§ LORD ESLINGTON
asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether, since the passing of Clause 6 of the merchant Shipping Bill in Committee, he has received a protest from agents of foreign shipowners at Liverpool, Newcastle, Cardiff, Leith, and London against interference with foreign shipping; and, whether he intends to propose, on Report, any alteration of Clause 6, so as to meet the objections of the memorialists?
§ SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY
, in reply, said, that no such protest had been received by the Board of Trade. The 6th clause had not passed, nor been debated, but was postponed. It proposed no interference with foreign shipping; but, on the contrary, its object was the prevention of British ships from assuming falsely a foreign character, which was as much in accordance with applications now being made by foreign Powers to us as it was in the interest of all honest British shipowners, and for this purpose the clause would enable the public officer to demand the production of papers showing the ship's assumed nationality. Some memorials were received in May, but were based upon an entire misconception of the meaning of the 6th clause. He proposed to amend the postponed clauses in their wording before they were brought up again, but not in their substance.