The

and English ships, and Courts of Mixed I enter into that friendly concert. Commission were appointed for determin- House will see what have been the proing offences at variance with the existing posals that have been made from time to engagements. Either Government had time; not recently, but during the period the power in its own discretion to termi- my noble Friend Lord Aberdeen has been nate that Convention in the month of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and March, 1842, a period of fifteen years during the period the noble Lord opposite from the time it was entered into. Brazil held the same office. The House will thought fit to give notice of her intention find that repeated exhortations were adto terminate that subsidiary Convention, dressed to the Brazilian Government, for and this Government thought fit to accede the purpose of inducing them to enter to such desire on the part of the Brazilian into amicable concert with us, and to Government. But there remained in force enable us to search Brazilian vessels, and the original Article of the Treaty of 1826, to punish those who were engaged in the and the object of this measure is to give Slave Trade under that Act which had effect to the stipulations of that Treaty. been agreed to by the Brazilian GovernA great part of the hon. Gentleman's ment of its own free will. But those speech appeared to be in favour of the efforts have failed. The Brazilian Goabandonment of all policy on our part for vernment have from time to time distinctly the suppression of the Slave Trade. The stated to us, that her views on this subject hon. Gentleman says, imputations are are entirely at variance from ours, and thrown out on the faith and integrity of from the Brazilian Government we can this nation, and that on that account we expect no assistance or co-operation in ought to be particularly careful how we the suppression of the Slave Trade by ber interfere with the rights of other countries. own subjects. Shall we then altogether No doubt such imputations are thrown abandon our efforts? Shall we hold the out, and thrown out from interested mo- Convention of 1826 to be of no effect; tives. There is no doubt a desire to de- and, notwithstanding that international preciate the character and paralyse the engagement between the Brazils and this exertions of this country in the suppression country, shall we permit Brazilian subof the Slave Trade; but I think the sacri-jects and ships to carry on the African fices this country has made for the miti-Slave Trade without any independent gation of the evils of the Slave Trade, and effort on our own part to suppress it? for the termination of the status of the First, I say, that the Brazils themselves Slave Trade, may enable her safely to have admitted that this country, under the defy all such unjust suspicions. The hon. Convention of 1826, has a right of its own Gentleman says, there was a time when authority, failing other engagements enthis country herself carried on the Slave tered into with the Brazils, to suppress Trade, and the bishops in the House of the Slave Trade carried on by Brazilian Lords made speeches in its favour. The subjects. The hon. Gentleman will obfact may be so; but does the hon. Gen- serve in the correspondence that has taken tleman think that that constitutes an ar- place, in a note presented by the Brazilian gument why we should relax in the efforts Government, that at an early period subwe have made for the suppression of the sequent to the last Convention, Brazil Slave Trade? The Government proposes expressly considered that under the Conthis measure with regret. It would have vention of 1826, this country had a right been infinitely more satisfactory to them to interfere for the suppression of the that the Brazils should have consented to Slave Trade. He will find in page 7 enter into a new engagement in substitu- of the Printed Papers, that in a document tion of the engagement of 1817, and issued by the Brazilian Government, it should have acted in ready concert with was stated that the Government had reus in the suppression of the Slave Trade.ceived from the British Minister an asI have laid on the Table the correspon-surance that certain Brazilian vessels dence that has passed on this subject, and which had been employed in trafficking in I leave it to the House to judge whether | slaves, but which could prove that on or any effort on the part of Her Majesty's Government for the last ten years has been omitted in order to induce the Brazilian Government of its own good will to

The

treated as pirates, according to the Con- | the responsibility of issuing those orders. vention of 1826. The hon. Gentleman, But at present the Vice-Admiralty Courts again, will find that the Brazilian Secretary of this country are prohibited from taking of State relied on the Article in the Con- cognizance of these offences. At present, vention of 1826, as a proof that the Slave without the intervention of an Act of ParTrade was totally forbidden to Brazilian liament, I apprehend that the Vice-Adsubjects. No law was passed in the miralty Courts could not proceed to the Brazils at that time, making the Slave adjudication and condemnation of BraTrade piracy; for the Brazilian Secretary zilian vessels; and it is necessary to proof State said, that the Slave Trade was vide in this case, as you did in the case of abolished, and that the offence was con- Portugal, that the Vice-Admiralty Courts stituted piracy; and, in saying that, he should have that jurisdiction of adjudicawas not speaking of the municipal laws tion and condemnation, with respect to passed by the Brazils, but of the effect of vessels seized on suspicion of carrying on that Convention which had been signed the Slave Trade, which they would not between this country and the Brazils. have without it. The hon. Gentleman But efforts were made to put an end to tells us to issue the orders on our own rethe Mixed Commission. Objections were sponsibility, and trust hereafter to an Act made to it by the Brazilian Government; of Indemnity. It is infinitely better to but in making those objections, the Mi- ask from Parliament the power of adjudinister of the Brazils urged that the con- cation upon vessels that are seized, rather tinuance of the Mixed Commission was than to issue orders and leave it in doubt unnecessary; because, under the Conven- whether there be any jurisdiction comtion with England, there was a power on petent to decide upon those points. the part of the two Governments to sup- hon. Gentleman refers to a speech made, press the Slave Trade, by making it an and a protest entered into, by my noble offence cognizable by their own respective Friend in 1839, with reference to the Bill legal tribunals. There was, then, a dis- proposed by the noble Lord, enabling the tinct admission that we had a right to British Government to detain Portuguese treat the offence as piracy, virtually by the vessels concerned in the Slave Trade. law of Brazil. The hon. Gentleman says, I, for one, seeing there was an indisposihe will not share in the responsibility of tion on the part of Portugal to fulfil the the Government in bringing forward this obligations of her Treaty with this counmeasure. What is the effect of it? We try with respect to the Slave Trade, felt consider that the Crown is empowered to that the noble Lord was justified in the direct the detention of Brazilian vessels. measure he proposed. I saw the unWe have not acted without the fullest de- availing attempts he had made to prevail liberation. It was the impression of the on Portugal to fulfil those stipulations noble Lord opposite, than whom none has into which she had entered with this paid more attention to this subject, that on country, and that after benefits received the suspension of the last Convention an from this country, and every diplomatic Act of Parliament would be absolutely effort having failed, I thought that the necessary to give effect to the Convention noble Lord was fully justified in calling of 1826; and the noble Lord inquired of on Parliament for their assistance. Both me whether it were my intention to pro- Houses have, from time to time, presented pose a Bill for that purpose. It is true that addresses to the Crown for the suppreswe did not proceed without mature deli- sion of the Slave Trade, and have assured beration. We approached the subject with the Crown of their willing co-operation great caution and reluctance, for we were in case legislative interference was necesmost anxious that the Brazils should take sary. Those addresses were unanimously the course which Spain took in 1835, and carried, and therefore on the part of the Portugal in 1842, and by mutual stipula- Crown, I think, after the Convention of tions should have enabled us to effect this 1817, I should be abandoning my duty if object. But all we do by this Act is not after those addresses I permitted that state to give the Crown the power to issue these of things to arise which would arise unless orders, for we think that the Crown has you give to the Vice-Admiralty Courts the the power to direct the detention of Bra- jurisdiction which this Bill proposes. But zilian vessels, in virtue of the Convention, the noble Lord proposed in the case of and we are prepared to take on ourselves Portugal an Act of Parliament expressly

munication with the Queen's Advocate, he
and the other highest authorities in this
country, gave us deliberately their opinion,
that, under that Convention, failing the
agreement and consent of the Brazils
to other measures for the suppression of
the Slave Trade, we were entirely au-
thorized in continuing to exercise the
Right of Search over Brazilian vessels.
The right now reverts to the Crown of
acting under the Convention of 1826;
and, supported by the advice to which I
have referred, we feel it to be our duty to
abide by it, in so far as to give to the
Admiralty Courts the power of exercising
the rights conferred by that Convention.
I think the hon. Gentleman cannot com-
plain that I have thrown any difficulty in
the way of the production of all the Papers
which, consistently with my sense of pub-
lic duty, I could lay before the House.
He will see that, in the last com-
munication we made to the Brazilian
Government, there is an expression of
deep regret that considerations of public
duty compel us to propose this measure,
and an assurance that we shall have the
utmost satisfaction in proposing to Parlia-
ment its repeal, if-influenced by the Act
of the noble Lord in 1839-the Brazils
shall enter into a Treaty with us, not for
the suppression of slavery, not for inter-
ference with any institutions in the Brazils,
but for the purpose of giving effect to the
original engagement of 1826. We have
waited to the last; for a series of years we
have implored the Brazils to substitute
something efficacious in lieu of this tem-

giving to the Crown the power of issuing
orders, and enabling the Vice Admiralty
Courts to exercise those powers. At a
subsequent period, after some difficulties in
respect to the first Bill, the House of Lords
acquiesced in what was proposed by the
noble Lord; but the case of the Brazils is
very different from the case of Portugal.
In the case of Portugal there was no such
Treaty as in the case of the Brazils. There
was an engagement on the part of Portugal
that she would co-operate with you ge-
nerally in the suppression of the Slave
Trade-that she would pass a law prohi-
biting the Slave Trade-that she would give
you a Right of Search; and she engaged
to do various things which she did not
do, and entered into various stipulations
which she did not perform, and the noble
Lord asked for the interference of Parlia-
ment to compel Portugal to do that which
the British Crown had required of her,
but which she refused to do. But that
was a casus belli. The noble Lord thought
the conduct of Portugal justified the Crown,
first in making the most urgent diplo-
matic remonstrances, and, those failing,
then to call on Parliament to compel
Portugal to enter into her engagements.
If the hon. Gentleman refers to the pro-
test of my noble Friend, he will see that
it proceeded upon those grounds: because
the Constitution of this country and the
usual practice had been to leave it to the
Sovereign, acting on the advice of Her
Ministers, to come to a decision upon all
questions of peace and war; and to carry
into execution such measures and to order
such operations as Her Ministers proposed.porary measure; at length we feel driven
My noble Friend contended that in the
case of Portugal it was a casus belli-that
the Crown ought to have proceeded upon
its own imperial authority, and declared
war against Portugal to compel her to
perform her engagements. But this is not
a casus belli, it is a casus fœderis. There
are stipulations by the Brazils with this
country expressly declaring that carrying
on the Slave Trade by Brazilian subjects
should be piracy; we therefore do not ask
Parliament to enable us to declare war
against the Brazils. We are content under
the Convention, after taking the advice of
the highest authorities in this country,
including my lamented Friend Sir W.
Follett, whose name I shall never mention
without a feeling of respect for his memory
as that of a most distinguished man. After
the best consideration, and after com-

to the necessity of interfering ourselves, to enforce the exercise of our right. But, at the same time, while we intend to exercise that right for ourselves, we accompany the intimation of our intention with an earnest exhortation to the Brazils to relieve us from this necessity, by entering into amicable engagements with us on the subject. The hon. Member for Manchester says that this measure is imperfect, be cause some alterations were proposed by me in Committee, into which the House went pro forma the other night. But what was the alteration that was then made? It was simply this: - As the Mixed Commission, with the consent of the two parties, are to continue their operations for six months, in order to preclude any doubt as to the validity of their decisions, a clause was inserted giving to the deci

1057

Slave Trade

Mr. Hutt believed that if this Bill were
passed its effect would be, in the course of
two years, to destroy all commercial inter-
course between this country and the
Brazils. Although this measure might, to
some extent, prevent the Brazilian flag
from affording protection to the Slave
Trade, he believed hon. Gentlemen were
mistaken if they supposed it would have
the effect of preventing that trade from
being carried on to the same extent as at
measure would not diminish the Slave
present. His conviction was, that this
Trade; and in a fruitless attempt to effect
that object the Government were sacri-
ficing some of the best interests of this
country, and bringing us to the very verge
of war, or, at least, placing us in circum-
stances which it would be the highest
wisdom to avoid. He therefore felt it his
duty to oppose this Bill.

{JULY 24} sions of that Commission all the force which their decrees had under the former As the period for which Convention. that Commission is to sit, is continued beyond the term specified in the original Convention, the object of that clause was merely to solve a doubt which might have arisen as to the validity of their subsequent decrees. I also introduced into this Bill the usual clauses-similar to those contained in the Portuguese Act, and in every other measure of the same nature enabling the Lords of the Treasury to award to vessels which succeed in capturing slave-ships a proportion of prizemoney. These clauses, being regarded as money clauses, were omitted in the other House of Parliament; and it became my duty to propose their insertion in the Committee in this House. I think, therefore, that the hon. Gentleman's charge, that this Bill has been got up with such haste as to render considerable alteration necessary, is, so far as it regards the alterations to which I have referred, altogether unfounded. I am not aware that there is any other point to which it is necessary for me to refer. The correspondence I have already laid on the Table will probably afford sufficient explanation of the circumstances under which the Bill was prepared. I again repeat, that it is with reluctance I propose this Bill; and I trust that the necessity of continuing it will be removed by the voluntary act of the Brazils, in entering into a Treaty with

Viscount Palmerston: As I cannot concur in the views of many hon. Gentlemen near me, I am quite prepared to give Government my support as to the Bill now under the consideration of the House; indeed, I have no other course to pursue, having, as the right hon. Baronet has reminded me, been the first to suggest that There exists a Treaty, conthis course should be pursued. Let us see how we stand. cluded in 1826. Now, the question for the House to consider is, whether that Treaty is to be allowed to remain a dead letter; and whether all that was to be accomplished remain unfulfilled? or whether this House under it, and by it, is to be permitted to is to take such measures as it can, in order liament has repeatedly addressed the Exto carry it into practical execution? ParCrown to conclude Treaties with Foreign ecutive since the year 1814, urging the Powers-pointing out the object of these Treaties to be the suppression of the Slave Trade-and, in some cases, suggesting the the purposes in view. Now, it would be means by which they were to accomplish utterly disgraceful to the country if Treaties so concluded were allowed to be violated by the bad faith of the Governments with whom they were contracted. I am sorry, Sir, to say, that it is impossible to state in exaggerated terms the just accusation against the Brazils, of bad faith as to the Conventions agreed to by it, respecting the Slave Trade. It is true, that the Government of which I was a Member did, during the ten years we were in office,

us similar to the Treaties we have con-
cluded with Spain and Portugal. I can
assure the hon. Gentleman I shall have
much greater pleasure in recommending
the repeal of this Bill, than I now have in
proposing it to the House. The negotia-
tion with the Brazils-not for a tariff, bat
for a commercial treaty, is still making
progress and if I felt that any good ob-
ject could be promoted, or the success of
the pending negotiation advanced, by the
further production of Papers and instruc-
tions, I would readily consent to lay them
before the House. The instructions I have
already produced will, I think, afford
proof that I have been desirous to lay
upon the Table such information, bearing,
in my opinion, immediately upon the sub-
ject, as I could do consistently with my
public duty; but I regret that I cannot
consent to produce the instructions issued
to Mr. Ellis alluded to by the hon. Gen-urge, year after year, by every possible
argument, the Government of the Brazils to
tleman opposite.
2 M

VOL. LXXXII.

Third

Series S

a

:

fulfil the engagements by which they were afraid we shall find the result of this will bound. But all our inducements—all our be, not to put an end to the Slave Trade arguments—all our persuasions, were ut- of the Brazils, but to drive it to take shelterly fruitless; and whenever the subject ter under some other flag. It is quite of the Slave Trade has been discussed clear, that if the Right of Search be given here, the notoriously bad faith of the Bra- up with France, and if it do not exist with zilian Government has been on all hands America, that the Slave Trade to Brazil admitted and deplored. Therefore, the will be carried on under the flags of question is, are they to be permitted to France and of the United States. Nevercarry on their Slave Trade with perfect theless, it is, perhaps, a point gained to impunity ? or are you to take, in order to drive it out from under the flag of Brazil, prevent them, the only means which the if such should be the effect of the Treaty. Treaties you have passed, place within It seems to me, however, that a remark of your power ? Considering the matter in the hon. Member for Manchester was not this light, I am prepared to share in any understood by the right hon. Baronet, as responsibility which, as an individual it was not adverted to bg him, while he Member of Parliament, may accrue to me, answered an observation which my hon. in giving my support to this measure. Friend did not make. I understood my At the same time, I must admit that there hon. Friend to have put a particular quesis some force in the observations of my tion ; and if he did not, I beg to put it hon. Friend (Mr. M. Gibson), that if the myself

. The Treaty with the Brazils Government had not taken that injudicious says, that the subjects of Brazil who may, course which they have thought it right to directly or indirectly, be concerned in car. pursue, with respect to the Government of rying on the Slave Trade, shall be deemed the Brazils, as to the Sugar Duties, las pirates ; while the Bill before us merely think it is very possible that we should not applies to ships, not to subjects : and, if be placed in the situation in which we now I understood my hon. Friend, he alluded tind ourselves ; because, Sir, it is certainly to this discrepancy, and expressed a wish true, that that course was calculated to to know what were the grounds on which produce a great deal of unnecessary irrita. Government, proposing as it does to carry tion in the Brazils-irritation which may out the stipulations of the Treaty, introhave led the Government of that country duced a measure different from that which to put an end to the Treaty of 1817. The these stipulations would allow them to argument of my hon. Friend the Member propose. It appears to me, that the Bill for Manchester, however, that you cannot falls short of what the Treaty would jusexpect Brazil to submit to what we now tify. Government, in acting under the propose to do, because England would not Treaty, might deal with the subjects of submit, were any Foreign Power to as- Brazil, whilst the Bill is limited to dealsume the right of exercising on our coasts ing with ships and cargoes; and it may that sort of inspection and police, which be remarked, that the contiscation of veswe propose to establish on those of Brazil sels and goods must be incidental to the -I say, Sir, this argument does not ap- crime of piracy committed by the owners pear to have much weight; and for this of the one, and the navigators of the other ; reason-ihe Government of the Brazils is and, therefore, surely you are as much bound by Treaty to submit; and I hope justified in punishing the latier, as in exand trust, that were we so bound, we tending the consequence of their crimet o should also submit. Indeed, I am con- matters contingent on the offence. Sir, I vinced we should; for I have such an with to take this opportunity of recalling opinion of the honour of this country, that to the attention of Government one or two I know we should submit to any incon- points which I more than once endeavoured venience, however galling to the national to impress upon their notice, and which I pride, were we bound by stipulation to do hope will receive their attention during so. Therefore, in asking Brazil to fulfil the recess. I would advert for a moment her engagements, we are only urging what to the Slave Trade carried on upon the we ourselves would consent to do, under coast of Muscat. I adverted some few days converse circumstances. I fear, however, ago to a Treaty signed by an officer of the at the same time, that what the hon. French Government, which seems to me Member for Gateshead anticipates, in re- calculated to lead to a renewal of the Slave gard to the effect of the Treaty, may, in a Trade from Zanzibar to the Isle of Bourbon. great degree, take place. I am very much | Since then, I see that the Duc de Broglie,

a