Chapter V: Excerpt From Report of Mr. Peterkin, General Inspector of Board (41)

10,824. And if you wanted anything of that kind, it would be set down against your next account?-No, it was set down against the second payment of oil-money, if we had so much coming to us.

10,825. What you have been describing was the ordinary practice during all the years you were at the whale fishing, both for Mr. Leask and Mr. Tait?-Yes, and for Messrs. Hay also.

10,826. Did you sometimes engage with Messrs. Hay?-Yes.

10,827. Do you think it would be better to have your fishing paid by monthly payments, according to the quantity delivered, and at a price fixed at the beginning of the season, rather than to have the long accounts you have now?-I don't know that, upon the whole, it would be any better for myself; and I can only speak for myself. Those whom I have been serving for the last three years have given me money whenever I wanted it.

10,828. But don't you think you would have the money more under your own command if you were paid monthly or fortnightly?-I could not say that I would have it more under my own command, because they give it to me whenever I ask for it.

10,829. I suppose the merchants are always very glad to get you to fish for them?-I suppose they are.

10,830. Are you not about the best fisherman in the islands?-I have heard that said since I started.

10,831 And I suppose you have generally a balance to get at the end of the year above the supplies you have got?-Yes, sometimes.

10,832. Who do you fish for?-Spence & Co.; I have done so for the last three years.

10,833. Do you get all your supplies at Uyea Sound?-Yes, except occasionally when I send down for anything to Lerwick.

10,834. Do you think you get any advantage in price or quality by sending to Lerwick for your goods?-I do not.

10,835. I suppose you get all money if you ask for it?-Yes. 10 836. And you don't require to take any supplies from Spence & Co. unless you wish?-No; I only take meal and oil-cloth, and the like of that.

10,837. But you might get all your pay in money if you wished, and be able to buy your goods anywhere else?-Yes, I could get every cent of my money if I wanted it.

10,838. Is it entirely of your own choice that you deal in the shop?-Entirely.

10,839. Where is it that boats are most commonly lost on the coast of Shetland? Is it at sea or in the sounds?-It is when we come in towards the land. We fish fifty or sixty miles dead off the land, and we will come in within ten or twelve miles of the land before we get into any danger. Then we come in upon the tides.

10,840. Therefore, if you were out at the haaf in your large boats, these boats might live through any storm?-Yes; a large boat could keep outside and not require to come in to involve herself in the tides, but when we have a small boat we are forced to come in.

10,841. A man cannot stay outside in these small boats?-No; the weather is always getting worse, and the sea getting higher and higher on them, and they must run for the laud.

10,842. But with a larger boat you might run out to sea in a storm?-Yes.

10,483. Do you do that sometimes with your small boats, and escape?-Yes.

10,484. You think that is often a better course to take than running for the land in a storm?-Yes; the summer breezes are not very long.

10,845. But do you do that in a winter storm?-In winter we do not go very far off the land in our small boats.

10,846. But in a winter storm with one of the large boats you are to try, you think you may run off to sea and be comparatively safe?- I think so.

<Adjourned>.

[Page 265]

LERWICK: MONDAY, JANUARY 22, 1872

WILLIAM ROBERTSON, examined.

10,847. You are cashier and principal clerk to Mr. Joseph Leask, merchant, shipowner, and agent in Lerwick?-I am.

10,848. You have been for nineteen years in his business, during which time you have been employed in shipping and discharging seamen, engaging and settling with fishermen, and employing and paying hundreds of labouring people?-I have.

10,849. You are also fully acquainted with the barter system as it prevails in Shetland?-I am.

10,850. I understand you desire to be examined with regard to the Report furnished to the Board of Trade in September 1870 by Mr. Hamilton, as well as on certain questions and answers in the Report of the Commission, of which you have given me a list?-I do.

10,851. Will you give me, in the first place, a general description of Mr. Leask's business? He is, I believe, a proprietor of land to some extent in Shetland?-Yes, and he is also a pretty large proprietor of house property in town.

10,852. What estates does he hold?-He has estates in West and South Yell, Ulsta and Coppister.

10,853. Has Ulsta been long in his possession?-I think about ten years, but I could not exactly say.

10,854. What is the extent of his estates in Yell?-There are about fifty tenants on the Yell property, and the annual value is upwards of £200.

10,855. I understand that in Yell Mr. Leask now carries on the fishing to a considerable extent?-He has only commenced in the past season to carry out the fishing in Yell on his own account.

10,856. Has he a station and shop there?-He has now. He commenced them at the beginning of this year at Ulsta. The shopkeeper is William Hughson.

10,857. How many boats were employed there last year?-Four.

10,858. Are the fishermen bound to fish for the proprietor?-They are not bound to fish. They requested Mr. Leask to employ them last year, and it was at their own request he did so.

10,859. Who was the fish-curer at that station previously?- William Jack Williamson, and James Johnston. Williamson lived at Ulsta, and Johnston at West Yell Sound.

10,860. Was the request you have mentioned from the fishermen to Mr. Leask to employ them a written one?-No; it was verbal.

10,861. How was it conveyed to you?-By the people themselves.

10,862. By how many of them?-By about half dozen or thereby; I cannot state the number exactly.

10,863. Did they come to Lerwick for the purpose?-They always come to Lerwick in November to settle their rent accounts; and in November 1870 a few of them requested Mr. Leask to build boats for them, and they would fish to him rather than to Johnston and Williamson.

10,864. Had Williamson given up business at that time?-No.

10,865. Had he still a shop and curing station at Ulsta?-Yes.

10,866. In consequence of the request made to you by the men, what steps were taken to take over the business at Ulsta?-The business was not taken over at all. Mr. Leask simply built boats for three crews, and employed three masters to obtain crews at Ulsta and West Yell. One boat belonged to Ulsta, and the other two to West Yell.

10,867. Did Mr. Williamson hold premises from Mr. Leask on the Ulsta estate?-Yes.

10,868. He paid rent for them, but he had no lease?-No.

10,869. Did he receive notice that his tenure was at an end?-Yes; he received notice of that verbally two years or year and a half before he had to leave.

10,870. Had he received it before the verbal requisition was made by the fishermen to Mr. Leask that he should take them into his service?-I think so; but I could not be sure.

10,871. Was it in the contemplation of Mr. Leask to commence business there himself, at the time when he gave Williamson the first notice to leave?-I am not quite sure. I think he was not sure about it himself, whether he would commence business there on his own account, or let the premises to another party. The matter had not been fully considered; but I think Mr. Leask had it in contemplation to make some change, because the Yell people were not altogether satisfied with the state of matters at that time.

10,872. And the requisition made by the six fishermen had the effect of bringing him to a decision?-I suppose it had; at any rate it helped. The men were all of opinion that they would be better served by Mr. Leask, than by any person whom he might send there.

10,873. Were the fishermen under any obligation to fish for Williamson?-I don't think they were bound.

10,874. Was there any understanding when he took his premises, that the fishermen on that estate should fish for him?-No. Mr. Williamson was on the estate before Mr. Leask bought it; and after Mr. Leask bought it the men were at liberty to go wherever they pleased, either to fish at home or to go to Greenland, or to go south, or anywhere they liked. They were not bound in any way.

10,875. But when they did go to the home fishing, were they at liberty to sell their fish to any one they chose?-The boats belonged to Williamson, and of course they would be bound to give him the fish.

10,876. But were they at liberty to go in the boats of any other fish-curer?-Yes; they were at perfect liberty to fish for whom they pleased, so far as the landlord was concerned.

10,877. Was there any written lease of the premises to Williamson at any time?-He never had any written lease, so far as I am aware.

10,878. If there had been a written lease at the time when Mr. Leask bought the property, you would have been aware of it?-I think so.

10,879. It would have come into your hands along with the other writings relative to the estate?-Yes.

10,880. Either before or after the application of the West Yell tenants to Mr. Leask, was any intimation made to the rest of the tenants on that estate, or to the whole of them, that he (Mr. Leask) was about to open a shop there himself, and to receive fish?-The men who made the representation to Mr. Leask were given to understand that he would build boats for them; and when they went home they spread the report that Mr. Leask intended to do that.

10,881. Was any written intimation made to the tenants to that effect?-None that I know of.

10,882. Or any verbal intimation other than you have now mentioned?-The masters of the boats were to go and engage their own crews. We appointed masters, and they went among the tenants to engage whom they could get.

10,883. What instructions were given to the masters?-They were engaged on the same terms as usual, and they were to be paid in the same way.

10,884. But what instructions were given to them about telling the tenants?-There were no special instructions given at all.

[Page 266]

10,885. Were they desired to inform the tenants that Mr. Leask was undertaking the fishing himself, and that he expected the tenants to engage in his boats' crews?-At that time Mr. Leask could get more men amongst his tenants than he could employ, and there was no need for any pressure. More men were anxious to go than he had boats for at that time.

10,886. Had you any correspondence with Mr. Williamson about him leaving Ulsta?-Yes, a very long correspondence, and rather an amusing one. He implored Mr. Leask to allow him to remain for another year, as his business was so extensive that he could not wind it up in so short a time.

10,887. What was Mr. Leask's objection to allow him to remain?-He required the premises as a dwellinghouse for the incoming man, William Hughson; and of course it would not do to have opposition.

10,888. But he had made no arrangements for that at the time when Williamson was requested to prepare for removal?-He had not.

10,889. Then when was the correspondence? Was it when Williamson first got the notice or afterwards?-It was not until long afterwards. I think Williamson was of opinion that Mr. Leask would not remove him, and he trusted to that until the very last. I think he had some idea of getting the new premises, notwithstanding what had passed.

10,890. Were new premises built?-Yes, they were built last year. They were begun in June and only completed in December 1871.

10,891. Was Williamson still carrying on the fishing in 1871 while these new premises were being built?-Yes. He was fishing and carrying on the business the same as before.

10,892. How many men had he fishing for him last year at Ulsta?-I think he had about the same number of boats that he had formerly.

10,893. And he still had the same premises?-He occupied the same premises all along. The premises which Mr. Leask is occupying now for business purposes are altogether new. Williamson continued to occupy the old premises until November 1871, when he had to leave.

10,894. Where did he manage to get fishermen when Mr. Leask had put on three new boats?-I think he got some from Mr. M'Queen's estate, and also some of Mr. Leask's own tenants.

10,895. Does Mr. Leask intend to put on a larger number of boats this year?-I think he intends to put on one or two more.

10,896. But the boats' crews that he employed last year had formerly been in the employment of Williamson and Johnston?- Yes.

10,897. Is Johnston still carrying on business?-Yes, he is carrying on business at Sound, in West Yell, where he has a small property.

10,898. Do you know how many boats he has?-I think he has two but I am not sure. Some of Mr. Leask's tenants fished for Johnston last year also.

10,899. Will Mr. Leask's tenants be allowed to fish for Johnston and Williamson in future?-I don't think they would do so if Mr. Leask would give them employment.

10,900. But will they be allowed to fish for any other than Mr. Leask?-I don't think Mr. Leask would force any one to fish for him.

10,901. The tenants have received no intimation to the contrary?- No.

10,902. And no hint?-No hint whatever. In fact, there were tenants applying in November last for new boats, and requesting Mr. Leask to build new boats for them, because there are a good many men who would like to be employed by him, in preference to being employed by Johnston or any other body.

10,903. Do you know whether many of the men were in debt to Williamson when he left Ulsta?-I don't know.

10,904. Was that one of the reasons why Williamson was anxious not to quit in a hurry?-He alleged that reason; but I am of opinion that there were not many of them in debt.

10,905. Did he ask you to relieve him of any of these debts?- Never.

10,906. Do you suppose he has any chance of recovering any debts that may exist now?-Certainly he has. The men have all got effects of some kind or another, so that he may easily take them into court and recover what they are due him. They are all in very good circumstances; there are none of them who could not pay their debts.

10,907. Has Mr. Leask any property in Sandsting?-Yes; he has the property of Sand and Inner Sand. There are between 40 and 50 tenants upon it.

10,908. Are most of them engaged in the summer fishing?-A good many of them are. Some of them fish for Garriock & Co., and some for Mr. Leask, and I think some for Charles Nicholson.

10,909. Is that property in the south side of the parish?-Yes; it is near Reawick.

10,910. Has Mr. Leask any station in that district?-No.

10,911. Then where do they fish for him?-They go in some of his vessels to the Faroe fishing. He has no home-fishing station in Sandsting.

10,912. Are they at liberty to go to the home fishing or to the Faroe fishing for anybody they like?-Yes. They are under no obligation to fish for Mr. Leask. They can go where they like, and they have always done so.

10,913. Do they hold their land as yearly tenants?-Yes.

10,912. What other property has Mr. Leask?-South Whiteness, to the north-west of Scalloway, in the parish of Tingwall. I think there are about seventeen or eighteen tenants on that property. They fish principally for Mr. Leask in the Faroe fishing, and in the spring fishing, which occupies about a month or a little more.

10,915. Then they are not generally engaged in the home fishing?-No; they are generally engaged in the Faroe fishing.

10,916. How many of them may have gone to that fishing last year?-There may have been above a dozen.

10,917. These men, I presume, have accounts at Mr. Leask's shop at Lerwick?-Yes.

10,918. Is there any stipulation made with them that they shall man his Faroe smacks?-None. They are not bound at all. They may go where they please and engage themselves with whoever they please.

10,919. Has Mr. Leask any other properties in Shetland?-He has some small properties in other places-in Quarff, North Roe, and Aithsting. He has two tenants in Quarff, three in Aithsting, and one in North Roe. These tenants do not fish for Mr. Leask at all, and never have done so, or been asked to do so.

10,920. Then Mr. Leask's business consists in sending smacks to the Faroe fishing?-Yes.

10,921. And in sending boats to the summer fishing?-Now it does, but not formerly. It was only last year that he commenced the home fishing at Ulsta.

10,922. Has he commenced that business anywhere else?-No. Ulsta is the only summer-fishing station that he has.

10,923. Mr. Leask is also engaged in the whale fishing, both as an owner of ships and as an agent?-Yes.

10,924. I believe it is specially with regard to the agency business that you wish to make some statement?-Yes. I wish to make a statement with regard to Mr. Hamilton's Report to the Board of Trade in November 1870. Some of it is so utterly absurd that I should like to have it contradicted. He says, 'I ought to mention that the truck system, in an open or disguised form, prevails in Shetland to an extent which, I believe, is unknown in any other part of the United Kingdom.' Now, that I deny <in toto>; and I think I will be able to prove before I am done that it is not correct. 'And makes its depressing influence felt in all the ramifications of the industrial and social life of the natives.'

10,925. He says, 'Almost every fisherman in the islands is in debt to some shopkeeper; and not only is [Page 267] the head of the family in debt, but frequently his wife also, and other members of his family, down to children of twelve or fourteen years of age, for whom the shopkeeper opens separate accounts in his books.' Is that the case?-There may be some cases of that, but it is not general. I deny that almost every fisherman in the islands is in debt. Then he says, 'These fishermen, for the most part, also rent small farms of from three to four acres.' That also I deny Mr. Leask has about 120 tenants, and I think the average quantity of land they hold is about twelve acres of enclosed ground, besides common.

10,926. What is the amount of their rent?-The rent is something less than 10s. an acre, on the average. Some have as much as twenty-three acres, and in some cases they have about seven. The rental I have given is for the enclosed ground within the township; and in addition to that, the people have extensive commons.

10,927. On Mr. Leask's estates are the scattalds still left to the people without any payment?-Yes, except in Yell, where they have to pay 6d. per annum for every sheep. They also pay something for ponies, but nothing for cattle.

10,928. I omitted to ask whether Mr. Leask has the management of any properties except his own?-No.

10,929. He is not tacksman of any property, and he holds no property in lease?-No. I may mention that he has an assignation of the rents of a small property in Mid Yell, in security for debt. The rents are paid regularly, and he has nothing to do with the tenants except to draw their rent at the term.

10,930. Then what you deny in that sentence of Mr. Hamilton's Report is merely his statement as to the extent of the holdings of the men?-Yes. I hold they are three or four times larger than he says.

10,931. In the same sentence he adds, 'And it is from them (that is, the fishermen) and from their sons that the crews of the whaling vessels are mainly drawn.' Is that the case?-I don't deny that at all. It is quite true.

10,932. Is it also true that there are no whaling vessels belonging to Lerwick-that they belong principally to Dundee, Peterhead, and Hull, and that the owners of these vessels engage large portions of their crews at Lerwick through agents?-Yes.

10,933. Is it also true that these agents get little direct profit from their agency?-They get 21/2 per cent. commission on the gross wages paid through them.

10,934. Do you consider that an adequate remuneration?-It is not nearly an adequate remuneration for the amount of trouble they have; but it has been the practice to pay that, and there is so much competition amongst the agents that it has brought it down. I believe it was formerly 5 per cent.

10,935. I believe there are only three or four agents in Lerwick, and that the commission is fixed by mutual agreement between them and the shipowners?-Yes. It has always been 21/2 per cent. within my recollection.

10,936. Is it the competition that prevents the commission from being raised to such a figure as would be a sufficient remuneration in itself?-Yes.

10,937. The agents are engaged in business as shopkeepers and outfitters?-Yes.

10,938. Then it is the case that they have little direct profit from their agency; and Mr. Hamilton goes on to say, 'Their chief profit arises from what they can make out of the earnings of the men.' Is that statement correct?-I think some of them make very little profit indeed from the men. They sell their goods as cheap, if not cheaper, than other shopkeepers do; they give credit to the men, and sometimes they lose a good deal of it through bad debts when there is a bad voyage.

10,939. Is a bad voyage in the whaling a thing of frequent occurrence?-It is very frequent, especially in the seal fishing.

10,940. Then Mr. Hamilton says, 'Many of the men engaged are utterly unable, without the assistance of the agents, to provide themselves with the clothing necessary for the voyage?'-That is often the case with young hands. They come here without any clothing, and require perhaps from £5 to £6 worth in order to fit them out for the Greenland voyage. The wages for young hands are about £1 a month, and 1s. per tun of oil. When they have no success, they are back in about a month and a half; that is only 30s. they have to get, and that is all the agent has for his advance.

10,941. You are speaking now of the sealing voyage?-Yes. It only occupies about five or six weeks with the steamers.

10,942. But when a man goes on a sealing voyage of that kind, is he taken for the whaling voyage afterwards?-Sometimes, but sometimes not.

10,943. Do many of them only go to the sealing voyage?-Yes. Last year the majority bargained for the sealing voyage only, and did not go on the whaling voyage. Some of them re-engaged again, but many of them did not.

10,944. But, as a rule, do one-half of them engage for a second voyage after the sealing voyage was over?-I should say they do.

10,945. And many of them, I suppose, engage for a whaling voyage, who have not been at the sealing voyage at the commencement of the season?-That is sometimes the case.

10,946. How many men have you engaged for the last four or five years for the sealing voyages?-I could not say exactly for the last four or five years, but last year we engaged 207 for the sealing voyage, and 80 for the whaling, or 287 altogether.

10,947. Is not that an unusual proportion between the sealing and whaling voyages?-Yes. In former years we used to engage more for the whaling, and fewer for the sealing; but last year the owners took it into their heads to engage the men only for the sealing, and discharge them at the end of that voyage; and then, when the vessels were going to the whaling, they re-engaged only such men as they wanted.

10,948. What was their reason for that?-I suppose they were trying to economize. I don't know whether they economized or not, but it must have been with that view they tried it.

10,949 Are the crews larger in the sealing voyages than in the whaling?-They are. I should say that ten men fewer per ship are required for the whaling than for the sealing

10,950. How many ships would these represent?-Seven for the sealing, and four for the whaling.

10,951. So that you had three ships fewer under your care for the whaling than for the sealing last year?-Yes.

10,952 How did that happen? Did the ships not go to the whaling?-The 'Esquimaux' did not call here for men last year. The 'Victor' did not go at all to the whaling, and the third one remained at the sealing the whole season.

10,953. Then, in one ship the men you engaged would be employed through the whole season for the sealing?-Yes. That vessel tried whaling for a short time but I suppose it did not succeed.

10,954. You say that when a young man goes to the sealing at first, he incurs a larger debt for outfit than the whole amount of his wages?-Very often he does.

10,955. So that the merchant who engages him is often a serious loser, having no security in the shape of wages?-He risks his goods on the success of the voyage, and when the voyage is unsuccessful, he comes out a very serious loser occasionally.

10,956. But the man remains in his debt and may pay it up in a subsequent year?-Very often he does not. When a man gets into debt, we generally lose him. He goes to some other agent, or he goes south.

10,957. Is he more likely to go to another agent when he is in debt?-Yes. We very seldom get a man back again who is in debt to us.

10,958. How does that affect Mr. Hamilton's statement?-He says, 'The agents are, of course, interested in getting employment for those who are in their debt.' Now we very seldom or never get them employed again when they once get into debt, and therefore it is our interest not to allow them to get into debt, if possible.

10,959. But you would be very glad to get employment for such a man if you could?-If we could get him employment we would be very glad; but they take [Page 268] very good care not to allow us to catch them. Of course, there are some of them who pay their debts, but that is the exception. I am now referring to the young hands-those who get into debt on their first voyage.

10,960. When a man of older standing gets into debt, is he more likely to pay up in a subsequent year?-Yes. A man whose family is settled here is more likely to pay up.

10,961. Of course, in his case, you are not only interested in getting employment for him, but he also is anxious to get employment through you?-Yes, it is a mutual accommodation; but there are very few of the old hands in debt. It is principally among the young men who make unsuccessful voyages that anything of that kind happens. Then we come to a very serious mistake which Mr. Hamilton makes. He says, 'Even those men who are able to pay for their own outfit, and who might be able to obtain it at a cheaper rate from some other shopkeepers, are practically debarred from doing so; for any man who carried his custom to any other shop than to that of the agent employing him, would run the risk of being a marked man, not only with that particular agent, but also with all the others, among whom the news of his contumacy would soon spread; and as there are more men than there are berths, he would probably never get any employment again.' Now, it is nonsense to say, that there are often more men than berths. We have often had to go and search for men, and ships have frequently had to go on their voyages short of men. That has often occurred within the last nineteen years to my knowledge. I have seen vessels lying here for day after day, when we were searching for hands and could not get them, and after all they had to leave short-handed.

10,962. Did that occur last year or the year before?-No; it has not occurred for it year or two, but five years ago it occurred in the case of the 'Jan Mayen.' The first year she was a steamer, which was five years ago, she had to go short-handed, because the men were so scarce.

10,963. Do you know of any other ships which have had to go to the fishing short-handed?-They have gone short-handed, although I could not just remember them. I know that in 1854 or 1855 a number of them were short-handed.

10,964. Was there any particular reason why that was the case in 1854 and 1855?-There were more ships than men. I believe the Russian war was the principal cause of it.

10,965. Had a number of Shetland men gone into the navy at that time?-They had gone south, not perhaps into the navy; but there was it great demand for men in the merchant trade. For the last two or three years, also, the men have not been in excess. When the ships were done, the men were generally done too, so that they were about equally matched.

10,966. You refer to the statement in the Report: 'Any man who carried his custom to any other shop than to that of the agent employing him, would run the risk of being a marked man?'- Yes; I deny that most emphatically.

10,967. Is it the case that the men generally get what outfit they require at the shop of the merchant engaging them?-It is generally the case, but we engage plenty of men who go elsewhere to buy their goods. They are good men, and we are glad to get them back again. We never care a straw about whether they buy goods from us or not.

10,968. Are these men who have money of their own?-Yes. We give them their first month's advance in money, and they can go where they like.

10,969. What proportion of the men spend their month's advance elsewhere?-I don't think there is large proportion of them who do that. We generally find that we get on pretty well with the men, and that they prefer buying their goods from us. They tell us, but I don't know for the truth of it, that they get better value in our place than they get elsewhere.

10,970. Suppose a man gets his outfit from another agent, or from another shop, and comes back to you next year, is there any note kept of him having done so?-Never. There are several men who do that regularly, and we never quarrel them for it. They are good men and we don't like to lose sight of them for the sake of their custom. We always like to get hold a good man whether we get his custom or not and therefore we never quarrel with them on that account.

10,971. Suppose a man is in your debt at the beginning of the year, is he likely to go and get his supplies from another shop?-I could not say about that; but debt does not constitute any hold over him at all.

10,972. Do you know any case of a man in your debt at the beginning of the year having gone and got his supplies from another merchant?-I believe he would take part from us and part from others.

10,973. But do you know any case of that kind where the man went to another merchant for his supplies?-I could not point to any case.

10,974. Does any communication take place between different shipping agents with regard to the men who are in debt?-Not now. Formerly we used to hand our accounts from one to the other.

10,975. Did you exchange lists of the indebted men?-There were lists given for the other agents to try to recover the debts for us if possible.

10,976. Was that done with the view of obtaining payment from the agent by whom the men were engaged of a debt due to another merchant incurred in previous years?-Yes; but it was only done with the man's consent. Sometimes we recovered it, and sometimes not.

10,977. When you say that it was done with the man's consent, do you mean that at settling time the agent, who was aware that you were a creditor of the man, would arrange with him to hand over part of his wages to his former creditor?-Quite so, if the man was willing to do so.

10,978. The agent might advise him to do that, but not compel him?-He never could compel him. He would simply ask him if he chose to pay the claim; and if he chose not to pay it, there was no compulsion whatever.

10,979. Did you ever know of a man refusing to do that?-Very often.

10,980. In that case I presume that since the Merchant Shipping Act of 1854, there were no means compelling payment?-None; except, of course, that he could be taken to the Small Debt Court.

10,981. And there was no security, no lien on the men's wages?- None whatever. There never was that at any time. It was purely with his own consent if the money was used for paying another agent's account,

10,982. How long is it since these lists were interchanged between the agents in Lerwick?-It was previous to 1854. Perhaps there may have been some handed since then; one agent may have handed his accounts to another, in order to get recovery of them.

10,983. You say you have been nineteen years with Mr. Leask, and therefore these lists must have been interchanged within your time?-Yes; I was first employed in 1853.

10,984. Do you say that there have been no lists of that kind exchanged, and no information communicated with regard to the men's debts, since 1853 or 1854?-I don't remember any since 1854: there may have been, but I don't remember handing any lists or receiving any lists since that time.

10,985. Or receiving any information at all with regard to the debts of the men?-Not since the Merchant Shipping Act of 1854.

10,986. Why do you fix that date?-Because at that date it became compulsory to have the men shipped and discharged before the shipping master.

10,987. Has that always been done since 1854?-Not always. It was done I think, in 1854 and 1855, and it was not done again until 1867. In that year it commenced again, and the wages were all paid down in presence of the shipping master.

10,988. But if the Act was not observed with regard to the payment of wages in presence of the shipping master, how did it interfere with the passing of these lists?-The practice was given up.

10,989. At that time was it the practice for the men [Page 269] to receive payment of their wages at the agent's office?-Yes.

10,990. Was that done during all the period from 1854 down to 1867?-Yes, but not including 1867.

10,991. Can you say that, during that period you retained no portion of any man's wages for debt of another agent?-It is quite possible we may have done so, but I don't recollect.

10,992. I suppose your books will show whether any portion of a man's wages was so retained?-Yes.

10,993. Do you remember any case in which that was done?-I don't remember any particular case, but it is quite possible; in fact, it is even probable.

10,994. Do you think that some retentions of that kind took place every year?-I don't think so. Of course, if a man gave an order on Mr Leask to pay a debt or an account for him, he was bound to pay it if the man had funds in his hand. I have seen that done- that a seaman gave a special order in favour of another agent or another party.

10,995. Is that done frequently?-Not very often, but it is done sometimes.

10,996. Is it done by the man of his own accord?-Decidedly.

10,997. But probably at the request of the other agent?-I don't know about that. For instance, instead of getting money from the seaman, he might get an order on the agent, the same as he might get an order on the bank.

10,998. But the other agent who was the creditor of the seaman does not know necessarily that you have money belonging to the man in your hands as agent?-Not unless the man tells him.

10,999. Do you not still pass lists each year from one agent to another, stating the sums which are due to you by the men?-No.

11,000. I do not speak merely of seamen indebted to you; but do you not pass lists of all seamen whom you engage for the whaling?-Not at all. We have no occasion to do that, because it could serve no purpose whatever.

11,001. Why?-Because an agent who had a seaman in his books as a debtor would know at once whether that man was engaged by another agent in a particular year.

11,002. Is it the practice for one agent to be allowed to inspect the lists or books of another, in order to ascertain what seamen have been engaged?-I never did that or saw it done.

11,003. I suppose there are means of finding out in a small place like Lerwick what seamen in a particular year have been engaged?-We sometimes found it out in the Shipping Office. Whenever we wanted to see where a man was, we went there.

11,004. Can you state distinctly that in every case where such an order is presented for payment of a seaman's debt, it is presented without any previous communication between the agents?-I suppose it always is, but I don't know. The one agent has no interest whatever in recovering debts for the other; he gets no

remuneration for it.

11,005. If that is the case, why does he not refuse to honour the order?-I would not dishonour the order if the man had funds in our hands.

11,006. But the Merchant Shipping Act requires that all wages shall be paid, not in that way, not in obedience to any order, but in the presence of the shipping master in hard cash?-That is true; but it still allows a man to pay his debts.

11,007. Should not the agent leave him to pay his debts himself, and so obey the law?-It is merely as an accommodation to the seaman that we pay his debt for him, and we trust to his honesty that he will repay it to us.

11,008. But still, on the part both of the agent and of the seaman, is not that an infringement of the law?-No, it is not an infringement.

11,009. Does not the law require the whole wages, without any deductions other than those specified in the Act to be paid over in presence of the shipping master?-Yes, and that is always done.

11,010. If that is so, how is it possible, for you in obedience to such an order to retain the man's wages?-I do not retain them. The man comes back and repays his debt.

11,011. Then that is not retention in obedience to an order?-It is not retention: there has been no retention since 1867. Every man, since then has got his money in the Shipping Office, and those who had accounts in the shop came back and paid them.

11,012. Then how did it happen that you spoke of these orders being implemented?-I was referring to the period before 1867.

11,013. Your statement now is, that no such orders have been given, or acted upon since 1867?-They may have been given, but there have been no deductions from the seaman's wages since then, except the captain's account, the first month's advance, and the allotments. With these exceptions, the whole money was paid down to the seaman in the Shipping Office, and when he had an account in the shop he came and paid it.

11,014. Will your books show that?-Yes.

11,015. In what way do, your books prove it?-I request that the shipping master be called upon to prove it.

11,016. To prove what?-To prove that the men get their wages in money in the Shipping Office.

11,017. I intend to call Mr. Gatherer to prove that but you have come forward in order to contradict Mr. Hamilton's report, and the question I asked is, in what way do your books prove that no such orders have been honoured since 1867?-Mr. Gatherer will prove that since 1867 the men have got their wages paid down to them in money.

11,018. Am I to record that your books do not prove that?-They do not prove that. I want the shipping master to prove it.

11,019 Then your books will not prove that all the wages have been paid to the men in cash, and that no sum has been retained in obedience to a seaman's order?-That can be proved by the shipping master.

11,020. But your books do not prove it?-We have accounts with the seamen, and when they get their wages, they invariably come back and settle these accounts. We do not retain anything; we invariably pay them the whole money that is due to them, and they can either come back or not as they choose.

11,021. Who is it that hands over the money to the men on behalf of Mr. Leask in presence of the shipping master?-It is generally Mr. Andrew Jamieson, and sometimes myself. One of us attends at the Shipping Office along with the men, and hands over their cash to them in presence of the shipping master.

11,022. Do you generally find that a seaman comes down to your office immediately after he has been paid, and settles any account that he is due?-We generally find that that is the case; in fact, always when they have accounts they come down and settle them.

11,023. Have you known any exceptions to that rule?-I have only known one man who tried not to come down and settle his account.

11,024. Who was he?-He was a lad belonging to Lunnasting, named Robert Grains. He declined to come down and settle his account but he afterwards came on the same day. I think that occurred two years ago.

11,025. When was he asked to come?-I suppose he never was asked particularly; but it is understood that every man has to pay his debt when he is able.

11,026. But you say that he declined?-I believe he declined on the ground that he required the money. I don't know whether he was asked to come or whether he merely said of his own accord that he would not be able to pay his account just now, as he required the money.

11,027. Was that done in your presence?-No; it was in Mr. Jamieson's.

11,028. Did you see the man when he came back to the office?-I don't remember seeing him. It was Mr. Jamieson who told me of the circumstance.

11,029. When a man comes down to settle after receiving [Page 270] his money at the Shipping Office does he hand over the whole money into your hands, or does he merely settle the amount of his account?-He sometimes does the one way and sometimes the other.

11,030. Sometimes he may hand over the whole money for you to settle with him?-Yes; and at other times he asks what he is due.

11,031. When he hands over the whole money to you, does it ever happen that the accounts of another shipping agent are settled at the same time in your office-It has not happened since 1867.

11,032. Is there anything in the state of the law to prevent that from being done if the man has got his cash at the Shipping Office?-I don't think there is.

11,033. Then why has it never been done since 1867?-I don't know; it has just happened so.

11,034. Was that done regularly previous to 1867?-A few instances might have occurred, but it was not very general practice at all.

11,035. In what way before that time did you know that a man was owing another agent unless you had the sum intimated to you by that agent, or had lists exchanged?-The agent very likely ascertained when the man was to settle and came along.

11,036. He had ascertained where the man was employed?-Yes, in what ship.

11,037. Did he do that by means of information obtained at the Custom House?-Possibly he might.

11,038. Was it not by information obtained from the agent who employed the man?-It was possibly from the Custom House, or from some other party.

11,039. But it might have been from the agent who engaged the man?-It is quite possible.

11,040. Was it not a regular practice to give information of that sort?-No.

11,041. Was such an arrangement made more commonly when the man was pretty deep in debt?-Yes.

11,042. The agent in whose books he had run up a considerable debt would look sharper after him, and would make inquiries at the other agent by whom he was employed?-Yes.

11,043. So that at least to that extent there was regular system of communication between the agents?-It was not done to any great extent; it was merely trifling. There were not so many men in debt as to make it a common practice.

11,044. It might come to something considerable where several hundreds of men were engaged in the whale fishing?-Yes; but when they were divided among four agents there would not be many.

11,045. But last year you engaged 280 men yourselves?-Yes.

11,046. And in some years the number of men employed in the sealing and whaling would be greater?-Yes. I think we employed about 500 in 1853.

11,047. So that among 500 men employed by you it was very probable that a considerable number should be in your debt?-I don't think there were many of them indebted at all. Last year there were very few indeed.

11,048. But in past years there may have been a very considerable number when you had 500 or 600 men engaged?-When the fishing proved a failure the debts would be very considerable.

11,049. In going through Mr. Hamilton's Report, you have omitted a sentence in which he says: 'It is quite common for allotments of wages to be made out in favour of the agents, or, in other words, for the agent to undertake to pay to himself part of the seaman's wages.' Is it quite common for the allotment notes to be made out in favour of the agents?-Yes, it was quite common.

11,050. Is it sometimes done still?-We have never done it in Mr. Leask's office but I believe it has been done elsewhere.

11,051. Why was it never done in Mr. Leask's office?-We just trusted to the men's honesty.

11,052. Have you never taken an allotment note, in which the party to whom it was payable was, not Mr. Leask, but some one in his office?-We never took out allotment notes at all.

11,053. When you engage a man, does he not generally take an allotment note?-Not generally.

11,054. Does he do it at all?-Not at all.

11,055. He gets his supplies from you without any allotment note?-Yes; without us having any guarantee at all. We have advanced both goods and money, to great extent, without any allotment note.

11,056. But in these cases you were aware that he had no allotment note?-We have never issued any allotment notes for the last six years, except, perhaps, in a very rare case. We may have given one or so.

11,057. Of course, you would not have advanced him the money had there been an allotment note left in the hands of his with or other relations, which they were entitled to draw from you?-We would have advanced money to parties whom we knew.

11,058. Have you frequently given money to a seaman's family during his absence?-Yes.

11,059. But more frequently supplies?-Not more frequently. It was just as they wished it. If they wished supplies they got them, but we did not wish them to take them.

11,060. What further observation have you to make on Mr. Hamilton's Report?-Towards the end he says that the men employed are not free agents. I deny that. I say they are free agents, and that they are at perfect liberty, so far as my experience goes. They can engage with whoever they please, and take their supplies anywhere they please.

11,061. In denying that statement, do you intend your denial to be applicable both to the men who are in your debt and to those who are clear?-Decidedly. The debt constitutes no hold whatever over the men.

11,062. Even where the man has a family, and is resident in Shetland?-Yes, even then.

11,063. And even where he is a tenant of Mr. Leask, if that happens to be the case?-Yes. Even in that case he may go where he pleases. I never yet saw Mr. Leask compel a man in any way. Then Mr. Hamilton says: 'While the men employed are not free agents, however fair an employer may desire to be, he cannot treat them as if they were; and if, on the other hand, the employer wishes to make all he can out of those he employs, and to take every advantage of their dependent position, he has unlimited opportunity of appropriating to himself all the results of their labour.' That also I deny. There is an insinuation there that the employers do not do what is right; and I think the word 'appropriating' does not look very well; but it is not correct. The Shetland people, in general, are pretty well able to take care of themselves, and they are sharp enough in settling, to look out that they have got fair play.

11,064. And even to take care that the prices charged for goods are not unreasonably high?-Yes; they take very good care of that.

11,065. Have you many disputes as to the prices of goods at settling time?-Very few indeed.

11,066. Does that arise from the fact that your charges are very moderate, or from the fact that the Shetlanders don't pay much attention to that matter?-They pay great attention to it, and an article is always priced before they buy it. I am quite sure that our prices are not higher than those of others; at least so far as my experience goes.

11,067. There is another statement in Mr. Hamilton's Report, to which you have not referred,-that there is no time fixed for settlement with the men who go to the seal and whale fishing?- That is quite correct; but it is our interest to get the work of settlement done as speedily as possible.

11,068. In what way is it your interest?-To get the work off our hands. We could settle with a dozen men nearly in the same time that we can with two or three; and if they would all come and get settled with in one or two days, that would be so much less trouble to us.

11,069. Is it the case that the men, after being discharged from the ship and before settlement, continue to run accounts with you to any extent?-Very seldom.

11,070. Does it happen to some extent?-Only to a very small extent. They seldom buy anything after they have landed. Here [showing] is a crew of 27 men [Page 271] landed from the 'Esquimaux' on 28th April 1870, and they were all paid off by 14th May, or in about two weeks.

11,071. That was for a sealing voyage. Did these men engage again for the whaling?-I believe some of them did.

11,072. Were others going south?-Some of them went south, I daresay, and a good number of them went to the home fishing.