Bridlington and Quay Gazette. — 1884-01-19 (Bridlington, Humberside, England)

CHAMBERLAIN ON LOSS OF LIRE AT SEA.  The proceedings in connection with Mr. Chamberlain's visit to Newcastle were continued on Thursday. Early in the afternoon, at the invitation of the marine insurance associations of the district, he was entertained to a luncheon at the County Hotel, Newcastle. Mr. W. D. Stephens was in the chair, and among other gentlemen present were Mr. John Morley, M.P., Mr. J. C. Stephenson, M.P.. and Col. Gourley, M.P.—The Chairman, speaking of overinsurance of steamships, said he did not believe that over insurance for the purpose of losing a vessel existed, but the shipowners had been much interested in preventing the loss of life, and would join the Board of Trade in any effective scheme that could be effected for that purpose. He proposed the health of Mr. CHAMBERLAIN, who, in responding said: I may call your attention to one point in these replies which is of very great importance. I am afraid shipowners generally—those in the north as well as elsewhere—are a little inclined to under estimate the gravity of the case which I have brought before them. ("So, no.") I hope it is not the case, at all events, but I am here to speak my mind to you, and I shall lay before you the reasons which have brought me to that conclusion. I Am afraid that many shipowners, at any rate, are in. deed to look upon this loss of life—which certainly they regret as much as I do—as the inevitable incident of a dangerous profession. (Hear, hear, and Quite se " and "Yes.") Well, then, lam confirmed in that impression by the gentleman who says "Yes." Now what I want to say is this—if they are right we need hardly carry the discussion further. If ills the fact this loss of life, great as it is, deplorable as it is, is necessary and CAMIOI be avoided, what is the use of talking about further legislation? No change will be in that case required, and therefore it becomes ur, on: in the first instance, and before proceeding any further, to ex. amine into this question and to see whether or not there is a state of things which constitutes a wrong for which we have to find a remedy. (Hear, hear.) In the first place, remember what it is tImI have said. What are the statements, which he e litherto been very general en my part, on which I have based my demand for further legialation? I have said that the total loss of life at sea is appalling. No one can deny that the loss of 3,7.00 lives in the British mercantile marine alone, independently of fishing and colonial vessels—everybody will admit to be appalling. Then I have gone on to say—and this is the point in dispute—that a larger proportion—l do not say tho largest proporlion—l do not estimate the exact proportion, but a large proportion of the less of life is preventable. (Cries of "Question.") Precisely; that is the question to which lam coming. Now, let me any this with regard to those two statements of mine, that they have been in some quarters entirely misapprehended. It has been said that there is a charge of wholesale murder against the shipowners of the kingdom. I hope you do not believe for a moment that I sin so unjust and so Billy as to bring any each charge as that. (Hear, Hear.) I will say this to you, that I don't believe there exists a man in ihe kingdom, who is as utterly lost to evevy sense of what is right as to send his ship to sea deliberately with the intention of drowning his sailors. But what I charge, if yen call it a charge, is this—l charge the minority of the shipowners—l hope and believe it is a very small minority—with gross neglect of the precautions which a majority of shipowners think to be reasonable and necessary, and I say this is not exactly a charge, but it is even more important than a charge. I say that the state of the law at the present time is such that the shipowners would be something more than human—they would be angels from Heaven—if they were not induced to a false sense of security which may tend to prevent them from taking all the precautions which science and reason show to be desirable if all possible preventable loss of life is to be stopped.