He thought they had acted most wisely in leaving the questions of marine insurance and discipline for future consideration, because had they attempted to deal with such large subjects by the present measure they would have greatly complicated the matter and delayed the passing of the Bill. The provisions of the measure, if properly carried out, would undoubtedly do much to improve the seaworthiness of our ships; but, at the same time, he must state that he had received Petitions for presentation to that House from many of the leading steamship owners-very respectable men, possessing over 800,000 tons of shipping-in which they objected very strongly to the terms of the 4th clause, which made the sending unseaworthy ships to sea a misdemeanour. They objected that the clause introduced a novel and entirely objectionable principle into our laws, inasmuch as that by its terms a man might be held criminally responsible, notwithstanding he had been guilty of no personal negligence. He thought those gentlemen had fair ground for their complaint, because he had always understood it to be a grand principle of law that it was for the accuser to prove the guilt of the party charged with an offence, and not that the accused should be called upon to establish his innocence; and the Petitioners said that such exceptional legis

was liable to a penalty of £100. How was a detention abroad to be followed by the same consequences that would arise at home? He did not see how the enactments could be made applicable in foreign ports. He also desired to point out that there were many vessels which sailed as British ships employed in foreign commerce which never touched at a British port at all, and which were chiefly manned by foreign seamen; and he failed to understand how the provisions of the Act were to be put into force with regard to vessels of that character. In his opinion the noble Duke had in no way exaggerated the importance of the questions which came either within or without the Bill; and while he by no means complained of the Government for not having found it possible to deal with the questions which were without the measure, and which were almost if not quite as vital to the safety of our ships as those which were within it, he was glad to hear that the Government had those questions, especially those that related to the character and the discipline of the crews, the system of marine insurance and of advance notes, under their consideration. He need not detain their Lordships longer than to express his great hope that the life-saving clauses of this Bill would be zealously administered by the officials of the Board of Trade, and that the Department would be sufficiently supplied with officers com-lation as to shipowners could only be petent to discharge the duties cast upon them, which, if properly performed, would do much to diminish the cases of unseaworthiness and the loss of life which had sometimes thrown disgrace upon the general high character of the British Mercantile Marine.

LORD HAMPTON expressed his great satisfaction that the Government had introduced this Bill; and he earnestly hoped it would become law without delay. He agreed, however, that the clauses regarding deck loads would require very careful consideration. The clauses referring to deck load and load line were of great importance; but he thought that these also would in Committee require careful consideration. As they now stood he was afraid they would be of hardly any value.

THE DUKE OF SOMERSET congratulated the Government upon having introduced this measure, and on having been able to bring it up to that House.

Lord Carlingford

justified by some very extreme necessity.
It was admitted that the great body of
shipowners were upright and just dealing
men, who by their enterprize and intel-
ligence had added much to the prosperity
of the country. He trusted that when
the Bill got into Committee it would be
considerably modified in this respect,
because as it now stood it certainly ap-
peared to be very unfair. The provision
relating to foreign ships, he thought,
should have formed the subject of
Treaties, or at least should not have been
introduced into this measure without
previous arrangements with foreign
States. With regard to Canada, which
had raised a strong objection to the
application of the Bill to them, it
was well known that the inhabitants
of the Dominion possessed an
mous amount of shipping, and it was,
therefore, of very great consequence
that nothing should be done by the
Imperial Parliament that could interfere

enor

unduly with the interests of Canadian | tion that had been raised would affect shipowners. He did not deny the power the whole Dominion of Canada, with its of Parliament to legislate as it pleased 4,000,000 of population, and it was most on the subject, but he strongly depre- difficult to bring to one's mind how large. cated the adoption of any course which a stake the Dominion had in this matter. could have the effect of compelling Ca- His noble Friend opposite who preceded nadian shipowners to transfer themselves him in the Colonial Office (the Earl of and their capital to the United States of Kimberley) would remember perfectly America. He could not help fearing well what the condition of Canada was that the clause in the Bill which dealt in 1867 as compared with the state of with this branch of the subject was things that existed now. Canada had drawn not so much with a view to save since that time grown largely in wealth life as to gratify the jealousy of English and power, and in everything that created shipowners in reference to the shipping national prosperity. It was now one of business carried on from Canadian ports. the largest shipowning countries in the The clause, which implied the application world. It had about 1,200,000 tons of of the Bill to Canadian shipping other shipping, worth from £7,000,000 to than that in inland waters, had been in- £8,000,000; and there were also 1,000 troduced somewhat hastily in the other shipmasters, 2,000 officers and not less House, and he hoped it would be care- than 20,000 seamen. These figures were fully considered in Committee. His only also year by year steadily growing. desire was that the Bill should receive Canada was a colony of whose comfull and fair consideration in order to its mercial marine this country might be being passed during the present Session. justly proud. He was also satisfied that, He should not, therefore, take up the whether they looked to public men or to time of the House on several points of private individuals, the Canadians were detail which he thought deserved consi- equally proud of their connection with deration. One of these points was the this country. He had watched with granting of advance notes-a system great satisfaction the course that had which he could not but regard as in- been taken in Canada with regard to jurious and mischievous alike to ship- this particular question. It had been owners and sailors; but, under all the his duty to read every word of the circumstances, he thought it best to defer debates which had taken place in the bringing the question before Parliament Canadian House of Commons, and he until some future time when the whole could bear testimony not only to the subject of discipline in the Navy might ability, but also to the extremely good have to be discussed. and loyal feeling which had been displayed. They were above all loyal. Though they felt that their interests had been injuriously affected by certain parts of this measure, there never had been the slightest doubt that the English Parliament and Government would accept every reasonable objection, and deal with the matter fairly and reasonably. The conduct of the Canadian Government also had been loyal in the highest degree; and when questions had been raised which it would have been undesirable to discuss they, with temperance and forbearance, put them aside for the time and dealt with Her Majesty's Government upon the best footing. He would not say that there were not difficulties connected with the question, but he was satisfied that with patience and forbearance on both sides, all those difficulties were susceptible of solution. Some misapprehension was, he thought, entertained as to the scope

THE EARL OF CARNARVON said, that nothing could be fairer than the way in which the Bill had been commented upon, and nothing could be more satisfactory than the general measure of approval with which it had been received by the noble Lords who had preceded him in debate. Several of the questions which had been raised by the noble Duke (the Duke of Somerset) would be better dealt with by the noble Lord upon the Woolsack than by himself; but he would draw attention to that very large Colonial question which had been touched upon by the noble Lord opposite and by the noble Duke. The noble Lord was perfectly right when he said that this Bill affected not only British ships, but those of Canada also; but whilst there were serious considerations in reference to humanity, there were also considerations almost as important on the other hand. The ques

of the Bill. Allusion had been made to | well in the interests of humanity, and the 4th clause, which imposed the many ships had been built with a view penalty attending the crime of mis- to the adoption and carrying out of the demeanour on the shipowner for sending provision in question. It was a conan unseaworthy ship to sea. But the sideration of those facts which induced answer was that that was the existing Her Majesty's Government to adopt the law; such a penalty was imposed at this Canadian law; but unfortunately that moment under the legislation of last decision was reversed elsewhere without, year. By the Act of last year the Legis- as he believed, a due consideration of lature marked its sense of the gravity of the true bearings of the Canadian law, the offence of the shipowner who sent the results which that law had attained, his ship to sea in an unseaworthy con- the real interests at stake, or the true dition; but it ought to be borne in mind interests of Canada. It would, he bethat the Bill provided this safeguard-lieved, be, under the circumstances, namely, that there could be no prosecution under it except with the consent of the Board of Trade. The noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Somerset) had pointed out the inconvenience to which the Canadian shipowners would be put in having to bring witnesses to this country, while the English shipowner who thought himself aggrieved could have his case brought before Parliament. Prima facie there was much to be said for the Canadian shipowner; but, in the first place, the Canadian shipowners who were likely to fall under the penal provisions of the Bill were very few in number. From all he could ascertain of the Canadian Commercial Marine, he could not doubt that it was so well found and the ships were so seaworthy that it was extremely improbable any Canadian shipowner would come under the clause referred to; and even if they did, of this he was certain -that the Act would be administered with that amount of caution and, so to say, with that delicacy of touch which was absolutely necessary in the administration of such a law. He was, however, far from saying that at a later stage there might not be further securities introduced without at all affecting the principle of the Bill, and which would serve to remove the apprehensions it appeared Canadian shipowners now entertained, and show them that their interests were practically safe in dealing with this matter. Allusion had been made by the noble Lord who spoke earlier in the debate (Lord Carlingford) to the subject of deck loading. Now the Canadian law on the subject he (the Earl of Carnarvon) believed to be a satisfactory law-namely, that at a certain season no ship should go to sea with a deck load exceeding 3 feet of light timber. That rule had worked The Earl of Carnarvon

within the province of their Lordships' House to reconsider that point, and to see how far that particular matter might be more satisfactorily dealt with. Not only was the clause open to objection as setting aside the Canadian law, but as opening a way to all sorts of evasions, and affording no securities for the protection of life at sea. Another point had been alluded to-namely, the inequality which, under Clause 25, was supposed to subsist as between foreign and British ships. The inequality was said to be this-that while the foreign ship might be detained in port for improper loading the British ships might be detained not only for overloading, but for unsoundness. He did not deny that there was a seeming inequality on that point, and he was not unacquainted with the opinions of the Colonies on the subject, or of that of English shipowners. It was just such a matter as might arise in the construction of such a Bill, pregnant as it was with difficulties which it was hard to avoid. They must trust to the caution and delicacy with which the Act would be administered; and he fully concurred in what the noble Duke the President of the Council had said as to the ability and prudence of the permanent officials of the Board of Trade. The chief difficulty which arose was as to the constitutional question which had been raised as to how far it was possible to draw a distinction in this matter between England and her colonial possessions. He agreed with what had been said that it was undesirable that the discussion which had recently taken place in the newspapers on that subject should be resuscitated in that House. The question was of such a grave and delicate nature that it ought to be discussed-if it was at all necessary to discuss it he was

going to say-on paper, so that no question might arise even as to a chance expression. He believed the shipowners of Canada knew they received advantages from the connection of the Dominion with this country, and would be as loath-as he would be-to surrender those advantages. The question involved was a great and fundamental one-a question which was inseparable from the maintenance of so great an Empire, but approached temperately and in a proper spirit, he believed it was capable of a satisfactory solution.

"Every person who sends or attempts to send, or is party to sending or attempting to send, that the life of any person is likely to be a British ship to sea in such unseaworthy state thereby endangered, and the managing owner of any British ship so sent to sea from any port in the United Kingdom, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor unless he proves that he used all in a seaworthy state, or that her going to sea in reasonable means to ensure her being sent to sea such unseaworthy state was under the circumstances reasonable and justifiable." By that clause nothing was presumed against the person accused. It would have to be proved by the prosecution that the owner or managing owner sent the ship to sea in an unseaworthy state, and there was no attempt to raise a presumption against either of them. This would give the person accused an opportunity of delivering himself from the consequences of the offence of which he was supposed to be guilty. He might prove either that he used all reasonable means to ensure the ship being sent to

VISCOUNT CARDWELL said, he should be sorry if, in the discussion of the Bill, anything should have been said tending to raise a controversy on such a subject; he supposed there could be no doubt that there was not to be one law for British and another for Canadian shipping, and that there was for the Queen's subjects only one flag all over the world. The Bill raised many questions of ad-sea in a seaworthy state, or that her ministration, of a complicated and difficult character, which could only be considered in Committee, but he was sure their Lordships would examine the clauses with a desire to arrive at a common understanding.

LORD SELBORNE would be glad to hear from the noble Earl the Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether the clauses relating to foreign shipping had been brought to the particular notice of the Government of foreign countries, and whether there was any reason to believe that those provisions would not be objected to by those Governments?

going to sea in such unseaworthy state
was reasonable and justifiable; and he
was allowed to give evidence in his own
exculpation. If there had been no direct
precedent for legislation of this kind it
would still be justifiable; but the fact
was that for many years-if not for 100
years past-legislation of that descrip-
tion had been adopted, and certain
criminal statutes might be quoted in
proof; as, for example, those relating to
the possession of stolen property, which
raised a presumption against a person
from facts which were consistent either
with guilt or innocence.
The fact was,
however, that this clause had been the
law of the land for the last five years.
The noble Duke had also referred to the
manner in which the Bill proposed to treat
foreign ships in this country, and he stated
that this was not a provision intended
to save life. He differed from the noble
Duke, because the provision was intro-

THE EARL OF DERBY said, he had received within the last few days one communication from the Government of Sweden and Norway-in reference to this subject, asking that consideration might be given to it. There had not yet been time to reply to this communication, but no doubt their Lordships would be able to consider the subject induced with that direct object. Was it Committee.

possible, however, to introduce such a THE LORD CHANCELLOR thought provision as to British ships without a that the noble Duke (the Duke of similar provision as to foreign ships, and Somerset) had spoken under a miscon- without putting them on the same footception as to one clause of the Bill. He ing? The clause as to deck loads was spoke of the "criminal" clause of the introduced. into the Bill in the House of Bill, and described it as contrary to the Commons with the consent of all sides usual course in this country, because it of the House. As a matter of consticharged a person with the guilt of an tutional law and practice he saw no diffioffence and left it to him to prove his in-culty in that clause. The Legislature nocence. That, however, was not the effect of the clause. Clause 4 enacted that

had a right to say that ships which came to this country with particular cargoes

The House met at Two of the clock.
MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT-THE

"PALMERSTON."-QUESTION.

SIR WILLIAM BAGGE asked the

President of the Board of Trade, Whether he has received the Report of the Dover Harbour Commissioners with re

should be loaded in a particular way; and the Bill pointed out the person who should be responsible for the loading. The noble Duke objected to the clause STRATHCLYDE COLLISION-THE TUG that it did not merely refer to the arrival of a ship in this country, but to the loading, and therefore to something done, not within, but out of the jurisdiction of this country. He did not underrate the gravity of the objection; but, if the Legislature ought to prevent the practice, there was no difficulty in retaining a jurisdiction over the ship when it arrived in this country, after the date which rendered it liable to the penalty provided by the Act, unless it was proved that, according to the date when it left the port of departure, it might reasonably have been expected to arrive in this country before the day in question. It was, however, worthy of consideration in Committee whether this or some alternative plan should be adopted.

spect to the conduct of the Captain of lamentable collision off Dover; and, the tug "Palmerston,' on the late whether he has any objection to lay it

upon

the Table?

in

SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY, reply, said, that an inquiry had been held on the 16th instant by Mr. Rothery, assisted by Captains Harris and White, Trade. The Dover Harbour Commissioners, by whom the inquiry had been directed would, no doubt, send him the Report, and he would then consider what portion of it it would be desirable to lay on the Table.

as nautical assessors from the Board of

RAILWAY COMPANIES-DISMISSAL OF

SERVANTS.-QUESTION.

MR. MACDONALD asked the President of the Board of Trade, If his attention has been directed to a paragraph in the "Hour" newspaper, dated 19th instant, which is headed "The Board of Trade and Railway Accidents," in which paragraph it is stated that a porter named George Shoebridge had been. dismissed the service of the Company without a character, immediately after the termination of the inquiry by Colonel Hutchinson; if it be true, as alleged, that Shoebridge was dismissed because he asked the Secretary of the Society he is connected with to be present at inquiry; whether he, the President of the Board of Trade, will take any steps to see that men are protected from arbitrary treatment on behalf of Railway Companies in such circumstances; and, if it be true that a Correspondence has taken place as stated with him on the subject, if he will lay the same upon the Table of the House?