S.S Kingsley & Defence of the Realm Act, 1914 - Part 2
         1.      
For that being the owners of the S.S. Kingsley
they unlawfully and indirectly receive certain frights in excess of the maximum
rates of fright for carriage of coal to a French port, Trouville, on May 1st,
1918;
         2.       Directly receiving etc;
         3.      
Directly receiving, etc, for carriage of coal to
the port of Caen;
         4.      
For indirectly receiving, etc, for carriage of
coal to the same port;
        5.      
For indirectly receiving, etc, for coal to the
port of Trouville, on September 6th;
        6.      
Inf for the same port and same date same port on
the 6th September;
        7.      
For indirectly receiving for the port of Caen on
September 6th;
        8.      
For directly receiving for the same port and
same date;
        9.      
That defendants did agree to receive certain freights
in excess of maximum rates for carrying coal to Honfleur on July 30th;
       10.  
Relating to the port of Trouville on the 15th
of August
       11.  
Relating to the port of Caen on September 1st;
        12.  
Referred to receiving directly freight, etc to a
French port, Honfluer, on May 8th 
|  | 
| The Cambria Daily Leader, 25th November 1918 | 
The defendants’ offer, they were prepared to refund the
£13,192 excess profile, made during the D.O.R.A. legislation and even before
the August 1914 date, they were also prepared to pay £1,200 costs.
By the end of the case, the owners, were fined and ordered
to pay £3,500.
|  | 
| The South Wales Weekly Post 23rd November 1918 | 
It can be seen that the Government, were taking a hard stand on the current situation

 
Comments
Post a Comment