Page:History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce (Volume 3).djvu/547

 of the British Parliament. It was closed, however, with great dignity by the Prime Minister and leader

of the Government, but this arose from their desire to pass the Merchant Shipping Bill this Session; but, finding it impossible to get through the committee on the Agricultural Holdings Bill this week, they had come to the conclusion to abandon the Merchant Shipping Bill. It had been submitted to the Government that they might pass the Bill in a modified form, but he declined to deal with the subject in that fragmentary manner. All he could say was that they would take the earliest opportunity of bringing forward the measure next Session.
 * [Footnote: hon. member. He felt some difficulty on Monday in stating the intentions

"Mr., speaking on behalf of the shipping interest, expressed his extreme regret that the Merchant Shipping Bill had been sacrificed for the Agricultural Holdings Bill.

"Mr. earnestly entreated the Government not to consign thousands of their fellow-creatures to an undeserved grave. There were, he said, shipowners of murderous tendencies—('Order, order!')—who had frustrated the passing of the Bill by protracted debates. The secretary of Lloyd's had assured a friend of his that he did not know of a single ship which had been broken up during the past thirty years because it was worn out. The result was that hundreds of brave fellows were sent to unhallowed graves by these speculative scoundrels—(cries of 'Order!' and uproar).

"The informed the hon. member that his remarks were out of order. When the Merchant Shipping Bill, which was on the orders of the day, came up for consideration he would have an opportunity of addressing the House.

"Mr. said he would give notice that on Tuesday next he would put a question to the President of the Board of Trade with reference to certain vessels which had been lost, entailing a great sacrifice of human life, and would ask whether those vessels were not owned by Mr. Edward Bates, the member for Plymouth, or a person bearing the same name. He should also have some questions to put, with respect to members on the Liberal side of the House, for he was determined to unmask the villains who sent these people to their death—(cries of 'Order!' and tremendous uproar).

"The said: The hon. member has used the term 'villains.' I trust that he did not apply it to any members of this House.

"Mr. : I did, sir, and I shall not withdraw it.

"The : The conduct of the hon. member is altogether unparliamentary, and I call on him to withdraw the language—(cheers).

"Mr. (excitedly): And I must again decline to withdraw it.

"In reply to a third interrogation by the Speaker, the hon. member again declined to withdraw.]*