4i8 INTERNATIONAL LAWS FOR THE 



is alleged to have arisen, and give the master of the vessel 

 whose gear has been damaged a certificate to that effect, which 

 shall be presented to the proper official at the port to which the 

 vessel belongs immediately on arrival, that he may have the 

 opportunity of inspecting the damage done, and certify 

 accordingly? 



From a practical point of view it would be impossible 

 for any commander of cruiser or even practical man to 

 judge at sea what damage had been done to nets. It can 

 only be ascertained properly when the boat arrives in 

 harbour and gets out her gear. Then a proper examina- 

 tion and estimate of damage to gear can be ascertained. 



Article 37 provides that " the proceedings and trial in 

 cases of infraction of the provisions of the present conven- 

 tion shall take place as summarily as the laws and regula- 

 tions in force will permit." So far so good, but it should 

 also provide that acknowledged debts under this convention 

 should be also recoverable in a summary manner in all 

 ports, as a first charge on the vessel having committed the 

 damage, and on her stores and gear. This would dis- 

 tinctly show that the owner is responsible, not the master. 

 As the convention now stands it does not point out the 

 party to be sued in international disputes. It simply states 

 that the offenders shall be tried, and in cases where 

 pecuniary recompense is required, it would not often be 

 of any use to sue the master, or even the owner of a mort- 

 gaged vessel and possibly hired gear. Or suppose damage 

 has been done by one fisherman to another, and they have 

 agreed on the amount to be paicl in the presence of the 

 commander of a cruiser, the debtor would not come under 

 Article 37, because it would not be a " case of infraction of 

 the provisions of the present convention," but a compliance 

 with them under Article 33, which states that "When the 



