the same shall for the purpose of this article be deemed to constitute a "shipped" bill of lading. 8. Any clause, covenant, or agreement in a contract of carriage relieving the carrier or the ship from liability for loss or damage to or in connection with goods arising from negligence, fault, or failure in the duties and obligations provided in this article or lessening such liability otherwise than as provided in these rules, shall be null and void and of no effect. A benefit of insurance or similar clause shall be deemed to be a clause relieving the carrier from liability. ARTICLE IV.-Rights and immunities 1. Neither the carrier nor the ship shall be liable for loss or damage arising or resulting from unseaworthiness unless caused by want of due diligence on the part of the carrier to make the ship seaworthy, and to secure that the ship is properly manned, equipped and supplied, and to make the holds, refrigerating and cool chambers, and all other parts of the ship in which goods are carried fit and safe for their reception, carriage, and preservation in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article III. Whenever loss or damage has resulted from unseaworthiness, the burden of proving the exercise of due diligence shall be on the carrier or other person claiming exemption under this section. 2. Neither the carrier nor the ship shall be responsible for loss or damage arising or resulting from: (a) Act, neglect, or default of the master, mariner, pilot, or the servants of the carrier in the navigation or in the management of the ship; (b) fire, unless caused by the actual fault or privity of the carrier; (c) perils, dangers, and accidents of the sea or other navigable waters; (d) act of God; (e) act of war; (f) act of public enemies; (g) arrest or restraint of princes, rulers, or people, or seizure under legal process; (h) quarantine restrictions; (i) act or omission of the shipper or owner of the goods, his agent or representative; (j) strikes or lockouts or stoppage or restraint of labor from whatever cause, whether partial or general; (k) riots and civil commotions; (1) saving or attempting to save life or property at sea; (m) wastage in bulk or weight or any other loss or damage arising from inherent defect, quality, or vice of the goods; (n) insufficiency of packing; (0) insufficiency or inadequacy of marks; (p) latent defects not discoverable by due diligence; (q) any other cause arising without the actual fault or privity of the carrier, or without the fault or neglect of the agents or servants of the carrier, but the burden of proof shall be on the person claiming the benefit of this exception to show that neither the actual fault or privity of the carrier nor the fault or neglect of the agents or servants of the carrier contributed to the loss or damage. 3. The shipper shall not be responsible for loss or damage sustained by the carrier or the ship arising or resulting from any causew ithout the act, fault, or neglect of the shipper, his agents, or his servants. 4. Any deviation in saving or attempting to save life or property at sea, or any reasonable deviation shall not be deemed to be an infringement or breach of these rules or of the contract of carriage, and the carrier shall not be liable for any loss or damage resulting therefrom. 5. Neither the carrier nor the ship shall in any event be or become liable for any loss or damage to or in connection with goods in an amount exceeding 100 pounds per package or unit, or the equivalent of that sum in other currency, unless the nature and value of such goods have been declared by the shipper before shipment and inserted in the bill of lading. This declaration if embodied in the bill of lading shall be prima facie evidence, but shall not be binding or conclusive on the carrier. By agreement between the carrier, master or agent of the carrier and the shipper another maximum amount than that mentioned in this paragraph may be fixed, provided that such maximum shall not be less than the figure above named. Neither the carrier nor the ship shall be responsible in any event for loss or damage to or in connection with goods if the nature or value thereof has been knowingly misstated by the shipper in the bill of lading. 6. Goods of an inflammable, explosive, or dangerous nature to the shipment whereof the carrier, master, or agent of the carrier, has not consented, with knowledge of their nature and character, may at any time before discharge be landed at any place or destroyed or rendered innocuous by the carrier without compensation, and the shipper of such goods shall be liable for all damages and expenses directly or indirectly arising out of or resulting from such shipment. If any such goods shipped with such knowledge and consent shall become a danger to the ship or cargo, they may in like manner be landed at any place or destroyed or rendered innocuous by the carrier without liability on the part of he carrier except to general average, if any. ARTICLE V. Surrender of rights and immunities, and increase of responsibilities and liabilities. A carrier shall be at liberty to surrender in whole or in part all or any of his rights and immunities or to increase any of his responsibilities and liabilities under the rules contained in any of these articles, provided such surrender or increase shall be embodied in the bill of lading issued issued to the shipper. The provisions of these rules shall not be applicable to charter parties, but if bills of lading are issued in the case of a ship under a charter party they shall comply with the terms of these rules. Nothing in these rules shall be held to prevent the insertion in a bill of lading of any lawful provisions regarding general average. ARTICLE VI. Special conditions Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding articles, a carrier, master, or agent of the carrier, and a shipper shall in regard to any particular goods be at liberty to enter into any agreement in any terms as to the responsibility and liability of the carrier for such goods, and as to the rights and immunities of the carrier in respect of such goods, or his obligation as to seaworthiness, so far as this stipulation is not contrary to public policy, or the care or diligence of his servants or agents in regard to the loading, handling, stowage, carriage, custody, care, and discharge of the goods carried by sea, provided that in this case no bill of lading has been or shall be issued and that the terms agreed shall be embodied in a receipt which shall be a nonnegotiable document and shall be marked as such. Any agreement so entered into shall have full legal effect: Provided, That this article shall not apply to ordinary commercial shipments made in the ordinary course of trade, but only to other shipments where the character or condition of the property to be carried or the circumstances, terms, and conditions under which the carriage is to be performed, are such as reasonably to justify a special agreement. ARTICLE VII. Limitations on the application of the rules Nothing herein contained shall prevent a carrier or a shipper from entering into any agreement, stipulation, condition, reservation, or exemption as to the responsibility and liability of the carrier or the ship for the loss or damage to or in connection with the custody and care and handling of goods prior to the loading on and subsequent to the discharge from the ship on which the goods are carried by sea. ARTICLE VIII. Limitation of liability The provisions of these rules shall not affect the rights and obligations of the carrier under any statute for the time being in force relating to the limitation of the liability of owners of sea-going vessels. ARTICLE IX. The monetary units mentioned in these rules are to be taken to be gold value. Mr. BRIGGS. I would like to ask this witness to have some data prepared in this connection, too. You heard me ask Judge Parker if there had been any analysis or study made or presented of this matter showing the changes in the existing law which this bill proposes to make and, if there has not been, I should be very glad if the proponents of this legislation would set forth in a clear and definite way, by sections, how this bill changes existing law, section by section, and referring to the existing law, and, if they have any authorities in support of these decisions to which you refer, to designate what those authorities are; and, if they have any reason to urge why this is in the interest of ships and is going to redound to the benefit of shippers in lower insurance rates, as well as any other benefits, if you have any in mind, I would like to know what those are. I should like also to have it appear in here just what further exemptions from liability are proposed by this legislation and will result from this legislation if it should be adopted and what, if any, advantages can be argued as flowing therefrom. Mr. HAIGHT. You mean what exemptions the bill contains over and against the present law. Mr. BRIGGS. Exactly. I should also like to know why, if it is only the Harter Act that is put in here, the Harter Act should not be incorporated in this bill, or whether there is any modification of the Harter act and to what extent that act is modified, and why. You understand the purpose. In other words, I want to see from every angle and I think the committee would be very much interested in seeing from every angle the necessity for legislation of this character, and the extent to which it goes. (The committee thereupon adjourned until to-morrow, Tuesday, March 4, 1930, at 10.30 o'clock, a. m.) RELATING TO THE CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY SEA TUESDAY, MARCH 4, 1930 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON THE MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES, The committee met at 10.45 o'clock a. m., Hon. Frederick R. Lehlbach presiding. Mr. LEHLBACH. The chair lays before the committee the letter referred to yesterday by the chairman of the committee, Mr. White, from the president of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States, outlining the attitude of the chamber toward this proposed legislation. Without objection, it will be inserted in the record. (The letter referred to is as follows:) CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES, Washington, February 17, 1930. Hon. WALLACE WHITE, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. WHITE: The adoption of uniform ocean bills of lading, as you know, has been advocated by the Chamber of Commerce of the United States for many years. At our annual meetings in 1922 and 1923, The Hague rules were indorsed. Legislation giving effect to The Hague rules again was urged at the annual meeting of the chamber in 1929. Recognizing the need of doing away with the confusion which results from multiplicity of variety of ocean bills of lading and to establish technically the liability and rights of shippers and ocean carriers, the chamber in the interest of business as a whole has sought to promote an agreement of American interests as to legislation that would be suitable to American conditions. We understand that a bill now is before the House Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries which substantially would provide for the desired uniformity. We would like to assure you that the members of this organization are heartily in support of legislation of this character and believe that the question is of sufficient importance both to shippers and carriers to warrant the most earnest efforts of your committee to secure passage of suitable legislation during this Congress. Very truly yours, WM. BUTTERWORTH, President. Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, I understand the chamber of commerce has a representative here, and if this is an opportune time, I would like to ask some questions of him. I want to know the origin and basis of the action by the chamber. Mr. LEHLBACH. It has been suggested that we call as the first witness this morning Mr. Ira Campbell. Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Chairman, we had yesterday Judge Parker of the Shipping Board. I do not know whether we want to crossexamine him any further, or not. Mr. LEHLBACH. The chair was informed he was not present at the conclusion of the hearing yesterday-that the committee had finished with Mr. Parker. Does any member of the committee desire to question Mr. Parker further? If not, Mr. Campbell, will you take the stand? Will you give your name to the stenographer, and if you are here in a representative capacity, state for whom you are speaking? STATEMENT OF IRA A. CAMPBELL, COUNSEL FOR THE Mr. CAMPBELL. My name is Ira A. Campbell. I am the counsel of the American Steamship Owners Association. Mr. Chairman, I appear here in support of this bill. This particular bill has not been formally before the American Steamship Owners Association, and it has not taken any formal action upon it; but the new provisions in the bill are of such a character that I think there is no doubt but what the association would take substantially the same position as it did when the earlier bills were before the committee some years ago. The changes in the bill since the days when Mr. Edmonds introduced his bill are rather minor, until we come to Title II. Those changes are entirely new. I understand that it was prepared by Mr. Nicholson, counsel for the Shipping Board, either alone or in collaboration with a representative of the Department of Commerce, and I think with Mr. Haight, and perhaps with Mr. Draper-well, Mr. Draper says not. In any event, however they were prepared, I see no objection to them. I think the provisions contained in Title II are eminently fair and proper to all interests, and I have no doubt but what our association would approve of them when the bill is formally read before the association. You may wonder why the association has not had the bill before it. Well, that is really my responsibility. I have understood that Mr. HAIGHT, who had been an active moving factor in this bill, had under discussion with the packers, who had been opposed to the bill, some provisions which would change the bill in such a way as would make it acceptable to the shipper interests, and I had thought that it was better to wait until that bill had been agreed to by those interests, so that I could then lay it before the association and get action, once and for all. I did not know and had no intimation that this bill was coming on for hearing before this committee at this time. My first notice. came Saturday afternoon about it. This morning I learned from Mr. Draper that he has been indiscussion with Mr. Haight about some of the provisions of the bill, and I believe he has come into substantial accord with Mr. Haight about them. Mr. DRAPER. That is true, except I had not explained those suggested amendments to the committee, and the reasons therefor at all. Mr. CAMPBELL. Now, the amendments which he has submitted to me, I think, will be acceptable to us, in principle. There may be some slight changes in the wording on one or two of them, but on the whole I think, in principle, they are agreeable, and I have no doubt but what we shall be able to agree with them, so far as they are concerned. If that can be done, then I would think that the various interests which are interested in the bill, both the shipper and the shipowning and underwriting interests, probably can say to you that this bill is acceptable to them; and that will include practically all parties to the shipping transactions. |