101
In other words, the impact of the canal going out of the insur-
ance business as one might put it would fall on shipowners who
happens to sustain heavy casualties in the canal. I think it would
fall on them unfairly. I think it is a matter of principle; he who is
negligent should pay for his negligence.
Mr. HUBBARD. Mr. Beale, let's hear from you.
STATEMENT OF ALMER W. BEALE II, ESQ., TOOLE, TAYLOR,
MOSELEY & JOYNER, REPRESENTING THE MARITIME LAW AS-
SOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES
Mr. BEALE. Initially, I would like to thank the subcommittee for
this opportunity to appear and make known the sentiments of the
Maritime Law Association of the United States on the need for an
amendment to the Panama Canal Act of 1979 addressing vessel ac-
cident claims. My full-time devotion is the practice of admiralty
law in Jacksonville, Fla., as a partner in the firm of Toole, Taylor,
Moseley & Joyner. I also serve as a member of the Committee on
Maritime Legislation of the Maritime Law Association of the
United States. Particularly, I have the pleasure of being the chair-
man of the subcommittee therein appointed to study the need for a
change in procedure in handling vessel accident claims involving
the Panama Canal Commission.
The Maritime Law Association of the United States is a national
bar association founded in 1899. The association has a nationwide
membership of more than 3,000 practicing admiralty attorneys,
Federal judges, professors of admiralty law and others interested in
the development and improvement of maritime law. The associ-
ation's attorney members represent the full range of maritime in-
terest: Shipowners, cargo owners, seamen, passengers, stevedores,
shipbuilders and repairers, insurance underwriters, the U.S. Gov-
ernment and a number of State and local governments.
Furthermore, because the association is a constituent member of
the Comite Maritime International, which is the international or-
ganization of national maritime law associations, it has a direct in-
terest in the need for certainty in international shipping and com-
merce.
With that preface, may I say that the president of our associ-
ation has designated me to have the honor of expressing to you our
support for a vessel accident claims amendment to the 1979
Panama Canal Act. The general membership of the Maritime Law
Association, at its fall meeting on November 5, 1982, unanimously
adopted the following resolution:
Resolved That the Maritime Law Association of the United States supports the
enactment of Legislation (1) to vest the Panama Canal Commission with authority
to compromise all claims against it arising from casualties occurring outside the
locks of the Panama Canal; (2) to grant jurisdiction to a district court of the United
States to hear and determine such claims; and (3) to restore the liability of the Com-
mission for detention of vessels by the Commission during the time necessary for
investigation of marine accidents for which the Commission is liable; and the Presi-
dent of this association is authorized to designate a representative of the association
to make this resolution known to and facilitate its implementation by the appropri-
ate committees of the Congress.
Today there has been much discussion about certain limitations
under the 1979 act. No one today has addressed the actual reason
12-978 0 7