§ MR. HORSFALLsaid, he rose to call the attention of the House to the arrest of Captain Judkins, of the Royal Mail Steamer Persia, in New York, on the 16th of May last. He had no intention to raise any unfriendly feeling between this country and America; on the contrary, it afforded him the greatest pleasure to know that in the recent arbitrary proceedings taken against him Captain Judkins had been supported by the press of New York and by the public feeling of that city. He would have been content to leave the question to be disposed of in America if it had not been one of considerable importance to the shipping interests of this country; but when he stated that Captain Judkins, though liberated on bail, was obliged to return to America to undergo a troublesome and expensive trial, he thought the House would naturally feel inclined to ask of what crime he had been guilty. The facts of the case which had been communicated to him not only by Captain Judkins himself, and by Mr. Cunard, the agent for the line of steamers to which the Persia belonged, but by an American authority also, might be briefly stated. The Persia, when under quarantine at New York, was boarded by a health officer, who discovered a case of smallpox in the ship, and who ordered Captain Judkins to lie to for some hours and allow no one to leave the vessel. A custom-house officer who was on board in his official capacity, desired to go ashore; but Captain Judkins, in obedience to the order of the health officer, which he was bound to obey, refused to permit him, and the custom-house officer remained on board until the Persia was discharged from quarantine and went up to the city. No sooner had Captain Judkins landed than he was arrested on the ground of having detained an officer of the customs on board his ship. Mr. Cunard, who was in America at the time, remonstrated against those proceedings, and, finding his remonstrances unavailing, he addressed a letter on the subject to the Mayor of New York. The Mayor forwarded that communication to the officer of health, who confirmed the statement of Mr. Cunard as to the facts of the case, and added that Captain Judkins 1946 had acted in strict conformity with the health laws of the port, and could not have done otherwise without incurring very serious consequences. The Mayor sent to Mr. Cunard a copy of the communication he had received from the officer of health, and, on his own part, stated that, had Captain Judkins acted in a different manner he would have subjected himself to punishment by fine or imprisonment, or both, as would be evident from an extract which he enclosed from the health laws of the State. It appeared that the whole difficulty arose from the fact that the laws of the State of New York were entirely at variance with those of the United States; so that it was utterly impossible for a person to observe the one code without infringing the other. Captain Judkins, therefore, was placed in this unfortunate position, that in consequence of having observed the laws of the State of New York he had been subjected to arrest, and, though allowed to come home with his vessel on bail, he had now to return to New York to undergo a very expensive and troublesome process. He submitted that that was not a position in which a British subject should be placed. if there was a difference between the laws of the United States and those of New York do not let Captain Judkins be the victim. He ventured, therefore, to ask for the friendly interference of the Government—for he believed it required nothing but a remonstrance on their part, not only to have the unjustifiable proceedings against Captain Judkins entirely quashed, but—what was his principal object—to prevent the occurrence of any similar case in future.