Year: 1870

s S6t S be-
From the London Times, july 2.


Further correspondence has been had upon
the subject of the collision between the United
States corvette Oneida and the steamship Bonn
bay. In letter addressed by the Peninsular
to the Board of Trade, dated the 18th
of May, the directors refer to the boards
condemnation of Captain Eyres conduct
after the collision, and observe that it
appears that in the opinion of the Board of
Trade 'the sentence of six months suspension,
so far from being too severe, is too lenient
punishment for the offense which he has CON-
mitted; while Captain Eyre himself is told that
he was "guilty of a gross breach of the thirty
third section of the Merchant Shipping act of
1862" that this enactment ''smply embOdies
the dictates of humanity" and that in dis obey
ing it he has "been guilty not only of an offense
created by statute, but of disregard of the natu-
raj duties which circumstances of danger such
as that of the Oneida imposed on him."


The company say: 1T would thus appear to
have been decided by the Board of Trade that
The important qualifications embodied in the
clause of the act referred to do not tend to ex-
onerate Captoin Eyre, that the fact that he was
placed in a position of great difficulty and
doubt, which was recognized by the Court at
Kanagawa, is not admitted, but that, on the
other hand, it is assumed that he knew at the
critical timet that the Oneida was
that he Ce1l could render assistance '' without
danger to his own ship and crew., and passen-
gers, and that it was practicable to render
such assistance. From all these conclusions the
directors must respectfully but emphatically
ex Dress their entire dissent"


They State that Captain Eyre has prepared a
detailed statement in his defense, in which they
hope the Board of Trade may yet find ground
for modification of their opinions. On the
21st of May Captain Eyre addressed to the
Board of Trade statement, commenting at
some length upon the evidence given before the
Naval Court at Yokohama, objecting to the
o1, hxyf f1a rA nf do md
challenging further investigation and the fullest
inquiry into the case. He maintains that neither
he any one on board the Bombay
thought, or had reason to think that life was in
danger; he says that the Oneida did not stop,
but held on her course straight away from the
Bombay, with q strong wind and Tide, and that
by the lime he had ascertained the condition of
his own ship, the attempt to come up with the
Oneida, go as to make inquiry and offer assist
anee, would have been fruitless; aud he states
that he watched for fifteen minutes, and saw
no signal or light of any kind. The Board of
Trade reply in letter of the I'd of June, in
which they say:-"If it could have been shown,
in a case of such importance, that the evidence
had not been fully or fairly taken by the Naval
Court, or that facts subsequently brought to
light materially affected the bearing of the evil
dence taken by the court, the Board OF Trade
would no doubt have endeavored to do substan-
tial justice in the matter; and they would GER
tainly, in such a case, not have expressed an
opinion of their own without giving full con-
sideration to the facts thus brought to light.
But it appears distinctly, both from your first
memorial and from your present letter, that
this is not the case. In neither of these have
you alleged or intimated that there are any new
facts in the case, and the grounds on which
you now rely for further inquiry consist merely
of extracts from evidence which was presented
to the Court at Yokohama, and commented on
by your advisor before that court passed their
sentence This evidence was also fully con-
sidered by the Board of Trade before they came
to the conclusion expressed inItheir letter of the
25th of April. Under these circumstances the
Board of Trade see no reason either to depart
from that conclusion or to suppose that it could
be modified by any further investigation, and
they must, therefore, decline to reopen the
case"