The Comptroller-General has submitted to me for advice the following letter from the Deputy Chairman of the Australasian Steamship Owners Federation:

With reference to my letter of 3rd instant and your reply of 15th instant, it was of course understood that the wages for any period during which a seaman is absent without leave could be stopped when the first payment of wages is made after such absence. This, however, would not get over the difficulty in cases such as that cited in my letter, as there would still be four days' pay due to be deducted on discharge, whereas only three days' pay would have been earned by the man since the last payment of wages. It will readily be seen too that if these fines are to accumulate until discharge it is possible in the case of a man on running articles for six months to have fines accumulated against him equivalent to the whole, and possibly more than the fortnight's wages which would have been due to him. It is obviously in the interests of the men themselves and their families as well of the shipowners that the fines should be paid when incurred and not allowed to accumulate.

As regards paragraph (2) of your letter, although regulation 18 (3) does not specifically state that the fine shall be deducted when the offence is committed, the actual wording of the regulation certainly justifies such an interpretation being placed upon it as it is definitely stated that the fine must be paid to the superintendent at the time of the man's discharge, whereas no such limitation is imposed by the regulation as regards the time the deduction is to be made.

With regard to your contention that section 115 clearly provides that the deduction of the fines may be made only at the time of the offender's discharge, it would appear that the section is equally capable of being interpreted as allowing the deduction to be made prior to discharge, but being subject to disallowance, and consequently refund, if at the time of discharge the offence and entry in the log book are not proved to the satisfaction of the superintendent. This view, it is submitted, is materially strengthened if the section is read in conjunction with sections 76 and 77. Section 76 (3) states that the master shall, during the voyage, enter as they occur the various matters in respect of which any deductions from wages are made and that the Minister may disallow any such deduction. This clearly supports the contention set out above.

Section 77 provides that the master or owner of every foreign-going ship registered in Australia shall pay the wages then earned to every seaman monthly, subject to all just deductions. The obvious intention was that these words 'subject to all just deductions' should also be read into sub-section (2) and this has already been admitted by your Department. If fines cannot be deducted until discharge the words 'subject to all just deductions' would appear to have no force as they stand. If your contention as to the interpretation of section 115 is correct the words 'on discharge' would be requisite after the words 'subject to all just deductions' in section 77.

In view of the practical importance of the matter, the difficulties which will arise unless fines can be deducted at the time of the offence, and the hardship which would result against the seaman and his family by allowing the fines to accumulate for possibly six months, I am again to urge strongly that your Department will raise no objection to the practice of deducting fines at the time they are incurred being adopted. It appears clear that the section can be read to permit of this construction being placed upon it and that the practice would not contravene regulation 18, in fact would be in consonance with it, and furthermore would also carry out the expressed intention of section 77, whereas the other interpretation that deductions can only be made at time

of discharge would certainly be in conflict with the instructions that wages are to be paid monthly, subject to all just deductions. In addition to this, should a man desert after having been on the ship several months, and having incurred many fines, he would have been paid each fortnight his full wages and it would be almost impossible to recover the fines he has incurred.

My members will therefore be glad to hear that on further consideration, in the light of the above remarks, it has been decided by your Department that they will be in order in deducting the fines at the time the offence is committed.

Section 115 of the Act contains certain provisions as to the deduction of fines for acts of misconduct dealt with in the agreement. Those provisions deal first with the case of an offender discharged in Australia. The discharge must be effected before the superintendent (section 61). Section 80 contemplates the settlement of wages before the superintendent at the time of discharge.

Section 115(1) in my opinion only gives a right of deduction, in the case of seamen discharged in Australia, when certain facts have been proved to the satisfaction of the superintendent at the time of discharge.

Sub-section (2) of section 115 has more general application and requires that fines shall be paid promptly to the superintendent.

Section 115(1) is a specific direction as to the deduction of fines in cases where seamen are discharged in Australia and, as regards such cases, sections 76 and 77 must be construed subject to section 115 (1).

Regulation 18 (3) of the Navigation (Master and Seamen) Regulations cannot be relied upon as authorising any practice contrary to section 115.

[Vol. 19, p. 162]