Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-08-19

( answer all the statements that are made
to excite hostility % the bin 20 amend the
pilOtage law, not because they contain
( anything that cannot be answered very
I easily, but because there are so many of
! them.
The opponents OF the bill, knowing
/ perhaps, that they have no good reasons
for opposing it upon it's merits, seem to
be acting upon the idea that they can de-
I feat il by creating an Incorrect idea OF
what its real purpose is. Hence, great
number Of statements relative to the
effect of the bill il passed, the interests
involved, the purpose Of the pilots in
seeking to amend the law, the feeling
elsewhere with regard to the compulsory
pilotsge system, and the earnings Of the
pilots, all Of which are wholly irrelevent,
are thrust upon the attention of the Legis-
tature and the public
or course it is 10 be expected that
the enemies Of the bill VIII make
as good a fight rs they can, but they
ought not 10 think 1t strange that
the House Judiciary Committee declined
10 reconsider its report In favor Of the bill
in order to hear what they had 10 say.
The members OF the committee knew very
well that 1t was useless to listen 70 state
ments having no particular reference to
the bill. Mention Of one or two OF theee
statements will show their character. In
Atlanta It was published, with great
show Of Importance, that a very large
number Of New York marine insurance
loo AaI al, In
OF abolishing compulsory pilotage. AS
there is no attempt being made
10 abolish compulsory pilotage it is diff.
cult to understand why this publication
was made unless il was 10 excite a feeling
in the Legislature against the pilots. But
a little Investigation shows that the petit
ton was one that had been circulated In
New York several years ago when there
was a proposition to get up a different
system Of pilotage at that port. The
proposition wasn't adopted, and many Of
the insurance companies that signed that
petition signed another petition in favor of
compulsory pilotsge, which was sent to
Congress June II, 1884. Is 1t not little
strange that those who had the petition
published at Atlanta, if they were aDx-
ious to have the whole truth known, did
not state all the facts connected with it,
and also call attention to the petition of
June Of last yearY
The statement has also been published
that, if this bill passes, all the watermelon
sloops, etc, will be subjected to the pay
ment of pilotage fees. OF course, every
tair-minded person knows that the pilots
have never collected fees from such yes
sells, and have no desire to; but if their
bill should become a law they would rot
have any more right to collect fees from
them than they do now. A vessel obi
getes herself to pay pilotage fees ''outside
the bar" and these watermelon sloops
never come over the bar. That fact, how
ever, is carefully kept in the background.
Butvthat is the use Of taking up these
statements and refuting and explaining
them9 They are about all Of kind, and
have no relegency. AS far as the pending
bill is concerned it doesn't matter
whether compulsory pilotage is good or a
bad thing for this port and this state, be
cause it is not proposed to abolish it. The
only purpose of the bill is to protect the
pilots Ia all the rights which they enjoyed
until within the last year or two.
The statute of 1899 provided that ''all
vessels entering and clearing within this
State shall pay the several rates OF pilot.
age, if licensed pilot is offered" and the
pilots never had any reason to doubt until
recently that they were entitled to fees
from vessels outward bound as well as IN
ward bound, where they offered their ser
vices when the vessels were inward
bound, even in cases where their services
were declined. By some an opinion OF
the Supreme Court of the State, delivered
in 1894, Is construed to mean that an in.
ward bound vessel which refuses pilo;
I is not required to pay outward bound fees
unless she takes pilot.
There is no doubt that the Legislature
when it enacted the pIIotage law, mean
that vessels should pay both inward an(
outward bound pilotage fees where thu
services ola pilot were rendered, whether
such service was accepted or not. The
! purpose Of the pilots, therefore, is to max,
plain the original intention of the law ant
clear away the doubt which is raised by
the Interpretation that is placed by som,
on the decision Of 1893,
If the members Of the Legislature will
keep in mind the two points in the pend
! Ing bill, and not allow themselves TO be
influenced by false issues, they will hay,
no difficulty in reaching a conclusion tina
! will be satisfactory TO the pilots. Tn,
first point is that the exemption reIatly,
10 vessels trading between the ports o
this State and those OF South Carolina ant
Florida is stricken out Of the law, becaus,
there is a question whether such exemp
ton does not render the who'll
! pilotage law unconstitutional. TIT
repeal Of this exemption, however, viii
not operate 20 increase tho incomes OF the
pilots. The second point is that vessels
bound inward 10 which the services Of
pilot are rendered must pay both Inward
and outward pilotage fees, even thougl
they do not take "A pilot either way. Thi,
is in harmony with the original purpOs,
Of the law. The amendment simply makes
that intention plain and effective.
--------------.-..------
The Pittsburg Times seems 70 want d
take hand In Georgia affairs. II says
"1he member OF the Georgia Legislator,
/ who ohipgtnd IN thu Grant raaoIutior