has had of reading through any of these reports, and I do, therefore, support the proposition of the gallant delegate from France, not only as regards this amendment, but as regards any amendment which was deferred until the report had been laid on the table, and I hope that the common sense of that proposal will commend itself to this Conference.
Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, personally I have not the slightest objection to assenting to laying over the consideration of this amendment until some future day. I only wanted to occupy the time of the Confereuce, if we had no other business before as.
Mr. VERNEY (Siam). Mr. President, I sincerely hope that this will not in any way waste our time, because I think we have before us an enormous mass of material with which our time can be occupied.
The PRESIDENT. The delegate from France moves to postpone the consideration of this amendment for forty-eight hours, and then to have it considered with the report of the Committee on Life-Saving Systems and Devices.
Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, I think that instead of being postponed for forty-eight hours, it had better be laid over until Monday, because a certain day had better be fixed for its consideration,
Captain RICHARD (France). Mr. President, I have no objection to that. I simply demand that the forty-eight hour rule be observed.
Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, might I suggest that the forty-eight hours would elapse, and we need not sit to-morrow, but could sit on Saturday? So far as I can see we shall bave nothing at all to do this week if we lay over this amendment until Monday. I do not see why we could not sit on Saturday, and do a day's work. We shall not have anything to do to-morrow.
Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, I shall not be able to be in attendauce on the Conference on Saturday, and I would like to be heard on this proposition before it is decided.
Captain MENSING (Germany). Mr. President, I would like to point out that the time would not be entirely wasted. Committee No. 3 have before it a large amount of work, and have been given very little time indeed for its work. There has not been sufficient time for the Secretary and Chairman of the committee to enable them to get on with their part of the work. If the Conference will adjourn we would find the time; and, I dare say, it would not be found to be lost time.
The PRESIDENT. The delegate for the United States proposes to put off this discussion of the amendment and the report of the committee connected with it until Monday. Is the Conference ready for the question upon tbat motion ?
The question was put to the Conference upon the motion to postpone the consideration of the proposed new section until Monday, and the motion was carried.
Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, might I point out that although it is most desirable that wherever time is desired all possible time should be extended, yet of course we have the power to discuss any subject by unanimous consent at once? I quite understand that the gallant delegate from France pointed this out, because he thinks that the principle ought not to be established; but I do not apprehend that any one at this table requires any more time to consider this question of the standing-by role, which is the amendment of the learned delegate from the United States. We have really nothing to go on with except this, unless some delegate really wants time to consider the matter, we might, by unanimous consent, agree to discuss it now.
I think I am right in saying that my gallant friend, the delegate from France, did not make this motion with regard to this particular rule, but it was more in order to guard against matters being discussed without our having time to consider them. The Conference, therefore, by unanimous consent, could agree to discuss the amendment of the delegate from the United States and proceed with the discussion of it at once, unless any delegate wishes more time to consider it. I certainly will not propose it if there is any dissenting voice, but not hearing any, I would suggest that we can take this amendment at once and discuss it. This matter has been before us for a long time, and I apprehend that all of us have made up our minds on the point, one way or the other. I would move, therefore, Mr. President, that the discussion of the amendment of the learned delegate from the United States be proceeded with now, notwithstanding any rule to the contrary which has been adopted by the Conference.
Mr. GOODRICH (United States). What does the delegate from France sayt
Captain RICHARD (France). Mr. President, we have heard our learned colleague from Great Britain, with his persuasive eloquence, tell us that he desired to make no exception, but he, notwithstanding, immediately thereafter proposed to violate the rules which govern our discassions. The reasons which he gave us were so strong that I myself felt fully convinced as to the propriety of adopting the measure which be advocates. But if to-day we depart from the rule, there will be nothing to prevent us from departing from it subsequently, and that is why I demand that the rule be strictly followed.
Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, I will only point out that we have on several occasions, where matters have come up when it was not necessary to wait forty-eight hours, dealt with them at once, when it was the general sense of the Conference that we could discuss them immediately. I centainly should not propose it unless it would appear to everybody that we could discuss it without any harm to any one at all. We have done this frequently. We have discussed cases absolutely in principle without waiting for the delay of forty-eight hours.
The PRESIDENT, The delegate from Great Britain proposes to discuss the amendment of the delegate from the United States at the present time, if there be no objection on the part of any member of the Conference. If the Chair hears any objection on the part of any member of the Conference the question will not be proceeded with.
Captain RICHARD (France). Mr. President, I still have the same objection, namely, that the proposition is directly contrary to the rule. If we infringe the rule for any reason which we may present, though the same may be overwhelming, we will violate the rule every time. I think that we should abide, as I said before, by our rule, and not introduce alterations into it. The amendment which is suggested to us for discussion will not, I think, lead to a long discussion. In our commit. tee we were unanimous upon its subject, and I hope that this unanimity will be shared by the Conference.
Consequently my objection is absolutely an objection to violating the rule; if we violate it to-day we will again do so later.
Mr. HALL (Great Britain). Mr. President, I withdraw my proposition, as it is opposed by the gallant delegate from France.
The PRESIDENT. The proposition is withdrawn, and the discussion of the amendment will be postponed.
Admiral KAZNAKOFF (Russia). Mr. President, if it is decided to postpone it until Monday, can we not begin on Monday earlier and sit later, so that, instead of sitting four hours a day, we may work for five or six hours a day?
Mr. GOODRICH (United States). Mr. President, I do not know why the suggestion of the learned delegate from Great Britain might not be adopted, and that the Conference proceed and read the report of Com. mittee No. 2.
The PRESIDENT. The delegate from France has just objected to the consideration of any report until sufficient time has been given to the delegates to consider and read it.
Mr. FLOOD (Norway). Mr. President, during our last meeting I took the liberty to ask permission to lay before the Conference a resolution intended to be a modest supplement to the report given by the committee on General Division 13 of the programme. During the discussion on that subject I, however, found that I must have been very