most important parts of the Bill, and he hoped the Motion would not be pressed. This system of substituting the regularity and responsibility of a public officer for the present irregular manner of performing the duties, was a decided advantage to the shipowners themselves. To illustrate this, he would state a fact relating to the establishing of shipping offices in Canada. The last arrival from Quebec brought a document in the shape of a memoral of merchants and shipowners there, and in which it was stated that after full experience of the Act for the regulation of the shipping of seamen, they had become convinced of its beneficial operation, and they requested the Legislature not to accede to the request of parties locally interested for the they were merchants of Quebec, and were interested in the preservation of a law which protected the shipping interest. So the hon. Gentleman would see that these petitioners did not consider the shipping offices and public functionaries as a vexatious interference. They further said, that the Act for regulating the shipment of seamen had done great service by putting down the combination of "crimps," preventing desertion, and taking care of the welfare of the seamen, and they petitioned the Legislature not to repeal that law. He therefore hoped the Committee would not sanction the Motion. must institute very large establishments to do the work on the Bill, and these arrangements must cause positive obstruction to the shipowner's business. He would now take occasion again to put the question to his right hon. Friend which he had on several occasions already put to him, but to which he had never yet received anything like a satisfactory answer, namely, whether his right hon. Friend was in possession of any information showing that it was an extensive practice of the shipowners of the united kingdom to deceive the seamen in regard to the signing of their articles of agreement at the commencement of a voyage, or to defraud them of their wages at the termination of it? Unless he could show that, he (Mr. Anderson) contended there was no justification whatever for sub-repeal of that Act. They stated that jecting the shipowners to the surveillance of shipping masters. He felt certain that, although a few isolated cases might possibly be found, no extensive practice of the kind could be shown. As to the shipping masters being a protection against the crimps, nothing could be more fallacious, as he had already endeavoured to show. In this opinion he was supported by the opinion of some of the most extensive shipowners of the kingdom. His right hon. Friend, instead of giving a plain answer to this plain question, was in the habit of quoting the opinions of two, no doubt, highly respectable gentlemen as being favourable to this shipping-master establishment, namely, Mr. Richard Green, of London, and Mr. Allan Gilmour, of Glasgow. Now, although it was, no doubt, but natural that his right hon. Friend, like other men, should occasionally" think his own geese swans," he (Mr. Anderson) could name gentlemen, such as Mr. Money Wigram, Mr. Dunbar, &c., whose opinions would carry as much weight among all who were practically acquainted with shipowning, as that of Messrs. Green and Gilmour, without any disrespect to them; and who would decidedly be opposed to the establishment of shipping masters as being useless for any good purpose, and calculated to prove a serious obstruction and embarrassment to the shipping interest. He strongly deprecated the appointment of a public officer to interfere in every petty detail relating to the shipping and crews, and he certainly should press his Amendment. MR. MOFFATT seconded the Amend ment. MR. LABOUCHERE said, the alteration of the hon. Member struck at the MR. CLAY contended that the case of Quebec afforded no analogy with that of England. There might be a necessity in Quebec for such regulations, which had no existence over here. All those with whom he had communicated entertained great objections to this minute interference, and thought that it would work a great deal of evil. MR. WAWN complained that his constituents greatly objected to this clause, and considered it an evil. MR. LABOUCHERE said, that his hon. Friend had called upon him, accompanied by some of his constituents, and had certainly left him (Mr. Labouchere) under the fullest impression that the constituents of his hon. Friend were favourable to this Bill. They had certainly wished him to make two alterations relative to the coasting trade, and he had been unable to comply with their request; and to this circumstance might probably be attributed a great deal of the opposition manifested by his hon. Friend. But the gentlemen who accompanied his hon. Friend were certainly not unfavourable to these shipping offices; but, on the contrary, had expressed their opinion that the establishment of them would be good policy. The corporation of Newcastle had signed a petition also in favour of the measure. Question put, "That those words be there inserted." The House divided:-Ayes 8; Noes 78: Majority 70. MR. LABOUCHERE said, the House would feel the importance of sending this Bill up to the House of Lords as soon as possible. He had ascertained now that the Bill could be reprinted and placed in the hands of hon. Members to-morrow morning, thus giving Friday and Saturday to consider the amendments and alterations. He proposed, therefore, to fix the third reading for Monday next. Meanwhile, the reprinted Bill could be sent by post into the country; and the alterations, though numerous, he considered were not such as affected the great body of the shipowners. MR. DUNCAN, on behalf of the same interest in Scotland, complained that the time was not sufficient to consider the recent alterations. Other Amendments made; Bill to be read 3° on Monday next, at Twelve o'clock, and to be printed. MEDICAL CHARITIES (IRELAND) BILL. The House resolved itself into Commit tee; Mr. Bernal in the chair. Clause 9, as amended, agreed to. He did not think this Committee would either improve the constitution of the medical staff, or the general good working of the Bill, by assenting to the transference of these duties to the committee of management. SIR D. J. NORREYS objected to giving these powers to a local committee, as by so doing all the old jobbing existing under the present system would be revived. MR. STAFFORD protested against assuming any practice in the English poorlaw being applicable to the existing mode for relief of the poor in Ireland. As chairman of a board of guardians he denied that there was any machinery in Ireland for the operation of English modes. He believed that the committee of management was the best repository for the trust proposed to be committed to them, for it was only consistent with the whole clause, which was to give substantial and effective powers of administration to the Poor Law Commissioners. Amendment withdrawn. Committee report progress; to sit again The House resumed. MR. FRANK FORSTER-EXPLANATION. VISCOUNT DUNCAN said, he had been requested by Mr. Frank Forster to explain to the House that he meant and believed he had signed the returns required from the Metropolitan Commissioners, “Frank For MR. VESEY, pursuant to notice, moved to omit the words "guardians of unions,' and to insert "committee of manage-in reference to this mistake. ment." All the expenses of the union would be greater as the clause stood. ster, and that he was sure there must have been some mistake in the reading of The noble Lord then apologised to the his name on the part of Messrs. Hansard. House for having taken up so much time SIR W. SOMERVILLE opposed the Amendment as being against one of the main principles of the Bill, which was, that as far as the districts were concerned, local management should be in the hands of the boards of guardians. If the medical officer were to be placed so completely under the control of the committee of management, many of the present evils would be continued, and the committee would probably look more to the interests of the persons who were appointed than they ought; but if the appointment rested with the boards of guardians, it would be in the hands of a more independent body. EXHIBITION OF 1851-HYDE PARK. COLONEL SIBTHORP begged to ask the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General whether it was true that he had refused his sanction to an application to the Court of Chancery for an injunction to stay the holding of the Exhibition of 1851 in Hyde Park. If the report abroad to this effect was true, he should certainly bring the subject under the notice of the House. The ATTORNEY GENERAL, in reply, said it was quite true he had refused his sanction to a proposed application for an injunction; but he would reserve his reasons for the course he had taken until Hamilton to inform him of that answer, and there was also sent to him a copy of the overture. About the same time, Sir George Hamilton had written a despatch, stating, on the part of the Tuscan Government, that they would agree to refer the question to the arbitration of some other Power. BRITISH CLAIMS ON TUSCANY. [Mr. B. COCHRANE: Of some great Power?] MR. B. COCHRANE: Sir, I wish to To the arbitration of some other Power, put a question to the noble Lord the Sec- which they would name, if the principle of retary of State for Foreign Affairs, of arbitration were admitted. There was which I have given him notice; and with some delay in the reception of that dethe permission of the House I will shortly spatch, but the delay was wholly unimexplain what is the nature of the question. portant. In the meanwhile the informaWhen the demand for the indemnity to tion was conveyed to the Government of British subjects at Leghorn was first made, Tuscany that we were willing to accept at the suggestion of Sir George Hamilton, the good offices of the Government of Sarour Minister at Florence, the Government dinia. In reply to that the Tuscan Goof the Grand Duke of Tuscany sent a pro- vernment stated that they declined the position to the noble Lord to refer the ar- good offices of the Government of Sardinia, bitration of that question to one of the and they proposed the arbitration of Rusgreat Powers. Some three weeks after sia. The answer to that was, that Her that communication was made by Sir Majesty's Government declined the arbiGeorge Hamilton, the Tuscan Government tration of any Power, but that they still received a note through him from the noble adhered to their willingness to accept the Lord, making a proposition for the good good offices of Sardinia. There the matter offices of Sardinia to settle the question of rested. I should object to produce any the indemnities, but making no allusion one despatch connected with a long corwhatever to the despatch from the Tuscan respondence. The despatch to which the Government sent some time preceding. hon. Gentleman refers is of no value exUpon the Tuscan Government asking for cept as containing the offer which I now an explanation of this omission, Sir George state on the part of the Tuscan GovernHamilton is reported to have said that the ment to refer the question to the arbitradespatch so forwarded had never been re- tion of some Power, that Power to be ceived at the Foreign Office, and that it named by the Tuscan Government, if the had probably miscarried upon the road. I principle were admitted. At a subsequent wish, therefore, to ask the noble Lord whe- period, as I have said, we replied by a ther that despatch has been received at communication that we would accept the the Foreign Office, and, if so, whether the good offices of Sardinia; but the Tuscan noble Lord has any objection to lay it upon Government proposed again, not only the the table of the House? principle of arbitration, but suggested Russia as the Power to whom the arbitration should be referred. VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: Sir, when that despatch was received at the Foreign Office, the state of the case was this. The Sardinian Government, through their Minister here, offered verbally the good offices or the arbitration of the Government of Sardinia for the settlement of the differences with Tuscany. He was requested to make that proposal in writing, which he did; and in reply to it he was informed that Her Majesty's Government could not consent to refer the question to the arbitration of any Power, but that they would willingly accept the good offices of the Government of Sardinia with a view to obtaining what might be proper satisfaction from the Government of Tuscany. A despatch was at the same time sent to Sir George MR. B. COCHRANE: What I want to know, when the noble Lord refers to that despatch, is, whether the suggestion came from the noble Lord that Sardinia should propose her good offices? I want to know if the proposition was not made by the noble Lord in the first instance that Sardinia should offer her good offices? [Viscount PALMERSTON: No, no!] Then I am wrong on that point? [Viscount PALMERSTON: Quite wrong.] I wish to know whether, when the noble Lord wrote that despatch to Sir George Hamilton, he had received the despatch suggesting, on the part of the Tuscan Government, the arbitration of some great Power. as I mad dogs,' than becoming proceedings which involve the lives of human beings. In attendance about to be examined before a Committee of the am, pursuant to a summons from Ceylon, and House of Commons, appointed to inquire into recent events in that island, I cannot but feel deeply wounded by this ungenerous attempt to damage my reputation, and discredit my testimony by anceive the prejudice to justice which must ensue ticipation. Nor will your Lordship fail to perfrom bringing forward such imputations in places where I have no means to meet and repel them, instead of reserving them for the approaching investigation, when opportunity would be afforded me for defence; and, in any event, the charge and its refutation would go together for the decision of the public. The evidence on which I have been thus assailed, is a document said to have been produced by Mr. Baillie, described as a the name of A. Watson, captain commanding.' 'savage proclamation,' and purporting to bear It threatens with death and confiscation of property all persons who shall fail to make disclosures VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: The two despatches crossed each other. When the offer was made, spontaneously, by the Sardinian Government, and not at our suggestion at all, that she should arbitrate, or interpose her good offices, we had not received the despatch on the part of the Tuscan Government offering arbitration by a Power, nameless at the moment, but to be named afterwards. But if we had received it, we should have given the same answer, namely, that we could not accept the arbitration of any Power, but that we would willingly accept good offices. [Mr. HUME: What is the difference between good offices, and arbitration?] I will explain the difference between arbitration and good offices. When you accept an arbitration, you agree to submit to the award; but when you accept good offices, you accept them as individuals between whom there is a difference accept the good offices of a friend-to endeavour to bring the two parties into friendly agreement upon the subject of the misunderstanding. Subject dropped. CEYLON COMMITTEE-CASE OF MR. BAILLIE: I rise, Sir, to put a question to the noble Lord at the head of the Government, and I trust the House will allow me its indulgence whilst I allude to a matter which is personal to myself, and in which my character, as well as that of my hon. Friend the Member for Montrose, is, in some degree, concerned. The House will remember that at the commencement of this Session the noble Lord at the head of the Government accused me of having made a statement in this House injurious to the honour and character of a British officer; that I had supported that statement by documents which were said to be forged; and the noble Lord read a letter addressed to the noble Earl the Secretary of State for the Colonies by Captain Watson, who he stated was an officer of twenty years' standing in Her Majesty's service, and the son of a general officer. The letter which the noble Lord read was as follows: as to the abstraction of the effects of Golahella declared that all doubts as to its authenticity are Rata Mahatmeya; and Mr. Baillie is said to have effectually set at rest by his possessing two of the original proclamations signed by Captain Watson's own hand-proclamations which have received the full sanction and cordial approbation of Her Majesty's Government.' Had opportunity been afforded me by Mr. Baillie, before thus pledging his own veracity and impugning my honour, I should have informed that gentleman, as I now do your Lordship, that the document in question is utterly spurious; that I never issued or authorised such a proclamation; and that he other allusions which have been made to supposed has been misled by an unprincipled forgery. The acts of mine, by both Mr. Baillie and Mr. Hume, are alike devoid of all foundation in fact, and so soon as an opportunity shall have been afforded me in the approaching Committee, I shall have no more difficulty in disposing of them than I have in denouncing the fictitious proclamation by which these gentlemen have been so grossly imposed on. -I have &c., ALBERT WATSox, Captain, Ceylon Rifle Regiment. To the Right Ilon. Earl Grey, &c." It was Now, let not the noble Lord suppose that I mean to attribute the slightest blame to him for the course he adopted on that occasion. Far from it: I think the noble Lord was perfectly right in taking it, and that he could have adopted no other course than the one he did the more so, inasmuch as this letter was written not without much consideration and advice. written by the advice of the Colonial Secretary at Ceylon, Sir James Emerson Tennent, who, from his official situation in 22, Craven-street, London, Feb. 7. Ceylon, ought to be perfectly aware of the "My Lord-Owing to absence from London, it existence of the documents, if they did was only this morning that I saw in the morning exist, for he was himself residing within papers of yesterday the very cruel and unjusti- sixteen miles from Captain Watson at the fiable attacks which are stated to have been made time the proclamations were issued, and on my character by Mr. Baillie and Mr. Humewho have coupled my name with acts of atrocity were distributed in large numbers all over more suitable, as they say, for the destruction of the country; and he remained in Ceylon a VOL. CXIII. [THIRD SERIES.] I year after they were published. The noble | read; and that I still think it would have Lord, therefore, was fully justified in read- been better if the hon. Gentleman had reing and in believing the letter which Cap- served the charge he had to make against tain Watson addressed to the Colonial Captain Watson until the matter could be Secretary. The answer which I made to examined into, either in the Committee or the noble Lord upon that occasion was, by some person competent to make the that I had received the documents as chair- inquiry. I must certainly admit, however, man of the Ceylon Committee, from a that the hon. Gentleman had grounds gentleman in whose honour, and upon which were sufficient, as it would appear whose character, I could place reliance, from circumstances that have been since that the name of Captain Watson was at- brought to light, for bringing that charge tached to them, and believed to be genuine. against Captain Watson. The present Upon a subsequent occasion, when the mat- state of the case is this:-The commister was brought under the notice of the sioners appointed in Ceylon to examine Ceylon Committee, having in the mean- into this matter have made a report, which time obtained further information, I stated they say is only drawn up at the moment; to the Committee that I was prepared to but that they are going into a further conprove the signatures by witnesses. The sideration of the circumstances, and that Committee, however, decided that it would they shall send a full report of their opinbe impossible to doubt the honour or the ions, together with the documents and word of a British officer; but subsequently, evidence which they have taken, by the upon the advice of the late lamented Sir next mail which leaves Ceylon for EngRobert Peel, it was determined to solicit land. It is likewise the case, that Capthis House to pray Her Majesty to issue a tain Watson having been informed of the Royal Commission to proceed to Ceylon, report of the commission, and having seen for the purpose of making further inquiry that report, still declares that the assertion into the subject, and there to ascertain the that he signed any such proclamation is truth or the falsehood of the statements totally false, and that any such signature of which had been made. The commission his name must be a forgery. Now, that did go to Ceylon. That commission has being the state of the case, the commisnow made its report, and the report is in sioners appointed in Ceylon having stated the hands of Her Majesty's Government. that they are sufficiently satisfied by the eviThat report states that the signatures of dence of persons who were employed to Captain Watson have been proved to be write them for him, and by the comparison genuine by the most conclusive evidence of the signature with other proclamations by the evidence of the parties who wrote which certainly were signed by him, that the proclamations, and who saw Captain Captain Watson signed those proclamaWatson sign them; that a large number of tions; and Captain Watson, on the other them were distributed by his orders through hand, entirely denying the truth of that the district over which he commanded; report, and still maintaining that his sigthat a considerable amount of property nature was a forgery, I think it incumwas confiscated under the provisions of bent on the Government not at once to those proclamations, and delivered over to arrive at any conclusion which shall be inCaptain Watson himself. Now, Sir, under jurious to the honour of a British officer these circumstances, I trust the noble who has hitherto maintained a high repuLord will relieve me from the implied censure tation. I shall not, therefore, think it my contained in the statement which he made duty to lay on the table that preliminary upon a former occasion, and that he will report of the commissioners, because I frankly admit that not I, but that unfor- think it is our duty to wait till that full tunately he himself, was made instrumental and complete report can be received, in stating what was not true in this House. which the commissioners say shall be sent I shall make no further observations, but by the next mail, and then to take into simply ask the noble Lord whether he will consideration all the circumstances; and, lay the report of the commission upon the at all events, in this certainly very strange table of the House? and inexplicable case, to give to Captain Watson-an officer who, as I said before, has hitherto borne an unblemished reputation-every means of defending himself against a charge which, as it now stands, is not only a charge of inhumanity, but LORD J. RUSSELL: Sir, With respect to the former part of the statement of the hon. Gentleman, I have only to say that I made the statement that I did upon the letter which the hon. Gentleman has |