The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-10-16
KRUTTSCHNTT DEFENDS SALE OF PACIFIC SHIPS;
"QUIT, AS WE COULD NOT OBEY LAW AND LIVE"

, the pay rolls and the other expenses of
operation which would be affected by the
provisions of the bill. All these remon-
s%trances, warnings and notices were
treated as a blur and now are regarded
as never having been made. The claim
of surprise at the effects OF the seamen's
bin Is absurd
Withdr m wal From the Pacific.
Again it is said that the Pacific Mail
mould have appealed for assistance to
the Secretary OF Commerce and should
have waited to see how he was going TO
enforce the law. 1t had to assume that
he would obey the law as written. Even
II 1t were In the power of the Secretary
TO construe away the noNious provisions,
what reason had the Pacific Mail to be-
lieve that the power behind the throne
which secured the law would permit a
disregard OF the very provisions which
that power most valued? There Is GER
tatnly no reason to believe that organ
lied labor Is less influential now than It
was when the law was passed. or that II
Is any the less interested now In securing
the strict Enforcement of the require
ment that every ship must have on
board a crew not less than IS per cent.
of which, in each department thereof. are
able to understand any order given by
the officers Of such vessel.
Next we have II that the Secretary OF
the Treasury has been told that the sea-
mems bill was not the cause OF the with
drawal OF the Pacific Mails boats, but
the real cause was the high price Of
ships brought about by the war. But
long before the war was reamed of the
officers of the Pacific Mail had declared
and demonstrated by facts and figures
before Congressional committees that the
passage of the act would necessitate the
withdrawal of its steamships on the
Pacific. The same reasons which in
creased the value of ships would have
made the Paciic Mail unwilling 10 part
with its vessels and abandon a business
which II had been engaged in for years
IL the intolerable restrictions of the La
Toilette bill had not deprived 1t Of any
choice In the matter.
The Secretary OF the Treasury init.
mates that the provisions OF the Panama
Canal act f~otbiddlng railroad owned
ships from going through the canal was
a contributing cause. 1t is up to him
TO explain what possible connection there
can be between the Panama Canal act
and Il sale not OF ships engaged in the
Panama Canal trade but OF "A separate
fleet always engaged in the t~ranspacihc
trade.
1t is claimed that the Pacific Mail
has not understood the law, especially
tn. language clause. and that If ii had
only waited until the Secretary of Com
merce construed that clause all would
have been well. The Pacific Mail had
no interest in deceiving itself. The
meaning Of the Law is too plain to be
misunderstood But IL 1t had passed by
a favorable chance 10 sell and had
awaited the Secretary's instructions
hat assistance would il have received?
witness the Secretary's circular OF Sep
TENDER II. 1915. That circular gravely
Informs us that the law does not require
an English speaking crew. but Il may
have French or German speaking officers
and crew, Also that when the law re-
quires that 20 per cent. OF the crew in
each department thereof must he able
TO understand amy order given by the
officers OF the vessel this means only
such orders as may normally be- given
10 members of the crew in each depart
ment Of the vessel in the course of the
usual performance Of their duties
But he properly adds: Among these
duties, however. should be included life
boat work or emergency work for sucn
OF tn. crew as may be called
upon to preform these classes of work
and applies this by declaring that As to
any waiter, stoker, eaman or other en-
ployce on the vessel WHO was assigned "a