PART X. 1854 17 & 18 Vict. c. 104. 1862 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63. = Int. Act, 1889 Interpretation Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 63). Marginal references are to the sections reproduced, PRELIMINARY NOTE TO PART X. PILOTAGE. THE all-important question under this Part of the Act is whether a shipowner is, in the case of any particular port, exempted from his liability for damage done by his ship, because she was in charge of a pilot whose employment was by law compulsory on him. The law on this matter was, before this Act, in an exceedingly obscure and unsatisfactory state, and its consolidation in this Part has done nothing to diminish, but has rather increased, the obscurity. It is beyond the scope of this work to deal in detail with. the various pilotage authorities of the United Kingdom. A detailed list, with references, will be found in Marsden on Collisions, 3rd edit., pp. 264-279; Newson on Salvage, Tonnage, and Pilotage, ch. xix.; and in Annual Pilotage Returns, 1892 (a). A list of the principal ports of the United Kingdom, with cases relating to them, will be (a) Parl. Papers (1893, 63). found in the Appendix No. 10. It is proposed in this note to deal with the principles, if they can be so called, by which the question whether pilotage is compulsory is to be settled. I. (1.) Under §§ 618-622 pilotage is compulsory : (a.) In the London district of the Trinity House, which extends over the Thames and Medway and the sea from Orfordness in Suffolk to Dungeness in Kent. (b.) In the Trinity House outport districts, being pilotage districts for the appointment of pilots within which no particular provision is made by any Act of Parliament or charter. All such outport districts will be found in the list in the Appendix No. 11. To justify the position of any district in such list, evidence that the Trinity House were accustomed to license pilots therein before 1854, and, semble, before this Act, will be primâ facie proof that the district is a Trinity House outport district (a). It may, however, be necessary to investigate whether any provision has been made by Act of Parliament or charter for the appointment of pilots, which must turn in each case. on the particular local Acts and charters. (2.) If pilotage is compulsory under these sections in the district where the collision happened, the particular ship may be exempt : (a.) Under § 605, as merely passing through the district without loading or discharging therein. (b.) Under the specific exemptions contained in § 625 of the Act, as explained in the notes thereto. These exemptions will not apply if the ship is carrying passengers (b). (a) The Juno (1875), 1 P. D. 135. (b) See wording of § 625; cf. § 604, and The Hankow (1879), 4 P. D. 197, where a steamship registered in the port of London, and on a voyage from Australia to London, carrying passengers, was held obliged to carry a pilot in the port of London. (c.) Under the exemptions which were in force before the Act of 1854 came into force, continued by the joint operation of § 353 of the Act of 1854 and § 603 of this Act, as explained in head II. below. These exemptions may be overridden by the express provision of § 604 of this Act, making pilotage compulsory on certain vessels carrying passengers (see head III. below). These exemptions as derived. from the general law will be found in the Pilotage Act of 1825 (6 Geo. IV. c. 125, §§ 59-63, 71), the material provisions of which are set out in the note to § 603 of this Act (c). (d.) The Board of Trade may, by provisional order under § 578, have exempted the ship in question from compulsory pilotage (d), (e.) Byelaws made by the Trinity House under § 581 may exempt the ship in question from compulsory pilotage (e). II. Outside the Trinity House districts, as defined in head I. above: (1.) Section 603 of this Act, together with § 353 of the Act of 1854, continues compulsory pilotage in cases where it was compulsory before the passing of the Act of 1854 (f). (a.) The general law will be found in the Pilotage Act of 1825 (6 Geo. IV. c. 125). (b.) There are, in addition, private Acts, such as the Act for the Bristol Channel (g), and for Hull (h), and charters, such as those incorporating the Hull Trinity House (i) and the Newcastle Trinity House. (c) These exemptions were considered, in the case, amongst others, of The Hankow (1879), 4 P. D. 197. (d) It is believed that at present the only exemptions under this head are (1) in the case of Bristol, outside the port of Bristol, and (2) Swansea. See note to § 578. (e) It is believed that none such have at present been made. (f) This also applies to the Trinity House districts. Cf. the reasoning in The Earl of Auckland (1860), Lush. 164, 387; following Reg. v. Stanton (1857), 8 E. & B. 445. (g) 47 Geo. III. sess. 2, c. 33, L. & P. (h) 2 & 3 Will. IV. c. 105, Local. 427. (2.) Compulsion so founded may be displaced: (c.) If the exemptions existing before the passing of the Act of 1854, which are kept alive by the joint operation of § 603 of this Act and § 353 of the Act of 1854, apply (k). These exemptions as to the general law are to be found in the Act of 1825 already cited, and in any then existing local Acts, byelaws, or charters. Semble, ships exempt before the Act of 1854 cannot be compelled to take pilots by byelaws or Orders in Council made since that Act (k). (d.) The Board of Trade may, by provisional order under § 578, have exempted the ship in question from compulsory pilotage (1). (e.) Byelaws made by a pilotage authority under § 581 may exempt the ship in question from compulsory pilotage. III. Ships carrying passengers between places in the British Islands must carry pilots under § 604 of the Act. This section overrides any exemptions continued by § 603 (m); it does not clash with the exemptions in § 625, which only apply when the vessel is not carrying passengers. The state of the law I have endeavoured to set out above appears a disgrace to any civilized system of jurisprudence, and this Act has made it worse. Whilst in appearance it re-enacts § 353 of the Act of 1854 as § 603 of this Act, in reality it has added a new link to the complicated chain. The state of things existing before the passing of this Act is to be found by the investigation of the Act of 1854 and the various public and private Acts and regulations affecting it; but the Act of 1854, in turn, sends us back to the state of things existing before it was passed, resting in the main on an Act of 1825. (k) Cf. The Earl of Auckland (1860), Lush, 164, 387. (1) See note (d), supra. (m) The Temora (1860), Lush. 17. Section. PART X. ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PILOTAGE. Preliminary. 572. Application of Part X. (p. 444). 573. Pilotage authority (p. 444). 574. Continuance of existing pilotage authorities (p. 444). Powers of Board of Trade as to Pilotage Districts and 575. Constitution of new pilotage authorities (p. 445). 577. Direct representation of pilots, &c., on pilotage authority (p. 446). 578. Exemption from compulsory pilotage (p. 446). 579. Power of Board of Trade to give facilities with respect to licences, rates, &c. (p. 447). 580. Making and confirming provisional orders (p. 447). Byelaws by Pilotage Authorities. 581. Power of pilotage authorities as to exemptions from compulsory pilotage (p. 449). 582. Power of pilotage authorities to make byelaws (p. 449). 583. Confirmation of byelaws (p. 451). 584. Appeal against byelaws or regulations not made under this Act (p. 452). 585. Returns by Pilotage Authorities. Returns by pilotage authorities to Board of Trade (p. 452). Licensing of Pilots. 586. Registration of pilot licences (p. 454). 587. Copies of pilotage provisions to be furnished to pilot (p. 455). 588. Licensed pilot to produce licence to employer (p. 455). |