28 OPERATING PROBLEMS OF THE AMERICAN SHIPOWNER. 
cause our legislators are governed somewhat by the consular reports, cases that are reported 
to the consuls at the out-ports, and not by many, many cases, the great majority of them, 
which are handled by the captains themselves or the chief engineers or other responsible offi- 
cers, and dealt with by the owners at the home ports. 
Another thing I think that operates against the owner and operator very largely is the 
lack of proper support on the part of some of the shipping commissioners and the leniency 
of the courts. It is very difficult to cover these matters by speaking of them broadly—at 
least I am not able to do so—but I would like to give you this one incident as an illustration: 
Some time ago, one of our vessels in a foreign port, about to sail with a full complement 
of passengers and cargo, had this experience. One of the men on board (a sailor who had 
gone ashore without permission three or four days before) had spent the money that he had 
demanded from the captain before he went ashore, and had spent it riotously on shore. When 
he returned to the ship he was insulting, profane and obscene in his language, and one of the 
officers attempted to quiet him, whereupon he knocked that officer down. Another officer 
came and overpowered and secured him and, still struggling, they put him in the brig. The, 
ship brought him home. The captain reported the case on arrival here to the proper officials 
and handed the remaining part of his wages to the commissioner. The offending man was 
held by the court for trial. The outcome of the trial was that the judge, after listening to the 
complaint said, in substance, to the culprit: 
“Now, you did wrong and you know you did wrong. Don’t you ever come before this 
court again on a charge of this kind. The case is dismissed.” 
Well, a month or two after that the vessel was in New York, all cargo had been loaded, 
the passengers were on board, and she was about ready to sail when two United States mar- 
shals walked on board. They went up to the bridge and said: “Captain, you are under 
arrest.” ‘What for?” ‘The judge will tell you; you come along with us.”’ 
The captain left. The superintendent of the line accompanied the captain. They went 
to court. The judge, in substance, said: 
“Captain, I am very sorry, just as you are about to depart with your ship, to do this, but 
I have no redress. This is the law. Charges have been brought against you by a man whom 
you had on your ship a month or two ago, of cruelty and false arrest. What have you to 
say?” 
The captain explained the situation and, bail having been furnished to secure his ap- 
pearance for trial, he was released and sailed after his ship had been delayed for an hour 
or two. 
Subsequently, when the case was tried in the courts the captain was also dismissed by the 
presiding judge. 
Now, this case that I have briefly outlined serves as an illustration of many similar 
cases that go before the courts, in dealing with a certain class of men, and that is, in my 
judgment, what has brought about existing conditions—at least on many American ships. 
Take, for example, the provision of the La Follette Law that forces us to give to the 
men a certain portion of their wages at out-ports. Many of you gentlemen who have trav- 
eled know what some foreign ports are and what temptations they offer a man. The men go 
ashore, become intoxicated (and worse) and return to the ship not only drunk but they also 
bring disease with them, and they are unfit to do their work. The result is that they not only 
do not and cannot perform their duties on board ship, but they force their comrades—who 
remained on board and attended to their duties—to assume the labors of the disabled mem- 
