114
contradictory opinions of the present Attorney General and his predecessor, or Mr Phillippo, and suggested that the question might be submitted for the decision of the Crown in England. I also wrote: "I do not know to what extent it is desired to examine emigrants." "to be done in the light of the Law Officers' opinion."
If it is "in which Dr Eitel conducted his examination of the Glamis Castle emigrants yesterday, I fear that emigration from this Colony will be brought to an end, as it took over two hours to examine 4 men", and the last paragraph of letter marked G. asked for instructions for my future guidance. The receipt of this letter has never been acknowledged.
14. On the 20th April I reported (letter marked I, copy enclosed) having examined the emigrants by the Glamis Castle and that with the exception of one, they were free and under no Contract of service whatever. This man, after severe questioning, admitted to the Revd. Dr Eitel that he had an agreement in the form of a card to repay his borrowed passage money. Under the Governor's instruction of the 4 July 1880, this was treated as an emigrant under a Contract of service and he was therefore not allowed to proceed.
15. On the 19th May 1881, in reply to a letter from ..., forwarding a list of passengers desirous of proceeding in the British Steamship ...