the travaux préparatoires hague rules hague-visby rules - Comite ...

PART II - HAGUE RULES 337Article 3 (7) - Received for shipment bill of ladingperfectly willing to issue “received for shipment” bills of lading if the mercantile communityrequires them”. Therefore, perhaps there is no need to summon the shipownersto the conference of which I am speaking. But you, Gentlemen, whose servants weare as bankers, must get together, and you must agree all round, consignors and consignees,that, in the particular cases in which you desire them, these “received for shipment”bills of lading are documents which will satisfy the terms of your contract, andyou must then instruct the bankers accordingly. If and when that is done, I think thatthe bankers will fall into line; but I am speaking, as I told you, under circumstances ofgreat difficulty, because I come here with a mandate as it were to some extent contraryto that to which I am speaking. As reasoning men, as I said before, we have to take thearguments which have been addressed to us into account; we have to give effect tothem; and we have to report to our principals that in our judgment the position hassomewhat changed since we have been here.I think that covers pretty well the ground which I wanted to put before you. As faras I know at present, it is the Eastern banks mainly who have, as I gather suddenly - Idid not know that before - stopped the use of these “received for shipment” bills oflading.Lord Phillimore: Surely Mr. Paine is making a mistake. “received for shipment”bills of lading are inferior, but they are honest documents, The complaint made on thisparticular clause is that [133] shipowners have been made to give “shipped” bills oflading, and this clause is designed to prevent that. The whole of Mr. Paine’s argumenthere strikes me as being in support of it.Mr. W. W. Paine: I am not controverting the amendment; I am simply putting mydifficulties before the meeting.Lord Phillimore: I do not understand that it was the Eastern banks who createdthese “received for shipment” bills of lading. They have been created a long time.Their use may have been developed or not by the Eastern banks, but the complaint ofthe Eastern banks was that they were getting “shipped” bills of lading when they oughtonly to get “received” bills.Mr. W. W. Paine: I am afraid. I did not make myself quite clear. Mr. Hobhouse toldme this morning - perhaps it was in an informal conference after the meeting had adjourned- that there had been a sudden order issued by the Eastern banks to theiragents not to accept “received for shipment” bills of lading.Lord Phillimore: Yes.Mr. W. W. Paine: And that, in consequence of that order the consignors had beenforced to get some sort of document which they could negotiate, and had consequentlybrought pressure upon the shipowners to issue “shipped” bills of ladingwhen they had no business to do so. That was the line of my argument. I do not thinkI could have made myself quite clear. But I do not think, so far as my experience goes,that that has extended to other banks. It is also true, as Sir James Hope Simpson willtell you presently about a trade which he knows much more about than I do, that the“received for shipment” bills of lading have been long since established in certainAmerican trades; I think I am right in saying, the cotton trade, and the packing trade;and they are established under conditions which do get rid of some of the difficulties,if not all of them, that I have mentioned to this meeting. It is expressly stipulated inthose “received for shipment” bills of lading that the shipment shall be made withina specified time; and it is also stipulated, I understand, that the date of the “Receivedfor shipment” bill of lading is accepted as the date of the shipment of the goods, andso it goes over the difficulty to which I have referred created by that old-establishedauthority of Bowes v. Shand (1877), L. R. 2 A. C.455. [134] Now, Gentlemen, I havetaken you fully into the confidence of the bankers; I have shown you the difficulties