The Sun.
London, England, 1865-05-31 00:00:00

THE CASE OF THE ALABAMA.

Mr. S. LEFEVRE said that, as some misapprehension
had arisen with respect to the reply of the noble lord at
the head of the Government in the case of the Alabama,
he wished to know whether the communications received
from the United States Government regarding the Alabama,
and vessels of the same character, were contrary to the spirit
of the despatch of Mr. Adame:to our Government in Octo-
ber, 1863, in which it was stated that, in order to preserve
amity as well as friendship between the two Governments,
it was desirable to postpone the question to a future time.
lie also wished to ask the noble lord whether the commu-
nications that had been referred to were received before or
since the commencement of the presidency of President
Johnson.

Lord PALMERSTON—I can only state that communi-
cations have been going on between the two Governments
for some time past with regard to captures by the Alabama
and vessels of the same kind. The hon. gentleman wishes
to know whether in a recent depatch the terms that were
made in a former one were repeated. The tenor of the com-
munication is of the same kind, and relates to the same
matters as those before, and of which a certain portion has
been laid before Parliament on the table of this house. The
hon. gentleman wants to know whether the communication
was made since the accession of President Johnson. It was
made here since that time ; but whether the instructions
on which it was made were given by President Lincoln or
President Johnson I cannot say.
Lord R. CECIL asked what period the portion of the cor-
respondence that had not been laid before Parliament re-
ferred to.
Lord PALMERSTON—I am not able off-hand to
answer the question of the noble lord.
Mr. FORSTER wished the Under SeCretary for Foreign
Affairs, or some other members of the Government, to give
a more explicit answer to this question. An impression
had arisen, he knew not on what foundation, that since the
accession of President Johnson claims had been made with
regard to the Alabama which had not been made before.
He believed there was no foundation for that impression,
and if that were so, he hoped his hon. friend would state
that distinctly.
Mr. LAYARD—The case is very simple. The general
demand was that made last or the previous session. Other
cases have arisen of vessels captured by the Alabama, or
ships of that kind ; and Mr. Adams in putting those cases
before us has done so in almost the same terms, and cer-
tainly in the same meaning, as those that related to the
Alabama. The demands made before the death of Presi-
dent Lincoln have been renewed since, of tho same tenor
and nearly in the same terms. Of course we cannot say
there has been a fresh demand, nor can wo say there has
not been any demand.
The motion for the adjournment was then agreed to.
THE BANKRUPTCY LAWS.

Mr. MOFFATT rose to call attention to the report of
the select committee on the Bankruptcy Act of 1861, and
the existing state of the laws with regard to debtor and
creditor, and to move that in the opinion of this house the
report of the select committee on the Bankruptcy Act of
1861 deserves the prompt and serious consideration of her
Majesty's Government. He complained of the unsatisfac-
tory condition of the present workitig of the laws affect-
ing debtor and creditor, and pointed out that the conse-
quence of the prevailing system was that the court was
avoided, and that, while creditors would not act as a body,
each made the best terms ho could for himself. The bank-
ruptcies, which a few years ago were £5,000,000 yearly,
now reached that amount occasionally in one week. Ile
trusted, therefore, that the Government would give early
and earnest attention to the subject.
Mr. AYRTON seconded the motion. It was impossible
to do justice to the subject at that time, but he felt sure
the Government would take it into consideration with a
view to future legislation, in the direction, he trusted, of
consolidation of the law. He should conclude by second-
ing the motion of his hon. friend, and he hoped the At-
torney-General would give them some distinct assurance
on the subject.

Mr. BASS said he believed it would be perfectly easy for
the Attorney-General to prepare a bill for amending the
law of bankruptcy in the present session, not with the view
to passing it this session, but in order that the country
might have an opportunity of considering its provisions
during the recess.

Mr. BEECROFT said it was generally admitted that the
bankruptcy law was in au unsatisfactory state. They had
all been disappointed when tho Consolidated Bill bad been
abandoned, and they had no choice then but to take the
patchwork bill which was substituted for it. That measure
was necessarily so complicated that he learned from those
who were engaged in administering it that some parts were
difficult of interpretation, and the result was great dissatis-
faction. The Leeds Chamber of Commerce were against
any change in the law which would allow the winding-up
of insolvents' estates to be in the hands of any court or
official body whatever ; and they were in favour of leaving
such winding-up to the creditors, as was the case in Scot-
land.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he had no difficulty
in saying, what ho had said before in that house, that her
Majesty's Government recognised the duty of taking into
their serious consideration the report lately made by the
committee appointed to inquire into the Bankruptcy Act of
1861. He was glad to hear so many members of the house
express their concurrence in a great portion of tho recom-
mendations of the committee; and that it was no longer
desirable to patch up the system which would not answer,
but that they must attempt to revise the entire law in its
principles and details, and place it on a well-considered
footing, so as to lead to a reasonable hope that they un-
derstood what they were going upon. The committee
recommended substantially what the hon. member for
Leeds (Mr. Boecroft) contended for, that the action of
the court should be removed from the mere business of
the administration of the estate; and they recommended
that imprisonment for debt should be entirely abolished,
and, as a necessary sequel to it, that no discharge to an
insolvent debtor should operate at once, except upon pay-
ment of a dividend of a certain amount. These were
important alterations ; and he mentioned the recommen-
dations not for the purpose
.2f discussion now, but in order
that public attention should bo directed to them. They
must proceed upon these two main grounds—first, they
must endeavour to consolidate the whole law ; and
secondly, they must have the support of the public and the
mercantile classes as to the important principles which
they proposed to introduce for the first time into the sys-
tem of bankruptcy. It was essential that they should be
in possession of the views of the mercantile community
with regard to those principal points, for without the ap-
proval of the mercantile public it would be vain to attempt
to carry a bankruptcy bill through that house. He trusted
that before the house met again in another Parliament the
attention of the public would bo directed to these matters.
(Hear, hear.)

Mr. GOSCHEN said he was sure the public would re-
ceive with great satisfaction the statement of the Attorney-
General; and that the subject introduced by his hon.
friend the member for Honiton had been transferred to her
Majesty's Government. He had no doubt the challenge of
the Attorney-General would be responded to by the mer-
cantile community. Thero was no dissentient voice, so
far as ho knew, that the present system should be entirely
recast ; and he was sure the trading community would be
glad to look for a measure which would introduce the
sweeping changes recommended, and put an end to the
present system, which Iv as a disgrace to the country. Ile
trusted it would be a measure that would do credit to the
reputation of the Attorney-General. (Hear, hear.)
The motion was agreed to.