JOHN GATHERER, examined,
15,866. You have been for a long time Collector of Customs at
Lerwick?-I have. Before questioning me, I would like if you
would allow me to make a brief preliminary remark or two which
may render clear any after-evidence which you may call upon me
to give. At the time when certain gentlemen tendered their
evidence on Shetland truck before the Commission at Edinburgh, I
read the brief, necessarily imperfect, and probably inaccurate
reports of the same which appeared in the Edinburgh weekly
papers. I also read some articles and letters which appeared in the
newspapers at the time. About seven months ago I read, as printed
I think in a Parliamentary blue book, the report of Mr Hamilton to
the Board of Trade about the discharge of the Shetland whaling
seamen at this port. I have never read the report since. On my
return from the, mainland last summer, I found a gentleman had
left in my house a copy of the evidence, as [Page 400] printed <in
extenso> in a pamphlet form. I think the pamphlet contained a
report of Mr. Arthur Hay's adverse evidence; but I had not time to
read it before I posted the pamphlet to a friend in the south. I
therefore never read his evidence. Beyond a brief newspaper
paragraph, which I read recently, I literally know nothing as to
the evidence which has been given under the present inquiry. I
purposely kept aloof from the same, and from inquiring about
the same. I appear here very reluctantly on the present occasion,
and, as you are aware, I would not have appeared at all had I not
been cited. I have several reasons for this reluctance to appear: I
will mention two of them. I entertain very strong opinions
condemnatory of the truck system, which I believe prevails all
over Shetland; but I do not wish personally to have anything to do
with the matter, directly or indirectly. I think it is to be regretted
that the question as to the mode of paying the whaling seamen
should have been introduced at in the Edinburgh evidence, and
complicated by being mixed up with the general question of truck.
Both questions, I think, should have been treated separately, as
they are the subject of distinct laws and regulations, these laws
at the same time being administered by distinct departments.
From what I have already stated, you will see that I have a very
imperfect recollection of the statements in Mr. Hamilton's report,
but I recollect my impression of it at the time when I read it. It
was, that the statements in the report were essentially correct
representations of what had taken place at one time or other at
Lerwick. I have heard that some one has questioned the accuracy
of some portions of his report. It might be liable to misconception
in this respect. When he inspected my office, we talked generally
over the objectionable system that had so long prevailed here in
the mode of discharging and paying off the men. A great deal of
this must have been patent and notorious to Mr. Hamilton, as a
former resident in Shetland, and having subsequent intercourse
with the same; and he may not possibly, in his narrative of this to
the Board of Trade, have clearly separated some of the past and
the suppressed practices of the agents, and those of more recent
date. This would the more readily occur, as I have reason to
believe that at the time he prepared his report he was not aware
that I had over a number of years repeatedly and fully reported the
whole matter to the Board of Trade. I have here with me a report
relative to the discharge of whaling crews during the last year, and
some returns relative to the same, and for previous years, which I
hurriedly prepared with the view of sending to the Board of Trade
by the mail, which I expected would have sailed yesterday. When
preparing the same, I was not expecting I would have to give
evidence on the subject. I do not wish to hand in the documents,
but I may have occasion to refer to them.
15,867. You showed me these returns last night, and allowed me
to see the report which you were sending to the Board of Trade?-
I did.
15,868. You are satisfied, I presume, as to the substantial
correctness of these returns?-Yes, of my own report and the
returns. There is a difficulty in preparing them, from the time
that has elapsed; but, as you are aware, I have asked them to
verify the accuracy of them at the proper quarter.
15,869. Subject to that verification, you believe these returns to be
correct?-Yes. They were prepared by myself and those in any
office from the records.
15,870. Therefore, if any application should be made to the Board
of Trade afterwards for production of these returns under this
Commission, you have no objection to their being regarded as part
of your evidence given upon oath?-None; and in continuation of
the report, I will refer to the fact that I have been examined before
you.
15,871. You are aware that before 1867 the wages of seamen
returning from Greenland voyages and landed in Shetland were
never paid at the Custom House?-In some cases they were, but
very seldom.
15,872. Do you also know from your own observation, and from
what you heard at the time, that those seamen were generally
running large accounts with the agents, by whom they were
secured for these sealing and whaling voyages?-I was aware of
that from the statements of the seamen, themselves.
15,873. In numerous cases?-Yes, in numerous cases.
15,874. In almost every case?-I believe so.
15,875. In what way did these statements come to be made to
you?-The seamen often came and complained to me that they
were not paid off. It may perhaps be proper to explain that at that
time, before the special Board of Trade regulations were issued,
the masters should have come and paid off the seamen. I may add
further, that I am aware that every means was taken by the agents
to keep the masters of the Peterhead and Dundee vessels from
coming and discharging their men in cases where it would have
been attended with no inconvenience.
15,876. In what way did you become aware of that?-I got
numbers of letters from the masters stating that they were unable
to attend themselves with the men. These letters, so sent to me,
were often written by the agents, but signed by the masters.
15,877. Did you know them to be in the handwriting of the
agents?-Yes, or of their clerks; and on inquiring at the captains
when they came back to engage men again, some of them told me
that the agents desired them to do so.
15,878. Not to pay the men?-Yes, not to pay the men. In these
letters they stated that they often wished the men to appear, but
that they (the men) ran away home; which statement the men
subsequently told was incorrect.
15,879. At that time, was the payment of these Greenland seamen
at Lerwick subject to the same general regulations which were in
force in other parts of the empire?-Yes. There were instructions
to shipping masters at that time.
15,880. Were these the same regulations that are still in force in
other parts of the kingdom?-Yes.
15,881. They are still in force everywhere, except in Lerwick?-
Yes. They are still in force, except in the case of Shetland,
Orkney, and the port of Stornoway. I may mention that the
procuring of seamen, by agents was at that time, and is still in
other places, illegal and punishable by fine-that is, according to
the Merchant Shipping Act of 1854. I believe the mode in which
they then acted would in the south be treated as crimping; and
allow me to say also, that the offence was rendered greater by the
fact of the agents being merchants and supplying the men with
goods.
15,882. I believe there is a prohibition of that?-Yes; and even
licensed agents-that is, individuals licensed by the Board of
Trade-are not allowed to be so if they have dealings with the
men. That also is under the Act of 1854.
15,883. The regulation at the time you speak of, although it
was not observed, was, that the men should be paid before the
superintendent?-Yes, then called the shipping master.
15,884. That officer in this case was yourself, as there is no local
marine board here?-Yes.
15,885. Why was the regulation not observed?-I am satisfied it
was from the agents desiring to secure the profits on the supplies
of the men.
15,886. Had you made frequent endeavours to enforce compliance
with the Act?-Yes.
15,887. You reported repeatedly to the Board of Trade on the
subject?-Yes. I may mention that, when I came here first, there
was an attempt on the part of some of the agents to introduce their
accounts into the men's accounts of wages, which I checked, and
which I believe then led to the shipmasters not appearing.
15,888. That was many years ago?-It is a good many years ago.
In some cases these accounts were introduced under the name of
ship's accounts.
15,889. Was not that done as late as 1867, after the regulations had
been modified? At least I was told that in some cases the agents
had introduced their own accounts among the captain's stores in
the ship's store-[Page 401]book?-I suspect that was done to a
trifling extent, although I should not like to say decidedly that it
was done.
15,890. Was there not a clause introduced in 1868 by which
that was distinctly prohibited?-There were some defects in the
regulations, and they were altered in order to meet the attempts
made to evade them.
15,891. Since 1867 has the system been materially changed by
the regulations then introduced by the Board of Trade?-Yes,
materially.
15,892. The seamen now receive their full payment in cash in your
presence?-They do.
15,893. Although not at the time required by the Act?-There is
great delay in many cases.
15,894. That is said by several witnesses who have appeared here,
to be due to the reluctance of the men to come forward, and their
desire to go home and see their friends as soon as they are landed:
is that so?-To a great extent, I do not believe that.
15,895. Have you any reasonable doubt that if the men were
instructed by the master of the ship and the agents to go at once
to the Custom House for payment of their wages, they would obey
that direction?-I believe from my knowledge of the men, that if
the master and the agent decidedly told them to go to the Custom
House after being landed, they would go. There is no doubt that
men after a long voyage are naturally anxious to get home; but if
they knew they had to be paid then, they would readily accede to
the request of the master and the agent.
15,896. Is there any reason you can assign, from your acquaintance
with the practice in paying seamen's wages, why the accounts
should not be all ready within the time allowed by the law?-My
whole experience in the matter points to the fact that the agents are
unwilling to have a speedy settlement, and that unless compelled
they would never appear at the Custom House at all, or rather I
should say at the Mercantile Marine Office.
15,897. Have you had occasion since 1868 to know that the
seamen are still incurring large accounts, or considerable accounts,
to the agents by whom they are secured?-I have endeavoured not
to be cognisant of any of their dealings; but I may add further, that
I believe, although the special regulations are outwardly and
nominally complied with the agents still secure their accounts
from the men for their supplies.
15,898. You think there is still a security-a sort of virtual
impledgment of the men's wages although they are nominally
paid over in cash?-Yes. It may not be by agreement, but the
thing practically exists; and I never heard the agents conceal the
fact that the profit on the seamen's wages is the main inducement
to them in accepting the agency. That very fact, in my opinion,
renders the whole transaction irregular and illegal. Of course, that
is a matter of opinion.
15,899. Have you had occasion to interfere while seamen were
settling wages with the clerk of the agent, in order to prevent
part of the money being retained for the payment of the agent's
account?-I may mention that the men, after being settled with at
the Custom House generally run down to the agent's office. I
know that, because I hear the men speaking about it, and the
agents, or rather the agents' clerks, telling them to go down to
the place.
15,900. Have you frequently heard the men told to go down?-
Yes. The men sometimes blurt it out, and the agents' clerks are
not very much satisfied at their doing so; but the whole thing is so
well understood, that there is little concealment about it.
15,901. You have frequently heard conversations on the subject,
showing that the men were expected to go down at once?-Yes;
and some of the clerks had the audacity to attempt to deduct the
amount at the office not later than last year.
15,902. Who were these? Are they mentioned in your report?-
They are mentioned in my report to the Board of Trade.
15,903. Do you know whether one consequence of the new
regulations has been, that the green hands engaged for the settling
and whaling voyages are much fewer now than they were before
1867?-I am not aware of the fact. My attention has never been
called to it.
15,904. Are you prepared to say that there are not fewer green
hands engaged now than there were before 1867?-I cannot say
as to that.
15,905. Your observation has not led you to think so?-No. The
idea never occurred to me.
15,906. Have you had occasion to know whether the seamen have
been told by the masters or the agents since 1868 to attend at the
Shipping Office within the time required by law?-The special
regulations, unfortunately, do not define any time within which
they are to attend, and I have no doubt the agents know that fact.
15,907. The three days do not apply under these regulations?-
That is a question that I should not like to give an opinion upon.
15,908. The clause about the three days is quoted in the last head
of the regulations?-It is quoted there to show what the general
law is.
15,909. But you have a doubt in your own mind as to whether it
applies here?-I may at once say that these special regulations
were a sort of compromise, and I am so far answerable for their
being framed, thinking that they would secure the men their
wages. My opinion now is, that it would have been better if the
Act had been enforced as it originally stood; and I believe the
thing will never be on a satisfactory footing as long as agents
who are merchants continue to act as agents.
15,910. Is it not a benefit for the young men who are engaged
for the Greenland fishery, to be able to get their outfit from the
merchants on credit, as they do?-I think the same thing could be
secured by other and legitimate means.
15,911. You know that the men get an advance note for the
amount of the first month's wages?-Yes; and after these
special regulations came into force, Laurenson & Co. were the
first who paid the men over the counter in cash.
15,912. You are speaking now of the advances?-Yes, of the
advance note. Messrs. Hay latterly did the same; and Mr. Tait, I
think, did so this year for the first time. I recollect asking Mr.
Laurenson if he sustained any loss by treating the men with
confidence and giving them the money, and to the best of my
recollection he said he did not.
15,913. But the outfit requires a larger sum than the advance
amounts to in any case?-Yes; but allotment notes would meet
that. That would give the relatives of the seamen an opportunity
of drawing the money in their absence.
15,914. Are these the only means by which you think a young man
without an outfit could provide himself with one?-I think any
merchant would give the seamen credit, if they were certain that
the present agents did not enjoy the monopoly of giving them their
supplies. I may further state, that I believe a gentleman intends to
a certain extent to act its agent for some of the vessels this year, to
pay the men's advances in cash, and to allow their allotment notes
to be paid by a banker or some disinterested party. If that system
were introduced, it would knock the whole irregularity on the
head. Such is my individual opinion.
15,915. Do you think the gentlemen who now act as agents would
have any hesitation, or that any danger would arise to them, in
supplying goods to the men, if they were not acting as agents, but
merely as merchants?-I think they are not entitled to enjoy a
monopoly of the trade.
15,916. But supposing they were not acting its agents at all, but
merely as merchants, do you think they would hesitate, or that they
would incur any risk by advancing outfits to the men its they now
do, but without the security or the quasi security which they now
possess?-In that case the men's custom would be distributed over
all the town. They would give their custom to the merchants they
were partial to, instead of being confined to the shop of the agent
who engages them, as at present.
[Page 402]
15,917. But would those who got their custom incur any serious
risk in giving them their supplies and outfits on credit?-They
would be liable to the same risk that every merchant who embarks
in trade is subject to. No man can deal with another on credit
without being liable to a risk; but at present the merchants
practically enjoy a monopoly of the seamen's supplies.
15,918. The seamen, however, could go to any other shop in town
for their supplies if they chose?-At present they could, but I
have no doubt they would offend the agent by doing so. If they
repudiated his right to secure his own account, that would put an
end to the thing, because the main inducement for the agents to act
as they do is that they have the supplying of the men with goods.
15,919. Have you anything else to say?-Nothing.
Lerwick, January 30, 1872, JOHN WALKER, recalled.
15,920. You formerly gave evidence before the Commissioners
under the Act of 1870, in Edinburgh?-I did.
15,921. Are there any points on which you wish to give further
information?-I merely wish to reaffirm all that I previously
stated. From what the people say, the only thing that seems to
require explanation, is with regard to the value of the worsted or
wool for the making of a shawl.
15,922. You refer to question 44,290: 'I know for a fact that the
worsted of a shawl which sells at about 30s. is worth from 2s. to
3s. They nominally give the worker 9s. for working it, but if they
get it in goods that will be about 4s.; and they get from 25s. to 30s.
for it?'-Yes. The question was intended to apply to half square
shawls and haps selling at from £1 to 30s., according to the
verdancy of the animal that was buying it. It takes about sixteen
hundreds to make a hap, and the worsted will be worth. from 2d.
to 21/2d. It will take from sixteen to seventeen hundreds to make a
half square fine shawl, and the worsted of it will be worth about
4d.; and these shawls are sold at from 18s. to 30s., according as
customers can be got for them.
15,923. Are haps often sold at so high a price as 30s?-No, not
haps; they are sold up to about £1. That has been my experience.
I may say that I have been in shops, when the first question asked
before a price was stated was, whether the article was for the
person's self or for a stranger; that is to say, was it to be sold to a
person in the country, or was it to go away outside, because in
these cases they have two different prices. I have likewise been in
shops when, if there were any of the knitting girls there selling
shawls or other articles, the merchant would take very good care to
state the price to his other customers in the lowest possible voice,
and at the farthest possible distance from these girls; and I have
been repeatedly told that they will occasionally put the price upon
a piece of paper, so as not to let the knitters hear it. That I say in
contradiction to the assertion which is made, that the merchants
sell the hosiery articles at the same price as that at which they
nominally buy them. Again, I want to point out that in most cases
all the worsted that the hosiery merchants in Lerwick dealt in up to
the last year was bought from the country merchants for goods,
and therefore that even that nominal value did not represent the
true value of the articles. I produce an account containing
transactions amounting to £146; it is all balanced by goods, which
were entirely worsted, up to £1, 3s. 10d. The only item of cash I
find in the account is 15s. Lately, however, they have been
obliged and are ready to buy the worsted for cash, because they
cannot do without it, and the supply of worsted is decreasing.
15,924. You are speaking of Shetland worsted?-Yes. I may
mention also that that estimate of the value of the worsted for a
shawl was intended by me to embrace the Yorkshire worsted,
or what they call the Pyrenees, although I don't suppose either
the worsted or the wool ever saw the Pyrenees: it is made in
Yorkshire.
15,925. Are you speaking, in both these cases of haps and of
shawls, of articles made of Shetland worsted?-All the haps
are made from Shetland worsted, the coarser worsted.
15,926. You said in that answer to which you have referred, 'They
nominally give the worker 9s. for working it, but if they get it in
goods that will be about 4s.:' is not that a little too strong?-I
don't think it.
15,927. That assumes that the charge for the goods is about 100
per cent. above the cost price, or rather it assumes that it is 100
per cent. above the price at which the worker of the shawl ought
to get these goods, which would not be the cost price, but the
retail price?-No, I don't mean that. I mean to say that if these
merchants were to go to the proper market, they could buy their
goods at such a rate that they would be able to sell them at 100 per
cent. profit; but I know that a great many of these merchants go to
second-hand houses to buy. Whether it is for the object of getting
long credits, or what it is, I don't know; but I know from the
parties who come here that a great many of them are not first-class
houses.
15,928. Have you any personal knowledge as to the wholesale
houses with which these merchants deal for their goods?-Do
you mean, do I know who comes down here?
15,929. Yes?-Yes, I do.
15,930. From what source is your knowledge derived?-From
their travellers, and from seeing their goods coming down.
15,931. You are acquainted with the travellers of those houses?-
Most assuredly.
15,932. And you know that they are not wholesale houses in the
strict sense of the term, but middle-men?-Exactly. I say that the
merchants here could go to much better quarters for their goods if
they were to put their business on a proper footing. Wholesale
houses in Aberdeen are not in the same position as wholesale
houses in London.
15,933. Do London houses send travellers here?-No; but if the
merchants' business was on a proper foundation they could get
introductions to these houses, and do their business at a better rate.
15,934. Is there any other point on which you wish to make an
addition or explanation upon your former evidence?-It has
been generally remarked by fishcurers, that one reason why they
could not give up the present system of dealing with their men
was because the men would not have the means of getting boats
and fittings for the fishing, whilst at the same time the principal
fish-curers assert that they do pay enormous sums of money to the
men. For instance, I have seen from the papers that it has been
stated by Messrs. Hay & Co. that in the island of Whalsay alone
they paid £1300 last year, whilst the total value of the boats and
fishing gear there cannot be over £400. Therefore it is absurd to
say that the men would not be able to supply themselves with
boats. Again, it has been stated and maintained that the Shetland
men as a race are intelligent, and in one sense they are. Indeed
their intelligence is so acute that the employers are ashamed, as
I have no doubt you have found in the evidence, to give them
accounts. They are rather afraid that their acuteness would
discover too much in them, but in addition to that they tell you it
would be impossible for the men to divide the produce of the
fishing among themselves if it was paid in cash at the station,
because it would require a man conversant with accounts; so that
it is an absurdity to say that they are an intelligent race, and yet
cannot adjust the proportions which would go to the different men
in a boat's crew if they were paid in cash.
15,935. Probably they would be sufficiently acute to adjust their
accounts if they were accustomed to do so like other people in
other parts of the world?-I say they are quite capable of doing
that. They are quite capable of looking after their own accounts if
these were [Page 403] produced to them. There is another thing I
should like to point out with regard to the agriculture of Shetland
as compared with that of other places. I am sorry I have come
away without the statistics, but if you look into them you will find
that we have a much larger number of stock in Shetland with a
rental of only £30,000, than Orkney with a rental of £60,000, from
which I deduce that it is a far greater object to the merchants and
proprietors here to continue the people as fishers upon the present
system, than to put the land upon a legitimate and proper footing.
15,936. In what way do you arrive at that inference?-The land
is under-rented for the purpose of binding the men to continue
as fishermen for their employers. A great deal of the land is in
outsets, and these outsets were originally set at the mere interest
upon the house that was built, or upon any enclosures that
were made. That was done for the purpose of procuring extra
fishermen, and the system has been continued to this day. By
looking at the valuation roll, you would find an immense
difference between the rents of merks land and the rents of outsets.
15,937. I don't suppose that any proprietor who employs his men
in fishing would deny that if he ceased to do so the rents of his
tenants must be raised?-I rather think they do deny that.
15,938. I have had admissions made to that effect in the evidence
which has been given before me?-I have heard none of the
evidence that has been taken; but I am glad to hear that they are
thinking of turning over a new leaf, and admitting even that they
are wrong.
15,939. I don't say it has been a general admission, but that
admission has been made by one proprietor at least?-I say that
it ought to be a general admission. Another thing I would mention
is, that the people with their present beliefs are unfortunately too
subservient to come forward and frankly give full evidence upon
the matter, and I would give an instance of the sub-serviency and
illiterateness that prevails among them. I received the other day
a report from two men, in which they use such language as
'resources of science and art,' and one of them was styled the
superintendent, and the other the manager, of the working
department of the largest establishment in this place for the
manufacture of blubber. One of these men could hardly sign
his own name, while the other had to sign with cross. That fact I
mention in order to show that these men are under the belief that
they are bound to do in most cases as their superiors may dictate
to them.
15,940. Has it come within your knowledge that many people
have been afraid to come forward and give evidence before this
Commission?-Yes; a great many people have told me they would
not do it.
15,941. Do you refer to fishermen?-To fishermen and to females
too. I may mention also that I have been instrumental in starting a
large company here upon the limited liability principle, the first
object of which is stated to be to afford to the people of Shetland
an opportunity of prosecuting their fishings free from the truck
system.
15,942. Is that a company for prosecuting the Faroe fishing or the
ling fishing?-It is to be for all. It is to commence this year with
the Faroe fishing.
15,943. Did you send out any vessels in 1871?-No, we did
not begin in 1871, except with a single vessel in which I was
interested, and which we sent out to see what we could do with it.
15,944. Did that vessel belong to the company?-No, not to this
company. The company has been formed in Glasgow, of
gentlemen who are desirous of putting down this iniquitous
system.
15,945. Do you propose to carry on the fishing with out any
shop?-Yes.
15,946. And to pay all in cash?-Yes.
15,947. Do you propose to pay by annual settlements?-The men
still prefer going upon the old system of payments; but in order to
provide for their outfit, as they call it, we propose to pay it in cash
the moment the vessel leaves the harbour with them on board, and
we intend to afford to their families an advance of what is fair and
reasonable to keep them while the men are away. We are quite
prepared to run all that risk against a bad fishing, and we will pay
them the balance in cash at any moment they choose after they
come home.
15,948. Are the advances you are to make to be in cash also?-
Yes; they are to be in cash, not in goods.
15,949. Do you think it will be possible for the fishing business
to be conducted, perhaps not immediately, but shortly after this,
without the fishermen requiring advances either in cash or
goods?-Certainly; and I say that if that system could be adopted
now it could be carried on, looking to the amount of money that
has been accumulated on deposit by the people in the country
generally.
15,950. Then why do you propose in your enterprise to make
advances in cash?-Just to suit the humour of the people, until
they come to see for themselves that such advances are not
necessary.
15,951. I suppose you want to begin cautiously?-We do, and
to work them into the system gradually. In fact we wish them
eventually to take shares in these vessels, and to get vessels and
boats for themselves.
15,952. But in the arrangement you propose, so far as the Faroe
fishing is concerned, the men will be sharesmen?-They are
sharesmen in the produce, but they have no shares in the vessel;
but I propose that they should eventually have an interest in the
vessel, and we are quite willing to give them an interest in any
vessel they choose. We are also desirous to get better boats for
them in the ling fishing. It has been stated likewise that the people
could not get their supplies at the stations if there was a cash
system, as there would not be shops there, because the whole
amount that is sold at the stations in the course of a year is merely
nominal; and to show that, it is mentioned that it is usually an
ordinary splitter who attends to the shop, or the fish factor. That
man is not in the shop any time during the rest of the year, and it is
said that there is only a very limited amount of goods sent there,
being intended only for the supply of the men when they go out to
sea. If that is the case, it would be no great hardship if these goods
were not there, but I say that they would be there.
15,953. Do you think the men could easily take their own supplies
with them?-Quite easily; and wherever the carcase is, there will
the eagles be gathered. If there is money to be got there, you will
be sure to find shops there too.
15,954. In what way were the men paid who went to the Faroe
fishing in your vessel last year?-They were paid by shares the
same as they had hitherto been, and this [producing it] is a copy of
their settlement. The name of the vessel is the 'Lily of the Valley.'
15,955. I see that this account of the settlement is drawn up in the
form which is ordinarily used in Shetland?-I don't know, but I
suppose it is.
15,956. It shows the amount of fish caught, and then the
deductions, and finally the division?-Yes.
15,957. I see no deduction for commission?-There is no
commision.
15,958. That is usually, but not universally, taken by the owner?-
I don't know why it should be. I think it is hardly fair if the men
are doing their duty that the owner should not do his also, and take
the fish to the best market.
15,959. You think the owner should be considered to be paid for
that by his share of the produce?-I think so. I also produce a
copy of our account for the expense of salt and curing.
15,960. Does this show the actual expenditure incurred by you in
curing the fish brought in by the vessel?-Yes.
15,961. Was it arranged with the men that they should be charged
only the actual expense incurred for salt and curing, and not an
estimate according to the usual system?-Yes.
15,962. Is it not usual in Shetland that the expense of curing is
deducted according to an estimate of 47s. 6d. and 50s., or 52s. 6d.,
as the case may be?-No; I understand it is the cost that is
charged. The agreement [Page 404] with our men was that they
were to receive one half of the proceeds of the fish caught, after
deducting the expenses of curing, salt, etc., and master's premium
10s. per ton, and mate's premium 2s. 6d. per ton, and that they
should receive 8 lbs. weight of bread per man per week, and also
9d. per score to each man for all the fish caught by him, one half to
be paid by the owners, and the other half by the crew.
15,963. What was the return to the owners upon their share of that
vessel last year?-22 per cent.
15,964. The total share payable to each man is shown in the
account you have produced?-Yes. Their half share amounted to
£188, 9s. 6d., but then they had wages in the succeeding voyage as
specified in the agreement.
15,965. Is there any other point on which you wish to make any
additional remark?-I may say that when I was south lately, I saw
letters from some of the whaling agents here, which plainly
indicated that the commission of 21/2 per cent. paid to them for the
engagement of seamen for the seal and whale fishing, would not,
in their opinion, afford sufficient remuneration to them.
15,966. Have you got these letters?-No; but I saw them, and I
was asked by the owners in the south if I could put them in the
way of getting an agent who would consider himself sufficiently
remunerated by that commission. I was first asked if I considered
21/2 per cent. paid them for their trouble. I said certainly; and I
then engaged with Mr. Scott in Lerwick to act as agent for these
vessels. Their previous agents did not consider that they would be
remunerated sufficiently unless they got a full opportunity of
trading with the men.
15,967. Is Mr. Scott to act as agent without having any opportunity
of trading with the men?-Yes. The advance will be paid in cash
at the time of the engagement, and the allotment notes will be paid
at the bank.
15,968. Did you make that arrangement in consequence of what
the shipowners in the south said to you?-Yes. That is an
experiment which Mr. Scott is about to make; but there is no
doubt about the result of it, because 21/2 per cent. is a very liberal
commission for doing little or nothing.
15,969. Are you now in the management of the chromate of iron
quarries in Unst?-Yes.
15,970. I understand the wages there are not paid in truck?-No;
they have not been since I had anything to do with the quarries.
15,971. Are you aware that that was the case formerly-Yes; it
was truck from beginning to end.
15,972. Did you find that to be the case when you undertook the
management of the quarries?-Yes; after I had commenced the
thing I was asked by the man who had previously trucked them if I
would allow the workmen to be settled with in the office, so that
they could get them into the shop immediately afterwards.
15,973. In what capacity had that person trucked them? Was
he secretary or manager for the company?-They had a sort of
anomalies there for managing the company. This one was
supposed to be paymaster, and then they had a manager. The
paymaster was a director, and he had a shop too.
15,974. Did you ascertain that the men had been paid at that shop
by lines or tickets?-There was no payment at all. Their accounts
were adjusted from time to time, the amount of goods which they
had got was taken off, and the balance was handed to them. It was
done openly and above-board; the man himself told me about it.
15,975. But accounts are always kept and settled in Shetland
without any attempt of concealment?-I think so. I never had any
difficulty in discovering it. I may add further, from my experience
as chairman of three parochial boards, that since the system of
truck and paying with lines was done away with in the parishes I
am connected with, the rates have been reduced considerably.
15,976. How do you account for that?-Because the people have
got money. It used to be considered an acknowledged fact, that for
a pauper's shilling, if they brought a shilling to the shop, they
would get 14d. worth of goods. The money was able to go much
further, because there was wholesome competition between the
different merchants to get a share of the money.
15,977. I understand Major Cameron's tenants throughout
Shetland are at liberty to fish for any fish-curer they please?-
Yes, for any one they please.
15,978. I think in your previous evidence you referred to the lease
to Spence & Co. in Unst, and expressed a sort of regret that it had
ended in a monopoly?-Yes.
15,979. There has been a good deal of evidence given before me to
the effect that a monopoly of that kind is beneficial, and that it is
wholesome, mainly in preventing small shops from springing up in
large numbers, and that it requires a large capitalist to develop the
resources of the country properly: is that so?-That is perfectly
true: but a merchant or any one who says that should recollect that
except for the capital of the poor fishermen they could not carry on
the business themselves.
15,980. Are you aware whether the fish-merchants generally are
men of large capital?-I should say that they cannot be, from this
fact, that they would readily pay the men in cash which they get,
and which in the month of August must amount to about £40,000
due to the men, if they had it.
15,981. Is that merely an inference which you draw from the
practice which prevails?-Yes.
15,982. But have you any personal knowledge on the subject?-
Yes. Perhaps it would not be fair to mention the names of the
firms, but I know several firms who have commenced within the
last few years with no capital, and who are carrying on a business
which in the south would require an enormous capital. I know it is
alleged by merchants generally that they do not consider they are
trading upon the poor man's capital.
15,983. I suppose you speak of the merchants trading upon the
poor man's capital, in this sense, that they do not pay for the fish
which is in their hands until about the time when they get their
returns?-Exactly; that they neither are merchants nor agents.
They are not merchants, because they do not pay the men for the
raw material, and they are not agents, because they do not give
them honestly their account sales.
15,984. Are you aware of the practice existing in Shetland,
that the proprietors in many cases receive their rents from the
fish-curers?-Yes. During the first year or two that I settled for
Major Cameron, I got many cheques from the fish-curers.
15,985. Was that for the whole amount of rent due by a number
of fishermen?-Yes, either that, or each man would bring his
separate cheque; but in a great many cases in Shetland the
fish-curer just pays it slump, or what is called guarantees it.
15,986. That is not an actual guarantee; it is merely an
arrangement by which the fisherman, for the convenience
of all parties, is debited in the fish-curer's book with the
amount of rent which the fish-curer pays to the landlord?-
True; but in it great many cases, as I have previously stated, I
think there is a chronic balance against the men, which balance,
I think, if looked into, would generally be found to be composed
to a great extent of advances of rent for the next year, which
practically thirls the men on to them, but which has no right to
go through their books at all.
15,987. Are you aware whether the fish-curer is induced to make
that advance of rent by the consideration that he holds his own
premises from the landlord, and might be charged a higher rent, or
lose some other advantage, if he did not do so?-Most assuredly.
There is no doubt that, if they were thrown open, the rents of the
business premises would double themselves throughout the
country.
15,988. Have you known any instance in which the landlord
favoured the merchant so far as to refuse to allow other businesses
to be begun upon his estates?-Yes.
15,989. Had that happened in the case of Major Cameron's
estates?-Not so far as I know, and no one [Page 405] has ever
asked it. In fact we have business premises lying unlet just now.
15,990. Do you know that that has happened elsewhere?-I do; in
more cases than one.
15,991. Is it not virtually the case in Unst, that no premises are
allowed there except those of Spence Co.?-I don't know about
that, because Spence & Co.'s principal premises are upon
Henderson's property.
15,992. Were you not aware of Spence & Co. removing a
merchant who had premises on the property of Major Cameron,
which was under tack to them?-No; I think that was on a
neighbouring property.
15,993. Was that the case of a house that was shifted bodily across
the road?-It was not shifted bodily. The man put up a new place
altogether.
15,994. Was that on Major Cameron's property?-No; neither in
the one case nor in the other. I think he came off the Greenfield
property, and he built a place upon the Earl of Zetland's lands.
15,995. Was there no one removed from Major Cameron's
property in the neighbourhood of Uyea Sound, by Spence &
Co.?-I don't think there was. There was a man there with a
lease of land who kicked up a row with us about a pier and other
things of kind, whose nephew, under his name was keeping a
shop, and we distinctly told him that he must turn his attention to
something else; that if he would use the house for a lodging-house
or something of that kind he could stay, but that we would not
allow him to do it under these circumstances.
15,996. Did he put up a shop elsewhere?-Yes. They built a new
place to the west of Baltasound.
15,997. What were their names?-Isbister. If I am not
misinformed, I think these parties are still carrying on the shop
at Uyea Sound, conducted by a man Donald Johnston; at least I
saw a boatload of goods coming ashore there, and on inquiry I
was told they were for Isbister's shop.
15,998. Do you think such an arrangement as you have made with
Spence & Co. is in any sense different as respects the interest of
the men from that by which a proprietor cures himself, and
employs his own tenants in the fishing?-In the way it is carried
out, I don't think there is very much difference; but had it been
carried out in the way that was intended and promised, it would
have been very different. You must bear in mind that I don't think
it is for the interests of the working people in Shetland to have
scattald, and therefore it was intended that each man should have a
farm for himself, and a lease of it, and they have a right to that
under the lease to Spence & Co. Had they stuck to that, or were
they to stick to that, they would be quite independent; but as they
persist in believing that the scattalds are for their benefit, and as
Spence & Co. have a right to these scattalds, it practically binds
them to the merchants.
15,999. I understand that Spence & Co, from their lease, have
absolute power to remove tenants if they don't comply with the
rules and regulations which, are appended to the lease?-I don't
think so, not without our sanction. I know that we don't think so.
16,000. That, if it is so, would give them an absolute power to
compel the men to fish for them, just as much as when a landlord
intimates to his tenants that they must fish for his tacksman on
pain of removal. Assuming that they have that power, is not that
the effect of it?-Assuming that they have that power, that would
be the effect of it, but I don't think they have that power. It was
never intended that they should have it, and I don't think they have
it. I hold that we alone have power to turn off the tenants, and
under the lease we only have power to bring in tenants.
16,001. The effect of the lease and the regulations appended to it,
so far as I have been able to examine it, appears to be, that if a
sub-tenant fails to comply with the rules and regulations appended
to the lease, he may be removed by the lessee?-No, we quite
deny that.
16,002. How do you reserve power under the lease to deal with
the sub-tenant who does not comply with the rules?-We exclude
assignees and sub-tenants, except as after-mentioned.
16,003. Perhaps the shortest way of dealing with that matter will
be, that I should have an opportunity of reading the lease or it copy
of it at leisure?-Certainly, but I may say decidedly that it was not
intended that Spence & Co. should have such a power, and it is not
being acted on, because we are now in process of warning four or
five tenants who will not come under the rules. It was intended
distinctly that we reserved all our present tenants, irrespective of
Spence & Co. altogether.
16,004. But are not the powers with which Spence & Co. are
invested with regard to peats and other matters, really such as
to compel the tenants to remove if they do not comply with the
rules?-No. The peats are reserved in our hands, for the purpose
of compelling them to take care of the peat-banks.
16,005. That is not Mr. Sandison's reading of the lease?-I cannot
help Mr. Sandison's reading of it but I am certain that it is the
correct reading, from the fact that there was a very considerable
correspondence carried on about Spence & Co. being allowed to
put in certain tenants during the first two or three years of their
lease. They have only right to put in new tenants within a certain
time and after that they have no right to put anybody into a vacant
farm.
16,006. You were speaking of poor-rates: do you think there has
been no reduction of poor-rates in Shetland from any other cause
than the reduction of truck?-Not in my opinion.
16,007. Have there not been better crops and better seasons
lately?-Yes, but that does not reduce the number of paupers.
The number of paupers has been increased rather than reduced.
16,008. But if there are good seasons with regard to crops and
fishings, may not a greater number of paupers be maintained by
their own friends, and fewer people fall upon the rates?-That
might be so; but if the same number of paupers are on the roll, and
if the allowances are practically the same, it must follow that the
rates should be stationary.
16,009. Your statement is that the number of paupers has not been
reduced?-It has not been reduced. It has been rather increased. I
may mention that in Unst there has been a decrease from deaths,
but not anything to account for a reduction of the rates from 8s. to
2s. 6d.
16,010. With regard to the price of shawls, when you spoke of a
shawl being worth 25s. or 30s., did that apply to the merchants
who purchase shawls for goods, or to private dealers?-I referred
to what the shawls would be sold for to private individuals in the
town.
16,011. The prices which you name for shawls are not the prices
that were paid by merchants?-No; but with regard to that I may
mention that I have heard merchants from the south say that when
they sold goods to merchants here, in a great many cases they got
goods back. There is a man named Saint in Aberdeen who deals
considerably with the merchants here, and perhaps he would be
able to give evidence as to whether he does not prefer to pay in
cash, but that to give goods is insisted upon by the merchants here.
16,012. Did you mean to say in an earlier part of your evidence
that the merchants here get supplies of goods mostly from
second-hand houses?-I mean to say that they could get them
from better houses if they chose.
16,013. Would you say that J. & R. Morley & Co.; Copestake,
Moore, & Co.; Stewart & M'Donald, Glasgow; Fletcher & Sons,
Manchester; J. & W. Campbell, Glasgow; Arthur & Co., Glasgow;
Mann, Byars, & Co. Glasgow; George Peek, Manchester, Vesey
& Sons, London; Allan & French, London, were second-class
houses?-No; but I should like to know the extent of business
which the merchants here do with them, and whether they deal
wholesale with them or not.
16,014. Would you be surprised to hear that Shetland merchants
engaged in the hosiery trade obtain the bulk of their goods from
such houses as these?-I should say that perhaps that was the
truth, but I should like to know the whole truth about the matter,
because [Page 406] these houses, large as they may be, have
certain clearances occasionally, which it may suit a people such as
those of Shetland to take. I know at least one instance of a large
quantity of that class of goods coming down in the steamer, and
being damaged by a cask of porter being burst upon them, and
a claim was made upon the Leith and Clyde Shipping Co. for
something like 50 per cent. of profit, because it was a job lot
which had been bought from big houses of that kind.
16,015. But I suppose there are job lots bought by almost every
house at times?-Yes, but that has been the system here; in fact it
has been stated by people in these big businesses, that they did get
rid of their over-season's goods in that way.
16,016. I suppose over-season's goods come to all parts of the
rural districts of Scotland?-I am not aware of that, but they may
do so.
16,017. Is there anything else you wish to say?-Nothing that I am
aware of.
Lerwick, January 30, 1872, CHARLES OLLASON, examined.
16,018. You are a member of the firm of Charles Ollason & Son,
bootmakers, Lerwick?-Yes.
16,019. Did you receive that letter [showing] from Mr.
Williamson?-Yes. [The following letter was put in:-]
'Haggersta, Jan. 20th 71.'
'Messrs. Charles Ollason & Son.
'Dear Sirs,-I am sorry to say that by some misunderstanding I
did not get the wages that I expected to get; for instead of a 3/4th I
only got a 1/2 share, and therefore instead of £18 I only got £12. I
was due Mr. Stove £4 from the year that I was at the fishing from
him, and he handed in that bill against me to Mr. Irvine, who
retained that for him, so in that way I had nothing to get at all.
Therefore I am sorry to say that I cannot pay the 15s. that I am due
you for the boots that I got in August, and I beg that you will wait
till the turn of the season, and then I hope that I will be able to pay
you, for I am signed to go in the 'Olive' as a sharesman. If you
cannot wait till then, you will be so good as to let me know. You
will make out a bill, and I will sign it and hand it in to Mr. Irvine,
and let it be marked against me, and then you will be sure of your
money then-for it is entirely out of my power to pay you any
other way just now. I beg that you will comply with my request, as
I can't do better.-Your humble Debtor,
'M. Williamson,
'Haggersta,
'Whiteness.'
16,020. Was that letter written to you by him in answer to a
demand for payment of your account?-Yes.
16,021. Were you surprised to get a letter of that kind explaining
the reasons why your account was not paid?-We were not very
much surprised, for we believed the facts to be just as he stated
them.
16,022. Did you think it a reasonable enough explanation he was
not able to pay you?-Yes; it was reasonable enough for him.
Lerwick, January 30, 1872, JOHN WALKER, recalled.
16,023. I now show you Messrs. Hay & Co.'s store ledger, kept by
William Halcrow, their storekeeper here: was Halcrow the party
referred to in the report which you mentioned in your evidence?-
If Messrs. Hay & Co. say he is their superintendent, he is the same
individual.
16,024. Is Messrs. Hay & Co.'s the largest establishment of that
kind in Lerwick?-I understand so.
16,025. And the party mentioned in the report describes himself as
superintendent of the largest establishment in this place?-Yes,
general superintendent, and the other is described as the manager
of the working department. The general superintendent is the one
who signs his name, and the other is the one who signs with a
cross, and they are the parties who speak about the resources of
science and art.
16,026. Is the book I now show you kept in a fair enough
mercantile hand?-Fair enough.
16,027. Would, you be surprised to hear that it was kept by
William Halcrow?-I would not. The reason why I mentioned
this matter at all was to show the subserviency of the people in
Shetland,-that they are accustomed to do what they are bidden,-
that they are ready to sign their names to what they really cannot
understand, if they think it is doing a favour to any one above
them.
16,028. Do you think Halcrow was incapable of understanding
such a phrase as the resources of science and art?-I think so, as it
is applied here; because I may mention that in the correspondence
which passed before, and which refers to the same parties, they
said they did not know that whales had skins.
Lerwick, January 30, 1872, ARTHUR LAURENSON, recalled.
16,029. I understand you have heard the evidence which has been
given by Mr. Walker with regard to the merchants in Lerwick, and
that you wish to make some explanation in regard to it?-I have
not heard it, but the substance of it has been reported to me since I
entered the room. I have been told that he said that the merchants
in Lerwick buy from second-class houses, and pay for their goods
by consignments of hosiery. I wish to refute that, so far as I am
concerned; and I refer to Messrs. J. & W. Campbell, Glasgow;
Stewart & M'Donald, Glasgow; Arthur & Co., Glasgow; John
Clapperton & Co., Glasgow, and Geo. Peek & Co., Manchester,
as a proof that I deal with first-class houses.
16,030. Are these the only houses with which you deal?-No; I
deal with a good many more.
16,031. Are there any houses from which you get portions of your
goods which might be characterized as second-class houses?-No.
16,032. Is it the case that you ever get job lots or over-seasons
goods?-Never, unless in the ordinary way of trade. Perhaps an
article may be shown to me by a traveller occasionally, but only
one pattern out of fifty which may be described as a job lot.
16,033. You do not get in a larger proportion of these goods than
other dealers in other country towns?-No; I never bought a job
lot altogether in my life. We never pay by consignments of
hosiery.
16,034. Is there anything further you wish to state?-At the
close of my last examination I wished to make objection to the
credibility of a witness. I was asked to state it privately, and I now
hand in paper with regard to it. [Produces paper.]
Lerwick, January 30, 1872, ROBERT SINCLAIR, recalled.
16,035. Do you wish to concur with Mr. Laurenson in the
statement which he has now made?-Yes. The only difference
is that I deal with more houses in London.
16,036. The list of houses which I read from in putting a question
to Mr. Walker was furnished by you?-Yes; but it does not include
one half of the houses that I deal with. I wish also to say that I
have now been 25 years in business, and I never to this day
exchanged 2d. worth of hosiery goods for goods in the [Page 407]
south. I do not mean to say that I have not bought hosiery goods
for goods here, but I have never exchanged them in the south for
other goods.*
16,037. Does any one present wish to give any further evidence?-
[No answer.] Then I adjourn this inquiry. I have to think the
Commissioners of Supply for the use of this room, which they
have kindly furnished to me; and I have also to return my thanks
to all parties in Shetland with whom I have met, for the courtesy
which I have received from them, and for the readiness which
they have shown in furnishing me with all information which I
required.
*Mr. Linklater also, on the same day, sent the following
letter to the Commissioner, referring to the same subject:-
LERWICK, 31st January 1872.
W. GUTHRIE, Esq.
Sir,-I am sorry that I was absent when Mr. Walker in his
evidence before you today stated, as I have been told, that the
merchants here bartered their goods in exchange for drapery
goods from second-class warehouses in the south. I beg to state
that I have been thirty-seven years in business here, and have paid
cash for all the goods ever I bought, and beg to refer you to the
following houses from whom I get my goods.-I am, sir, yours
very respectfully,