The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-19 00:00:00

England and attached it to himself; but (said the hon.
gentleman) "he shall have no more inches if I can stop
him."
Mr. CRAUFURD announced his intention to divide the
house upon the question, that the o;iginad motion be with-
drawn. (Oh, oh.)
Mr.. V. SCULLY hoped not, for many members who
might have spoken—(a laugh)—had left the house under
tho impression that the motion would be withdrawn.
The amendment to the original resolution was then
withdrawn.
On the question that the original resolution be with-
drawn,
Mr. MALINS blamed the conduct of the Government
for allowing two nights to be wasted in opposition to the
name of Mr. Walpole, when it now appeared they did
not object to that right hon. gentleman being on the coin-
mittee. If the motion had gone on, no doubt Government
would have a lowed many other nights to be wasted in the
same manner, but the country would learn from to-night's
debate that the reason why legislation was impossible on
this subject was simply that there w,:re a h.ely of men
banded together in the house for the purpose of defeating it.
Lord J. RUSSELL observed that the hen. and learned
gentleman seemed to think that, having voted against the
appointment of the committee, he (Lord J. Russell) should
have come down to the house night after night for the
purpose of inducing members opposed to the committee to
withdraw their opposition. • That was expecting rather
too much from him. He gave his opinion ageiust the ap-
pointment of the committee, and when that discussion was
over he dial not think it was his duty to attend. If the
discussion had gone on to-night he should have taken a
similar course, he should have left the house, but as to
being a party to saying that the minority should succeed
against the majority he never would, and if he had been
favourable to the appointment of the committee be would
have sat there until three or four o'clock in the morning
but it should have been carried out. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. NEWDEGATE again insisted that in the face of a
factious opposition there was no alternative but to with-
draw the motion.
Lord E. HOWARD, in opposing the committee, had
been actuated by no factious motives ; it was directed
against his religion, and he was, therefore, bound to resist
it to the last, as hon. gentlemen opposite would have ilone
had it been opposed to their faith. He repudiated the lan
gunge which had been used out of doors in reference to this
motion by some of his co-relic,eionists, but at the same time
he was glad to tell the house that the language which had
been complained of to-night was used against the consent
of the meeting to whom it was addressed.
Mr. V. SCULLY disapproved of this language, which,
however, was only confined to a few individuals, and it
was therefore too bad to take it as representing the senti-
ments of the entire catholic community. He denied that
this motion was withdrawn in consequence of a factious
opposition, and those who asserted that it was, were only
deluding the public.
After a few words from Colonel BLAIR, who saw no ad-
vantage in going to a division on the question,
The house divided, when there appeared,
For the motion
Against it l-99
The announcement of this extraordinary result was re-
ceived with loud cheers and laughter.
GAMING HOUSES BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill.
On clause 3,
Mr. KNIGHTLEY moved the omission of certain words,
so as to render it obligatory on the magistrates to imprison
parties concealing their names.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said. it Would be better
to give the magistrate the option of fine or imprisonment.
If a penalty were imposed, it would be an encouragement
to the police to detect such cases. In general, the young
men who went to those places were looked upon in the
light of victims ; and they ought not to be punished too
severely. The imposition of a tine might deter them from
visiting gaming houses again. Since the bill had been in-
troduced, out of fourteen gaming houses that were in
nightly operation in the metropolis, nine had been put
down. (Cheers.)
Mr. A. PELLATT would support the clause as it stood ;
thinking it necessary that there should be some means of
rewarding the officers engaged in these cases. He rejoiced
to know that, by means of the Government bill against
bettin*houses, every establishment of that kind had been
put down in S'uthwark.
In answer to Captain SCOBELL,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the magistrates
would have the option either of fining or imprisoning. If
the former was found insufficient to deter parties, they
might inflict imprisonment.
On the suggestion of Captain SCOBELL, the penalty was
altere I to 50/., and the period of imprisonment to one
month.
The clause as amended was agreed to, as were the re-
maining clauses; and the house resumed.
MEIICHANT SHIPPING BILL.
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. HORSFALL said he entertained some objections
to the bill, which he would point out in committee ; but
he thought the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Cardwell) had
made a mistake in transferring the powers of the various
local marine boards, appointed under the act of 1850, to
magistrates. He could bear testimony to the excellent
way in which the marine board of Liverpool had worked.
They had the advantage of the presence of the mayor, the
stipendiary magistrate, and some other officers, and no
board could be more complete. It was proposed to trans-
fer the power to two magistrates, who might know nothing
about ships—not even the difference between a bowsprit
and a mainmast. There were also deficiencies in the bill
It did not re-enact the apprenticeship system, which was
important. A return recently made showed that the num-
of apprentices in the merchant service on the Ist January,
1850, was 31,636 ; while on the ,st of January last, the
number had been reduced to 13,826. (Hear, hear.) This
was the result of the abolition in 1830, at the request, he
admitted, of the shipowners themselves, of the requirements
to take apprentices in proportion to the tonnage. How
was the supply of seamen for our navy to be kept up un-
less the fanner system were resorted to? The shipowner
had now the liberty of shipping sailors of all nations ; and
they now came forward, with perfect consistency, to
ask for the re-enactment of the apprentice clause.
A counter memorial, ho was aware, had been sent to the
right honourable gentleman, but it was only signed
by a minority of the shipowners. A far more important
omission in the bill was that no notice was taken of
the operation of 9 and 10 Vic , commonly called Lord
Campbell's Act. Doubts had arisen whether that act,
meant only to apply to railway accidents, did not extend
to shipping • and if this was intended, a clause to that
effect should have been introduced into this bill. Lord
Campbell himself said that he neven meant the act to
apply to shipowners, but it had been so applied by some
courts ; and as the matter now stood, the wealthiest ship-
owner in England might be ruined in an hour. Formerly,
his liability only extended to the • value of the ship and
freight ; ke had no wish to evade any proper responsibility,
but under the present law no prudent man would become
the owner of a ship. He himself would not undertake to
take out a cargo of passengers under a very high premium.
He hoped the right hon. gentleman would state his inten•
tion to confine the responsibility of the shipowner to the
ship and the cargo. If this were not done the result would
be that none but adventurers would engage in the pas-
senger trade,

Captain SCOBELL said it would be a great benefit to
consolidate in one act all the laws relating to merchant
shipping. At present, by the manning clauses, a British
ship might be manned entirely by foreigners. Since that
act passed we had gone to war, and the value of British
seamen was greatly enhanced. Not only our liberties, but
our wealth and importance as a nation, depended on our
keeping the supremacy of the sea; and this could only be
done by keeping up the supply of sailors, at present said to
be decrea,ing.. Of all the measures that had over passed,
the most injurious to the efficiency of the snerchant service
ansrthe navy were the repeal of the manning clauses and
the removal of the regulations as to apprentices in the mer-
chant ships. You must have in every vessel a certain pro-
portion of seamen trained to the sea, or you have uo safety
for the ship. The provision for a certain number of ap-
prentices on board every ship was therefore of the greatest
importance, and he hoped the President of the Boaid of
Trade would yet reconsider that matter. It was altogether
a mistake to suppose that the apprenticeship reguktions
and the requirements which formerly existed of manning
our merchant ships with a proportion of Bridsh seamen
had anything to do with free trade. He urged the justice
of giving a bounty to seamen who entered the royal navy,
in the same way as a bounty was allowed to recruits join-
ing the army and militia.
Mr. W. S. LINDSAY understood the hon. member for
Liverpool to say that lie would at a future stage of the
bill move that it be made compulsory on shipowners to
carry a certain number of apprentices, according to the
size of the ship ; when that proposition was brought for-
ward, he, as a shipowner, should feel it his duty to op•
pose it When the hon. gentleman said the shipowners of
Liverpool were anxious for the re-enactment of the appren-
ticeship regulation, he should have confined the observa-
tion to the members of the Liverpool Shipowners' Associa-
tion. But they were not the shipowners of Liverpool,
a very large number of whom, subsequent to the pre-
sentation of the memorial of the Liverpool Shipowners'
Association, hail memorialised the President of the Board
of Trade against the re-enactment of the compulsory
system of apprenticeship. He could not suppose that
the right hon. gentleman could have any intention of
returning to that system, or that, consistently with
the free trade opinions he professed, he could pro-
pose the re-enactment of any of those restrictions which
formerly fettered the operations of the shipping interest.
He had had some conversation with the right hon. gentle.
man the President of the Board of Trade upon the subject
of "advance notes," and had urged upon him to leave all
legislation on that subject alone. There had been many
attempts made to enable the sailor to obtain full vale, for
those notes, but they had invariably failed. He believed
the advance notes were injurious alike to the shipowner
and the sailor. They were one geeat, cause of desertion,
and they tended po induce habits of carelessness and extra-
vagance in the sailor. If the sailor, when he was paid
off, knew that unless he took care of his money he would
not be able to obtain the necessary outfit for another
voyage, he would, without doubt, save sufficient for that
purpose. He thought legislative interference was inju
rious as between the shipowner and the sailor, in the same
way that it would be considered injurious as between the
master manufacturer and the mechanic and artisan. What
he would recommend was that there should be a savings
bank and a money-order office in connection with every
shipping office, so that the sailor, on being paid off, might
send home a portion of his money to his wife and family
at once, and place another in the savings bank, suffi-
ciently to provide him with the necessaries for his
next voya e. With regard to what hail been said by
the honourable member for Liverpool, as to the spirit
of the law in reference to the limitation of the responsi-
bility of the shipowners in the case of goods and mer-
chandise, he saw no reason why that responsibility should
not also be limited in the case of passengers. (Hear.)
He thought that in a country like this every facility should
be afforded to capitalists to invest their money in ships—
(hear)—but as the law now stood, capitalists had reason to
dread such investment, because the responsibility was not
limited to the value of the ship and freight, but extended
to every penny the owner possessed ; se that the wealthiest
capitalist who hell but a small portion of a ship might at
any moment find himself a ruined man. He hoped the
right hon. gentleman would not consent to re-enact the
manning or the apprenticeship clauses—(hear, hear)—and
though the law in this respect might be left as it was he
could assure the hon. and gallant member for Bath that he
need not be afraid that British sailors would ever be su-
perseded by foreigners' in our mercantile navy. (Hear.)
For his own part, he had no dread of the competition of
foreign seamen any more than ho had of foreign ship-
owners. (Hear, hear.) But the best way tomaintain the
supremacy of the British mercantile marine, and conse-
quently of the navy, was to remove all the reeteictions
which yet remained, and to give free scope, as far as
practicable, to its energies and skill, that its resources
might be fully developed. (Hear, hear.)
Admiral WALCOT considered the re-enactment of the
apprenticeship clause essential, in order that a enffunent
body of effective and competent /MUM= msgb always kp

f found available for the maritime service of the country. ; MANNING THE NAVY BILL.
IHe always looked upon the mercantile service as the nur- 1 On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
eery for the royal nay, and was anxious, therefore, that Mr. F. FM NCH s he thought it ilue• to the house
the efficiency of the marine, both in numbers and couipe- anti to the right hou. baronet the First Lord of the Admie
teucy, should be meintained• miralty, that ho should state that he was fully borne out
Mr. DIGBY SEYMOUR considered that the decision in stating, that the reply which the right hon. baronet
the courts of law had given to Lord Campbell's act would made to his statements in the early part of the evening
operate most injuriously upon the shipping interest, un- was incorrect. In using that term he had not the slightest
less the difficulty were removed by a declaratory law. Ho intention to say anything that could be considered offen-
should be glad if the system of advance notes could be got sive, but he spoke on the authority of men who knew what
rid of altogether. He thought it was a fallacy to legislate they said, and who were as good vouchers for the truth of
for ships as a particular property, differing from all others their statements as the right hon. gentleman. The right
on account of their presumed connexion with the royal hon. baronet stated that the Great Britain was not offered
navy, and that it was equally a fallacy to mix up the inte- twice to the Government, but only once, and that the price
rests of the two services. Merchant ships ought to be left I was so exorbitant that it could not be accepted, and that
to their own regulations, and not be subject to coulee laid she was incapable of performing the voyage within the
down by the house for their internal management and time. The hon. gentleman then read a letter from the
government. These, however, were questions which would owners of the Great Britain, which was published in the
arise in committee. The principle of the bill he understood i Morning Herald, which was to the effect that when the
to be the consolidation of our mercantile marine alma but Great Britain returned from Australia they offered her to
it appeared to him that the bill was rather the re-enact- Government, but they declined to take her; and, under-
went of the shipping laws that existed rather than a cola. standing some weeks after that Government was still in
fication. At the same time, he rejoiced that the bill had j want of steamer... they put aside her engagements for Aus-
been laid upon the table; anti, as the representative of a i tralirt, and again offered her to Govern:7Jan,-, who &gala
mercantile community, tsegged to thank the right hon. declined. The next point was as to the capability of the
gentleman for it. vessel, anti he approached that point with great diffidence ;
Mr. DUNLOP also thanked the right hen. gentleman but to show he had not proceeded without data, he would
for bringing forward the bill, which he considered would read an extract from a letter which he h received from ge
be of great service to the shipping interest in consolidating gentleman whose name he did not feel himself authorised
the laws which affected them into one act of Parliament. to mention. (The hon. member then read the letter, in
In reference to the decision of the courts upon Lord Camp- which the writer stated that he considered the Great Brie
bell's act, he thought the bill should contain a clause detain the best calculated ship in the world for the convey-
claring what the law was. ance of cavalry; that she was ten feet wider than the
Mr. G. THOMPSON was understood to approve of the Himalaya, and longer, and that if the offer of the o vnera
clauses generally, though he thought some of the clauses had been accepted, three cavalry regiments could by this
were likely to obstruct rather than facilitate shipping ope- time have been landed at the seat of war.) The right hon.
rations. baronet had also stated that the vessel was not capable of
Mr. Serjeant SHEE adverting to the question of the performing the voyage with the speed which had been stated.
liability of shipowners under Lord Campbell's act, said He could only tell him that the Himalaya went to Malta in
that it would be most intolerable that they should not be eight days. He considered that he was justified in putting
subject to the same liability for the negligence of their the question, and under such circumstances what right
servants as all other persons. The bill bef,ire the house had the right hon. baronet to cavil at the mode in which
appeared to be one of great value to every class of the he put it? He (Mr. French) had stated to the house that
mercantile interests ; and he felt obliged to the right he considered the massa• re at Siuope might have been pre,. hon. gentleman for its introduction, and speaking as a vented by the English fleet, that the Russian fleet that
lawyer, who had often had occasion to consult the Went to Circassia could have been intercepted before its
acts of Parliament relating to shipping, he could say return to Sebastopol, and that was not done. He had also
that it was not easy for any one but a lawyer, stated that our fleet could have prevented the closing up
and one who had paid some attention to the subject, of the mouths of the Danube, and that was not done. He
to ascertain what the law was. By the present attempt at would now state that even when the fleets did at, they
consolidation of the various acts, a great service would be either acted not efficiently or not sufficiently. He wanted
done to all persons connected with the mercantile marine to know why the fleet retired from Odessa without perse-
and to lawyers also; and he thought this attempt at con- vering in the demand for the ships in the inner mole to be
solidation better deserved the name of a code than many delivered up. He believed that this war being iu so feeble
other productions which had been called by that name. hands the prospect for England was dark indeed, that our
He suggested that there should be an enactment that every contingent army was sent out too late, and Ihe result
ship of a certain burden should have a copy of this conso- would be that next year 200,000 French, 200,000 Ans-
lidation of the law on board. trians, and 200,030 Rue ians would be hovering about Tur-
Mr. A. HASTIE denied that shipowners were desirous key, and that while we had an army of only 40,000 men
of getting rid of any due liability which attached to them we should neither be able to protect our ally nor procure
with reference to accidents. He expressed his surprise for her good terms of peace.
that the hon. member for Liverpool should desire the ap- Sir J. GRAHAM sail he did not think the house would
prentice and manning clauses to be re-enacted, although be of opinion that, that was the fitting occasion fur him to
he (lid not wonder that Captain Scobell and Admiral Wal- enter into a discussion on the prophesied disasters of the
cot should be anxious to have them beck again. He war, nor was he prepared that evening to defend the con-
thought the bill as a whole a very good one, although there duct of the war, to reopen the question of Sinope, to dis-
were souse clauses that might be left out with advantage. cuss the bombardment of Odessa, or the expedition to the
Mr. G. M. BUTT concurred with the member for coast of Circassia. If the hon. gentleman wished that those
kenny, in thinking this bill a very good consolidation of subjects should come before the house, and would give an
the law of shipping. He urged that it was a mistake to opportunity, he should be happy to meet him, but this was
suppose that shipowners were exempt from liability for the not the opportunity nor the occasion. The hon gentleman.
negligence or incompetence of their servants either under in au adroit manner had tried to convert him into an assail-
Lord Campbell's act or the general law, nor did he think aut. Now, what he complained of in the early part of the
that they had any right to claim exemption from that re- evening was a great violation of the forms of the house,
sponsibility. putting a question with a view of expreesiug disap-
Mr. HORSFALL said a few words in explanation, proval of a course that had beet) pursued, wishing to wound
which were not very audible. without hiving the hardihood to strike. (Cheers.) That
Mr. CARDWELL said he had listened with attention to conduct appeared to him not consistent with the rule*
of the house, nor exactly with fair play,anti he appealed.
many of the suggestions which had been made by gentle-
to the house. With regard to the facts of the case, he re-
, men well qualified to give opinions, and he was much peated there was no formal order made by the Board' of
gratified at the tone and spirit in which the bill had been Admiralty There was an advertisement for tenders, and
received, because it was one which, from its magnitude, among others a tender was made on behalf of the Great
ought to receive the general concurrence of the house be- Britain, and he thought 31. a tau a month was asked—a
higher stun than they had paid, and which, on the whole,
fore it could be passel If he was to specify any opinion the Admiralty thought it prurient to reject. Since that
to which he attached most value, he should say it was time there was no offer that he was awarej of on the part
that of the hon. and learned member for Kilkenny, who of the owners of the Great Britain for hire by the month,
was the editor of Lord Tenterden's great work on the but there was an offer made to sell her for a sum which the
law of shipping, and therefore there was no one who could Admiralty thought still more exorbitant,
capability and that offer also
be a better judge of the difficulties was rejected. Then with regard to the of making any alts- vessel, before a decision was arrived at an officer of the
in Liver-
ration in the law. The bill was an endeavour to pool was ins- ructed to survey it. Now a regiment of ca-
effect, not a codification, but a consolid knon of the valry had 300 horses, and the report of the officer was that
statutes, which was a different thing from codification -a she could convey ISO horses in the lower deck, and 20 in
system which hail been adopted without any success in this the upper, and an objection was taken by the Admiralty to
country, although them heti been many instances of conso- taking horses Li the lower deck. Then with regard to
lidating into a single act all the enactments of Parliament speed, he did not wish to depreciate this vessel, which they
on the subject of a particular law. In this bill there had could neither buy nor hire, but it was his opa ion that she
been repelled 40 acts, ranging from the time of Eliztbeth, would never go from England to Constantinople in a fort-
end some 1,000 clauses, in order to make the law intelli- night. That never hat been achieved by any refine', and
gible. With regard to the language which had been used, he did nee think it would. Now they had had this expla-
he had only adopted new langreigo where it was necessary I nation, he would only say that he was always ready to an-
forswer questions put
fi
12,ie
hfsmoei
sr:
mutters
Cenßfattu ihretarrinwmt ineoa
tterneei,
tiat2lhenna:dit
we nothrheto
hs
whose
edfur
presidedremer
eteitroi
aeontrdirection
t:genehhoeef the sake of perspicuity, anti where there was a choice
between the old and new langu tge, the old had been re-
asAutgr.laetn;liarnlittltefyr,hiebindudtsol
tamed because of its having received the stamp of judicial
decision. The hon. member for Sunderland suggested that
minute regulations should be left out in the enactments, and could not sufficiently praise, anti who possessed his entire confidence. He had told the house the exact truth in this
principles only laid down. That had been done to a great
extent in the schedule, where there were only question-) of matter. (Cheers.)
Mr. FRENCH said he had to thank the tight hon. baro.
form to be dealt with ; but it was necessary specifically to
lay down in the clauses the mode of measurement to net for his answer. Had the former answer been made
in
which the hon. member had alluded, which was not a new in
the same spirit, he should have had no fault to find with it.
principle ; cud it was the more necessary, as tolls were often The bill was then read a third time and passed,
regulated not according to the amount, but the mode of NAVY PAY (&c.) BILL.
measurement. The mode which had been adopted in the This bill was read a third time and passed.
JUVENILE DELINQUENTS (SCOTLAND).
bill was that which was universally approved by all parties
competent to give an opinion. He was not alluding to the Mr. DUNLOP moved for leave to bring in a bill to ren-
d
question of space for the engine-room, but he was speaking der reformatory schools and industrial schools in Scotland
of the general mode of measurement adopted by Mr. Moor- - more available fur the benefit of juvenile delinquents and
Bom-a plan which had received the sanction of every vagrant children. The object of the hill was to enable the
authority to which it had been submitted. He would only magistrates to send juvenile delinquents to school instead.
refer generally to the different subjects contained in the of to prison.
bill. It began by taking a ship from the commencement of Agreed to.
her building, her measurement registry, and dealt with
the law of ownership ; it then went with her to sea, regulated
the relative duties of masters and seamen, and provided for
securities being taken against accident and loss of life. It
dealt with the questions of pilotage and lights, and if the
bill, to which he asked the concurrence of the house, to-
night, for regulating the law of wrecks and salvage should
be agreed to, that would be incorporated with this bill,
and all these together would make a manual of the law on
the subject of ;hipping. The course which he took last
year was to pass measures making great changes in the
law, by means of iniscellaneous bills, and this year he had
' laboured to consolidate all those bills, the details of which
had been sanctioned by the opinion of the house. Great
pains had been taken in that work of consolidation, anti he
would take the opportunity of stating that he was greatly
indebted to the judge of the Admiralty Court for his kind
ness in twice going through t -is long bill, and giving him
the benefit of his great experience. The hon. memoee for
Liverpool had objected to the transfer of the power of
dealing with masters' certificates, from the local marine
boards to the justices, but the shipowners of Liverpool did
not agree in that opinion of the hon. gentleman, for after
con idering the clause, they had stated that it was a great
relief to the marine board, but it was not only intended as
a relief to the marine boards, but the object was to have
inquiries into the question of the conduct of masters and
the dealing with their certificates, committed to a judicial
power, not to leave that duty to the merino boards, the
same body which had examined an officer previously to
the granting of his certificate The hon. member for Tyne-
mouth had suggested that facilities thereto should be given
to seamen with regard to savings banks, and he had made
that suggestion with r eference to the system of advance
notes which he wished to be abolished. It was easy to
propose to abolish advance notes, and if they contributed
to habits of improvidence in the seamen it was much to be
regretted. But it was very properly objected that you
must not treat the sailor like a child, and not permit him
to make any arrangements and contracts with hie employ-
ere that he chose, or put hint under greater restriction in
that respect than landsmen. With regard to savings
banks, he had anticipated the suggestion of the noble mem-
ber, and in a trill prepared last session by the Chancellor
of the Exchequer on the subject of savings banks, a clause
had been introduced, giving facilities Co seamen in the
case of those banks in all seaport towns; and the principle
was already in operation in London and Liverpool, where
the system of savings banks in connection with the
Sailors' Homes was working very satisfactorily. Where-
ever savings banks were established in seaport towns,
every facility would be given to seamen to make use of
them, anti to induce them to lay by those sums of
money which they received on their return from their
voyages. With regard to the liability of shipowners in
cases of accidents, the house ought to uut lerstand what the
law now was on that point, and what the proposition was,
when it was asked to create limitations of that responsibi-
lity with respect to shipowners. They were under no legal
liability under Lord Campbell's Act to which every other
subject of the Queen was not equally exposed, and there
was no legal, although there was a practical, difference in
their case. A shipowner was often charged with a large
number of lives-perhaps of 200 or 300 passengers -under
circumstances of hazard. In pint of law there was no
distinction between his liability and that of ether persons,
but there was this practical difficulty, that if au accident
occurred at sea by the negligence of the master of a ship
the owner might be liable to the whole extent of his for-
tune. It was not included in the changes that were sub-
mitted to Parliament last year, and if he had intended to
originate the change he should certainly rather have pro-
pureed it last year in the bill altering the law than include
it in a bill which professed to be a consolidation of the
law. With regard to the subject of apprentices and sea-
men, the hon. gentleman proposed to submit a clause in
committee which had received the sanction of the ship-
owners of Liverpool, making it compulsory on shipowners
to take a certain number of apprentices in proportion to
the tonnage of the ship. That subject was very touch con-
sidered last session, and the house was not of opinion that
it was desirable to return to that or any other restrictions
on shipowners. His hon. and gallant friend the member
for Bath said that he (Mr. Cardwell) would have to live a
long life, and be very active, if he did as much good as
would remedy the evil that had been committed by taking
away the restrictions from the employment of foreign sea-
men. Now, what had been the result? The hon. and
gallant gentleman said, " Only think of the circumstances
in which you are placed, and of the difficulty in manning
your fleet," and he complained that they had succeeded in
manning the fleet, not only without impressment, but with-
out a bounty, and then he said, " Only think of the ina-
po s hay of not having these restrictions in a time of war."
He (Mr. Cardwell) should have thought that that was the
best time in the world for having such restrictions, but
what was the amount of harm that had been clone? The
last return showed that there was then employed the largest
number of British seamen that haul ever been employed in
the history of this country, and the whole amount of fo-
reigners employed iu British foreign-going ships on the last
quarter was no more than 2,499. Multioly that by 4, anti it would give them something less than 10,000, while th number of British seamen was no less than 190,000. Then
a return had been quoted showing the number of appren-
tices
rn9
pfuren-
tices had fallen off What was the meaning of that
e Not that the number of boys hid fallen off. The number
of boys had increased, but the particular limitation to serve
under indentures had been taken away, anti they dill not
call themselves apprentices now. He he I now gone through
the list of the objections to the bill, he had the satisfaction
of knowing that the bill haul the concurrence of the house,
and he hoped that in the course of the present session they
would allow it to pass.
The bill was then read a second time.
MERCHANT SHIPPING ACTS REPEAL DILL.
On the order o' the Clay for the second reeding of this bill,
Capt. SCOBE LL eel the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Card-
well) had mistaken what he haul said about a prentiees.
He had a return for the same quarter, in which the num-
ber of boys was very small, and when the right hon. gentle-
man spoke of the great number of seamen, he could dissect
the returns anti mince that guma er inateriallY•
WRECK AND SALVAGE BILL.
This bill was read a secoutl time.
CUSTOMS DUTIES BILL.
This bill was passed through committee, after an ineffec-
tual attempt on the part of Mr. DUNLOP to alter the day
from which the increased duties 611944 be pivu)le.

MR. DAVID J. WILSON.
Sir J. FITZGERALD moved for a copy of the
re corr
pondence that had passed between the Irish Sectary oes-
f
the Government, and Mr. David John Wilson, formerly a
magistrate in the county Clare ; and also for copies of all
communications and reports male to tbe Irish government
by the constabulary, relative to a threatening letter found
on certain lands in the county of Clare, purporting to be
in the handwriting of Mr. Wilson.
The motion, however, was lost for want of a seconder.
The house rose at half-past 11.