Second Shetland Truck System Report Part 338

14,374. Is it not the fact that that is the interest of the agent?-It may be the interest of the agent, but it is never done.

14,375. The report only says that it is the interest of the agent: it does not state that he does it?-I think it does. It says that the man is indebted to the agent in an equal or greater amount, and that it is the interest of the agent to delay settlement until he gets the man in debt to him again. What I object to in that statement is the impression conveyed by it, that all the men are in debt to an equal or greater extent than their earnings. I think that is the way in which the statement would naturally be read; but, as a rule, the men do not run accounts after they come home until they settle, and then they will only buy what they require. They are never importuned to buy or to take goods, nor is the settlement delayed for that purpose.

14,376. You say the men are never importuned to buy anything.

Are they not asked at settlement if they want anything?-No.

Their money is paid them as soon as they call for it, without any demur.

14,377. I know it is; but are they not asked at that time if they want to take any goods?-After they have got their money we may ask them if they want anything; and if they are as well served by us as elsewhere, sometimes they do buy some goods.

14,378. I suppose in a number of cases the men are quite ready to take what they want from your shop, and to pay for it with the cash they have got?-Yes.*

*Mr Jamieson afterwards put in the following Return in supplement of his evidence:- RETURN relative to the Discharge of Greenland Seamen from Vessels for which Mr. JOSEPH LEASK was Agent. Year 1871.

s.h.i.+p's Name and VoyageNo. of men Date ofPlace of En-gagedLanding Landing

a Camperdown, sealing voyage33Apr. 30Lerwick b Polynia, sealing voyage34Apr. 17Lerwick c Esquimaux, sealing voyage30Apr. 17Lerwick d Narwhal, sealing voyage29Apr. 21Scalloway e Ravenscraig, sealing voyage31Apr. 17Lerwick f Victor, sealing voyage30June 1Lerwick g Alibi, sealing and whaling voyage19July 21near Scalloway h Total2066252 i Ravenscraig, Davis Straits whaling voyage20Oct. 26Lerwick j Polynia, Davis Straits whaling voyage19Oct. 26Lerwick k Narwhal, Davis Straits whaling voyage14Oct. 29Scalloway l Camperdown, Davis Straits Whaling voyage26Nov. 11Lerwick Longhope m Total79

s.h.i.+p's Name and VoyageNumbers Discharged in Apr.MayJuneJuly a Camperdown, sealing voyage25 b Polynia, sealing voyage1211 c Esquimaux, sealing voyage153 d Narwhal, sealing voyage139 e Ravenscraig, sealing voyage224 f Victor, sealing voyage195 g Alibi, sealing and whaling voyage4 h Total6252199 i Ravenscraig, Davis Straits whaling voyage j Polynia, Davis Straits whaling voyage19 k Narwhal, Davis Straits whaling voyage14 l Camperdown, Davis Straits Whaling voyage m Total 79

s.h.i.+p's Name and VoyageNumbers Discharged in

AugSeptOctNovDec a Camperdown, sealing voyage3112 b Polynia, sealing voyage362 c Esquimaux, sealing voyage102 d Narwhal, sealing voyage223 e Ravenscraig, sealing voyage121 f Victor, sealing voyage1941 g Alibi, sealing and whaling voyage1011 h Total3347135 i Ravenscraig, Davis Straits whaling voyage8102 j Polynia, Davis Straits whaling voyage19 k Narwhal, Davis Straits whaling voyage131 l Camperdown, Davis Straits Whaling voyage215 m Total8638

s.h.i.+p's Name and Voyage Not Dis- TotalsRemarks.

charged at Year's End

a Camperdown, sealing voyage133157 men returned in April, of whom b Polynia, sealing voyage3495 were landed in one day. 114 were c Esquimaux, sealing voyage30discharged by the end of May.

d Narwhal, sealing voyage29I requested the rest to return for e Ravenscraig, sealing voyage131discharge not later than August, when f Victor, sealing voyage30the ling fis.h.i.+ng terminated.

g Alibi, sealing and whaling voyage19 h Total2*206* The only cases I ever had.

i Ravenscraig, Davis Straits whaling voyage20 j Polynia, Davis Straits whaling voyage1971 out of 79 landed in October and k Narwhal, Davis Straits November were discharged in a month.

whaling voyage14 l Camperdown, Davis Straits Whaling voyage26 m Total79

Lerwick, January 29, 1872, WILLIAM BRUCE TULLOCH, examined.

14,379. You are a merchant and s.h.i.+pping agent in Lerwick?-I am.

14,380. You have been engaged as an agent for Greenland [Page 360]whaling vessels for some time?-Yes, on my own account, or as a partner of the firm of Laurenson & Co., for five years.

14,381. Before that, you were in the employment of Mr. Leask?- Yes.

14,382. I understand you desire to make some statement with regard to the evidence which has already been led upon this subject?-Yes. I heard a part of the evidence of Mr. Wm.

Robertson; and some parts of what I heard I could not agree with. In the first place, with reference to the handing of lists of balances at the end of the year by one agent to another, he said that practice had been discontinued for a number of years. So far as I know, that is not the case.

14,383. Does that practice still exist?-I know nothing to the contrary.

14,384. To what do you refer?-To the balances that may be due by men to the agents.

14,385. Have you in your business had such lists handed to you, or have you handed them to other agents in the trade?-Yes.

14,386. Is that still done?-It has been done within the last five years. It was the only legitimate way of keeping before you the men who were in debt. When they went from one agent to another, that was the only way in which we could know where they were, or whether they were still continuing to go in the trade; but, of course, when any balance was recovered, it was always with the entire concurrence of the indebted person.

14,387. Do you mean that when any balance was paid by an agent on his behalf it was with his concurrence?-It was always understood to be with his entire concurrence.

14,388. I suppose the practice you refer to came to this, that an agent to whom a man was in debt was able to recover from the agent who engaged him for the subsequent year in the Greenland voyage the amount of his debt or a part of it?-Yes, that was the object of it.

14,389. And the agent so paying became the creditor of the seaman, and trusted to be repaid out of the man's earnings from the voyage which was begun?-We might have a list of perhaps half a dozen men from an agent, and it might happen that only one of these men had been out for that agent for that year. If the man had the means to pay and was willing to pay, then of course he left it with the agent to do so.

14,390. If he had not the means to pay, was it usual for the agent engaging him for that year to advance the money?-Never. I never knew of a case where a debt was paid in that way, unless when the man had money to receive at the end of the voyage.

14,391. Then, at the end of the voyage does the agent receiving that list retain the money?-He would retain the money, and give a note to the man, or send the money with the man.

14,392. Would he send the man down to your office?-The man would often come himself, and sometimes be the bearer of a note stating that he left that money with the agent.

14,393. Has that been done since the regulations of 1868 came into force?-The regulations were in 1867.

14,394. The copy I have is dated 1868?-1867 was the first year that the men had to be paid at the s.h.i.+pping Office.

14,395. Was there a previous notice to that I have got, which is dated February 1868?-I am not quite sure; but if there was one, I think it must have been something similar.

14,396. The change of procedure may have taken place without a notice; but you say that there was a change made in 1867?-Yes.

That was the first year when we were obliged to pay the whole at the s.h.i.+pping Office.

14,397. Have the lists you refer to ever pa.s.sed since that new system was introduced?-Yes.

14,398. Can you remember the last time when such a list was handed to you?-I have a case here in point. In a book of the 'Arctic,' which I now produce there is an entry in the account of Magnus Thomson, dated 29th April 1868, 'By value in account with Hay & Co., 10s. 3d.'

14,399. The man was credited in the account for a sealing voyage with 10s. 3d., paid by Hay & Co. to you, the balance having been against him in his account with you for a previous sealing voyage to the extent of 11s. 9d.?-Yes.

14,400. Was that done in consequence of your handing Hay & Co.

a note showing that balance against the man?-Yes.

14,401. Can you say whether any such cases have occurred since 1868?-I don't recollect any other case.

14,402. Have you ever handed such lists to Mr. Joseph Leask, or any person in his establishment, or received them from his house?-I went along one day and mentioned the names of two men to one of Mr. Leask's men, but I had no list.

14,403. Who was the person to whom you mentioned the names?-Mr. John Jamieson, the brother of the young man who was examined just now. I told him the names of two men who were indebted to me, and asked him if he would be kind enough to mention it to them. A day or two afterwards one of these men went to settle with Mr. Leask at the s.h.i.+pping Office, and was discharged, and shortly afterwards he came and paid me a sum to account. I may mention that I was aware they could not keep the amount off the man's account; but I mentioned the matter to Mr. Leask's people, because I knew they would have an opportunity of seeing the men when they came to be discharged, and I wished them to remind them of their debt.

14,404. I suppose it was expected that if any case should occur in which a debt was due to Mr. Leask, you would do the same good office for him?-Yes.

14,405. Have you done so for Mr. Leask?-I am not aware that I have.

14,406. Have the names of any persons been suggested by Mr.

Leask's people to you, in order that you might, if they were engaged by you, remind them of their debt to him?-Not so far as I recollect at present.

14,407. Is there any other point on which you differ from Mr.

Robertson?-When you referred to the case of a man not having settled for his second payment until the time when he engaged for another year's voyage, you asked him if, when he got that second payment and his first month's advance for the following voyage, he left much of that money with the agent. Mr. Robertson stated that in many cases he did; but in all my experience, which has now extended over thirty years, I seldom ever saw a man leave any part of his first month's advance and his second payment both at the same time with the agent. If he did, it was an exceptional case.