The Comptroller-General of Customs forwards the following memorandum for advice:

On the 7th instant a proclamation was issued prohibiting the export of wheat and flour to places other than the United Kingdom, unless with the consent of the Minister for Trade and Customs.

It was subsequently decided that in certain cases (where the vessel did not form one of a regular trading fleet, such as the P. and O. etc.) a security should be required that the wheat and flour should be discharged in the United Kingdom.

A vessel known as the Metropolis laden with wheat which had been entered outwards for Valparaiso was refused a clearance under the proclamation.

The agents also stated they were unable to give the security asked for, as they had no authority to do so.

I have just learned from the agents that they are now authorised to give security.

In the meantime, however, Blake and Riggall wrote to the Department stating that they were instructed by their clients-the owners of the ship-to say that they considered the Commonwealth had no right to exact the condition of security, and to claim payment by the Commonwealth of demurrage since the date of detention (7th instant) at the rate of 4d per ton per day.

It is considered by the Department that its action in demanding security is authorised by the provisions of section 42 of the Customs Act 1901-1910.

Please say whether you concur in the opinion that the Department is sufficiently protected by that section.

If, in addition, you think it desirable that a further proclamation or a substitute proclamation be issued, making clear that the Minister may demand security as a condition of granting permission for delivery of the cargo, whether at a port in the United Kingdom or a port elsewhere, I should be glad if you would be good enough to cause a draft to be prepared and forwarded to this Office.

In such a proclamation it would seem desirable to cast upon the master, owner or agent of the ship the duty of providing the necessary security. This is in order to save the inconvenience of obtaining securities from a number of persons, as it is not very often the case that the whole cargo of a ship is owned by one consignee.

In my opinion the Department has power under section 42 of the Customs Act to require security that goods exported will not be dealt with contrary to the proclamation.

As an additional precaution, however, it would not be amiss to redraft the proclamation so as to omit the words which except exportation to the United Kingdom, and thus make the Minister's consent a condition precedent to any export of wheat or flour. The Minister would then be able to require security as a condition of his consent.

I enclose a draft proclamation accordingly⁽¹⁾ also a similar one for the export of meat.

[Vol. 13,p.67]

(1)draft proclamation not in Opinion Book.