MR. MAC IVERI wish to ask the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Chamberlain), Whether his attention has been called to the following entry on page 6 of Parliamentary Return, "Ship Insurance," No. 258:—"Mr. Mac Iver, M.P. C. Mac Iver, 8, Water Street, Liverpool Stromboli 13,532 1856;" whether, having regard to the circumstance that Mr. Mac Iver, M.P., was entirely unconnected with the lost steamer Stromboli, he will cause the said Return to be recalled and cancelled; and if, having regard to the circumstance that the steamer Thessaly (which did belong to Mr. Mac Iver, M.P.) was not lost, he will take care that her name does not appear in the list of lost ships to be furnished in the Return which has been ordered upon the Motion of the honourable Member for Carnarvonshire (Mr. Rathbone)?
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINI have already answered the first part of the Question of the hon. Member very fully on two separate occasions, and I am really unable to say anything in addition to what I have previously said on the sub- 122 ject. In my opinion, the Return referred to correctly states the facts of the case; and, whether this is so or not, I cannot alter the Return. The Return was ordered by the House, and it correctly shows how I arrived at the figures which I used in my speech upon the Merchant Shipping Bill. It is not open for me to alter the Return, except by order of the House. As to the second part of the Question, I do not think there is any dispute between us as to the facts of the matter. The only question is one of description—namely, whether a vessel which was stranded, and which was taken off the Register by the instructions of the hon. Member himself, can be properly described as lost, seeing that it was afterwards got off and repaired. The description of the vessel was in accordance with precedent in all similar Returns. I shall have no objection to insert an explanatory footnote to the Return, giving the subsequent history of the vessel.
MR. MAC IVERI wish to say that I am not satisfied with the answer of the right hon. Gentleman; and as I entirely deny the accuracy of his statement, I shall take an early opportunity of calling attention to the matter.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFI wish, Sir, to ask you a question on a point of Privilege. In a Return to this House, presented by the Board of Trade, under a heading showing the names of certain vessels belonging to the 47 Delegates and Members of Parliament who attended the Cannon Street meeting of shipowners, who were accused of having lost 65 vessels and 378 lives—it is represented that the ship Stromboli, belonging to Mr. C. Mac Iver, of 8, Water Street, Liverpool, was also the property of Mr. Mac Iver, M.P., thus fixing the ownership upon the head of my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Mac Iver). My hon. Friend has distinctly stated that he was not the owner of that ship, and that he had ceased to be a member of the firm which owned it for some years. [Cries of "Order!"] I am asking a Question of you, Sir; and it is for you to say whether I am out of Order or not—I believe that I am quite in order in the course I am taking. In this Parliamentary Return it is stated that Mr. Mac Iver, M.P., is the owner of the ship Stromboli; whereas my hon. Friend is neither the 123 owner, nor has he been a partner in the firm which owns it for some years. My hon. Friend has made a statement to the House, and to the President of the Board of Trade. The President of the Board of Trade refuses to withdraw a statement which is false. [Cries of "Order!"] I therefore wish to ask—
§ MR. SPEAKERIf I caught correctly the remark of the hon. Member (Sir H. Drummond Wolff), he said that the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade has stated that which is false.
§ MR. SPEAKERIf the hon. Gentleman says he did not state that, there is an end of the matter.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFI did not say that the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade had made a statement which is false, but that he had refused to withdraw a Return in which there is a false statement. I wish to ask you, Sir, whether, when a statement of this kind, affecting the character of a Member of this House, is made in a Return presented to Parliament by a Minister of the Crown, such Minister is not bound to withdraw the Return, or to make suitable reparation?
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINBefore you reply, Sir, I should like to offer one work of explanation. The hon. Member opposite (Sir H. Drummond Wolff) has not correctly stated the nature of the Return to which he refers. The first column, heading the Return, and in which the name of the hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Mac Iver) appears, gives the names of certain shipowners who were reported by The Merchant Shipping Gazette to have been present at the Cannon Street meeting on the 18th of March. The Merchant Shipping Gazette gave a report, to which I referred in my speech, and among the names of the shipowners reported to be present was that of the hon. Member. It is only as a shipowner present at the meeting that the name of the hon. Member appears in the first column of this Return. The second column gives the names of the shipowners in whose names certain vessels are registered, and in that column appears the name of C. Mac Iver. A little confusion has, no doubt, arisen from the fact that the vessel belonged to Messrs. David and Charles Mac Iver; and the 124 only David Mac Iver is the hon. Member for Birkenhead. At the time I made my statement nobody in the Office of the Board of Trade could be aware that the hon. Member had no connection with the firm in which his name still continues to appear.
MR. MAC IVERI wish to make an observation upon a question of fact. Within a few days of the publication of the Return I had been in communication with the Board of Trade—with the Assistant Secretary—and it is absolutely certain, as I am able to show, that it was perfectly well known at the Board of Trade when the right hon. Gentleman made his statement that I had not for many years been a partner in the firm of D. & C. Mac Iver. The Mr. Mac Iver who has also been gibbeted in this Return must have been intended for my father, as he at that time happened to be one of the partners in the Cunard Company to whom the Stromboli belonged. I would venture to ask if it was right and fair to the Cunard Company to select this ship, which, as a matter of fact, was absolutely and completely uninsured, and include it in a Return of this kind?
§ MR. NORWOODI must ask the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade to do me a personal favour. He has, unfortunately, published my name in the Return as having been present at the meeting of shipowners, either as a Delegate or a Member of Parliament. To make a short matter of it, I was not at the meeting at all; and perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will do me the personal kindness of expunging my name from the Return.
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINI accept at once the statement of the hon. Member for Hull (Mr. Norwood) that he was not present at the meeting. As I have already stated, I took the names from The Mercantile and Shipping Gazette. I had no other information besides that of The Mercantile and Shipping Gazette, and that paper stated the hon. Member to have been present. I must again point out to my hon. Friend—and I think nobody knows it better—that when I alluded to the fact that a certain number of gentlemen who attended the meeting had lost among them a certain number of ships, I expressly stated that they were picked representatives of the shipping trade, and I only referred to them to 125 shew the aggregate losses even among the best men in the trade. I did not intend, by the remarks I made, to cast any reflection upon these gentlemen; but I alluded to them in order to show that the average losses even among the picked representatives of the shipping trade were so great as to justify a Parliamentary inquiry. I cannot understand that any imputation has been passed upon the hon. Member, or that any imputation was implied in the statement I made.
§ MR. NORWOODWill the right hon. Gentleman grant my modest request?
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINNO, Sir; I cannot do that, as the Return was ordered by the House. The direction of the House was that I should give the names of the persons to whom I referred, and the names of the ships I supposed them to have lost, when I stated that 47 or some other number of shipowners had lost among them a considerable number of ships. The name of the hon. Member (Mr. Norwood) was among those which I obtained from The Mercantile and Shipping Gazette.
§ MR. NORWOODBut I was not present.
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINThe hon. Member now tells me that he was not present.
§ MR. NORWOODI told the Board of Trade so by letter.
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINThat really does not make the slightest difference. The statement I made was made under the belief that my hon. Friend was one of the shipowners present. My hon. Friend now says that he was not present. Very well, to that extent it affects my statement; but it does not in the least affect the argument I used. As a matter of fact, my hon. Friend is one of the picked representatives of the shipping trade; and he has lost—under circumstances which involve him in no accusation or blame whatever—certain ships. That, so far, strengthens the argument as to the character of the enterprizes in which my hon. Friend is engaged.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF["Order, order!"] I hope, Mr. Speaker, you will protect me from the interruptions of the hon. Member for Stockton (Mr. Dodds). I only wish to say that the right hon. Gentleman is wrong in his statement. [Cries of "Order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERIt would be out of Order to allow this question to be debated. The hon. Member for Portsmouth (Sir H. Drummond Wolff) appealed to me on a question of Privilege; but I am bound to say that it is not at all clear that this is a question of Privilege. It appears that what was stated by the right hon. Gentleman was not stated in his capacity as a Member of this House. Therefore, it is not for me to interfere on the ground of Privilege. If a mistake has been made, and the name of the hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Mac Iver) has been incorrectly placed on the list as the owner of this vessel, I think I am not going too far in saying that I am sure, if he will bring the matter before the Board of Trade, it will be rectified. It is not, however, a matter in which I can interfere.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFAfter what has fallen from you, Sir, I will ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, as the error has been pointed out to him, he will accept the suggestion of the Speaker, and withdraw the injurious statement in the Return, so far as it affects my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Mac Iver)?
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINI should have no objection to lay on the Table any additional information explaining the facts with absolute accuracy; but I cannot issue it in place of this Return; because the Return already issued has been presented in strict conformity with the Order of the House, and shows how I obtained the information which was laid before the House. I have no objection to issue a further Paper in any convenient form, stating that subsequent information received from the hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Mac Iver) has convinced me that he was not the owner of the Stromboli, which was the property of his brother. I must, however, go on to say that the hon. Member for Birkenhead was the owner of the Thessaly, which was reported to be lost under the circumstances I have set before the House. [Cries of "Oh!" and "No!"] Hon. Members do not understand the matter.
§ MR. SPEAKER,interposing: I must call the attention of the House to the inconvenience of debating this matter further. I do not think it is the wish of 127 the House that the discussion should be continued.
MR. MAC IVERI should like to ask one Question. [Cries of "Order!"] I would ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether, inasmuch as the Board of Trade cannot truthfully connect my name with the loss either of the Stromboli or of any other steamer, he will not cancel the Return I complain of, and rectify the mistake, as you, Sir, have suggested?
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINThen my answer is "No," Sir. I do not accept the statement of the hon. Member. I say that he himself was the owner of the vessel which, according to ordinary precedent, was properly described as having been lost.
MR. J. LOWTHERDid I understand that, with regard to the Stromboli, the right hon. Gentleman will undertake to correct the Return?
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINIf it is the desire of the hon. Member and the House, I will consider and inquire into the suggestion of Mr. Speaker, to see in what form a Paper can be laid upon the Table setting1 out the facts.
§ Subsequently,
MR. MAC IVERShall I have an opportunity of seeing the explanatory Paper which the President of the Board of Trade promises to lay before the House, because, at present, I have no guarantee that the libel of which I complain may not be repeated?
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINI must object to the terms of the hon. Gentleman's Question; but I may say that I shall be very happy to communicate with him personally on the subject.