Page:Blanchard on L. E. L.pdf/203

Rh settled that I should return home, and I was about to leave the morning after her death. This unexpected and sorrowful event delayed the sailing of the vessel some days. My husband having been engaged in England, as steward on board the vessel, through Mr. Maclean's recommendation, without Captain Morley, who was the master of the vessel, being consulted, he took a dislike to him, from that and other things, and they had words on the passage out. When my husband and I were about to embark, Captain Morley said my husband should go before the mast, and not as steward, as on the outward passage (Mr. Maclean no longer having any power, he said, on board the vessel), and that I should go in the steerage. This my husband objected to, and I believe Mr. Maclean also disapproved of it when consulted by my husband, as there were no accommodations in the steerage for a female. We were obliged, therefore, to wait for another opportunity; and, subsequently, my husband received an appointment as overlooker of the labourers, which delayed our return for nearly a twelvemonth. These are the only reasons why I did not return as was originally intended."

In further explanation of the protracted stay of the Baileys, a circumstance which certainly occasioned much anxiety and suspicion in this country, we are enabled to append the statement of Mr. Maclean himself. It forms part of a letter, addressed by that gentleman to Mr. Landon, and dated the 28th February, 1839. Mr. Landon never knew of its existence until apprised of its contents by the writer of these pages—to whose hands a copy of it was committed, so lately as November, 1840.