The Express.
London, England, 1848-03-25 00:00:00

many countries to abandon this trade. France and Holland
no longer pursued it, Spain and Portugal :scarcely pursued
it, and, as stated by the hon. member, the trade was almost
confined to a colony of Spain and to the empire of Brazil.
In that way they must base pi evented an immense deal of
human suffering. (Hear, hear.) Now, people ran away
with the idea, and the assertion passed from month to mouth,
that the means taken to put down the traffic greatly aggra-
vated its horrors. Re (Lord Palmerston) denied this con-
clusion. Was there anything in the present day equal to
the horrors of the middle passage in former times ? (Hear.)
Aad upon either principle they might feel assured that
these horrors were exaggerated. The shire trader's interest
was diametrically opposed to any suck cruelties as those de-
scribed. The more slaves he landoe Way and in good
health the greater his prelim; and therefore if env each
cruelties existed as those described they might merely be
attributed to the blindness of avarice, which would operate
equally whether we pursued the existing system of preven-
tion or entirely abandoned it. However, this was not the
proper time to go fully into this great question. His objec-
tion at this time was that the whole subject had been referred
to a select committee that was now sitting, and that there-
fore this motion was premature. (Cheers.)
Mr. DISRAELI objected to the proposal made by the
noble lord to refer such questions as were before the house to
any select committee. T hey were matters for the considera-
tion of the house, and not for a select committee. The cabinet
ought to determine upon them. Two select committees had
already been appointed on that same evening, and if that
mode of dealing with public questions was persevered in, the
whole force of parliament would presently be absorbed by
select committees. He wished some hon. member would
move for a return of the number of select committees that
had been recently appointed. It would be one of the most
singular documents ever publiseed by the house. The noble
lord (Palmerston) had asserted that the system of preven-
tion had not yet received a fair trial. But he
(Mr. Disraeli) differed with the noble lord, and was pre-
pared to argue the point on the broadest grounds. Even,
however, admitting that the system had been successful in all
respects, was it, he asked, one which it was expedient to
persevere in ? Token in that light, he maintained it would
not sustain examination, much less the positive declaration
of the noble lord. (Hear.) What could be urged in de-
fence of the expenditure of 1,000,0001. a year in addition to
the 80,000,0001. that had been wasted during the last thirty
years ? The noble lord had sad hothing whatever to shake
his faith in the statements of his (Mr. Disraeli's) hon. friend.
The noble lord had asserted that the traders to the coast
of Africa were prohibited from carrying water casks lest they
should be turned to the purposes of slavers. His (Mr.
Disraeli's) hon. friend asserted that the consequence of that
regulation was to prevent the slaves from having more than
one drink of water in two days during their transit through
the cruising grounds of the African coast. So that he was
entitled to say the sufferings of the slaves were not de-
creased by the regulations now in force, and that, on the con-
trary, those sufferings had been very greatly increased by the
course pursued inconsequence of the legislative interference.
Under these circumstances, he thought it could hardly be
contended that the system was one which should be upheld
in a time of financial embarrassment like the present. Hun.
members would incur a great responsibility if they did not
atterd to the representations of the hoe. member for Inver-
ness, and support the motion whicli he had introduced to
their notice.
Lord PALMERSTON explained that the right of search
given up in 1845 was not that which had been obtained in
1839. The latter referred to the Spanish flag, and was
still retained by this country.
Sir T. D. ACLAND objected to any change in so int-
I portant a portion of our policy as our maritime police for the
suppression of the slave trade without due and careful con-
slderation.
Lord .1. RUSSELL wished to address a few observations
to the house, net upon the gener;sl question as to the effaacy
of our system for putting down slavery and the slave trade,
hat upon the particular question as it stood at that moment.
Ile would venture to submit to the house that, for more
than 20 years, under different adminharations, they had
carried on the present system; and, in carrying it on, had
spent 80 millions for the suppression of slavery. Suppose,
then, that a primi facie case could be made out against the
system, could anything be more reasonable t, an that the
house should wait for the rep ct of the committee of inquiry
they had appointed, and not hastily decide the question on
a night devoted to the army estimates, and when many
members must have thought that no such question would
come on ? (Hear, hear.) The house had appointed a select
committee OR the motion of the hon. member for Gateshead ;
that committee was at present sitting, and when its labours
came to a con.lusion the house would base in the evidence
full materials for a decision, and if such evidence went to
confirm the statement of the hon. member for Inverness it
would be competent for theta to accede to the course which
he proposed. But it might be advisable to take other steps
to modify the system, without abandoning it altogether.
Part of r system might be founded on a mistaken policy, and
yet to abandon at once our whole scheme of maritime police
was a thing not to be done without full and search-
ing inquiry. (Hear, hear.) He thought there
could be no doubt, even to the minds of those
who contended for the non-success of our measures
on the coast, that a large portion of Africa had been relicsc.i
from 'he slave trade, and that legitimate commerce had been
extensively established in its place. Surely then, even if the
policy were objected to, it would not be humane at once to
withdraw our squadron from those parts, and to expose them
anew to all the horrors of the slave trade. (Hear, hear.)
Therefore the question before the house was not simply a
question of whether the present system of slave trade oreven•
non should be kept up. There would be found mixed up
with it various considerations, various questions of policy on
which it would he necessary to deliberate, and many of
which it might not be found convenient to aban-
don. The lion. member for Buckinghamshire, pre-
suming that the case had been made out, referred to the
question as merely one of economy; but he (Lord John
Russell) would ask the house whether a system which had
been so long established, and for such a purpose, should be
suddenly abandoned on mere grounds of economy. (Hear.)
It was a question of humanity, and would not be hastily
decided by the house, even to save a million a year.
What he wished the house to consider was that the question
should not be decided summarily on the statement of the
hon. member, on a day devoted to other business. The
hon. member fur Montrose had said that with fair play free
labour could successfully compete with slave labour. He
(Lord .1. Russell) inclined to that opinion, but from one
cause or other free labour had not as yet had a fair trial,
and that in his opinion formed another reason for careful
deliberation. They might hod that a greet portion of the
present system was wrong, and if in addition they foetid that
free-labour produce could successfully compete with the pro-
duce of slave labour, they might proceed with confidence in
their alterations without having at the same time to reproach
themselves with abandoning ter the sake of economy the
higher interests of humanity which they hid previously been
successful in upholding. (Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL said that the present was not the occasion
to enter into a discussion on the merits of the treaty of 184.1,
or as to whether the arrangements then entered into with
France were more efficacious than the previous right
of search. His object in rising was merely to ex- I
plain how far that treaty interfered with our previous
right of search. We had then the right of search with re- I
geed to Spain, Portugal, and Brazil ; we retained it still, and
with every country except France, which country had no
interest in the prosecution of the slave trade. He could only
say,with respect to the policy of the treaty of 1845, that when
the subject was discussed with a complete knowledge of all
the facts, the volley of government received the uu:,nimous
• approbation of the house. The noble lord opposite (Palmer-
sten) had questioned that policy ; but so couvinceel was he
that the house did not concur in his views, that he contented
I himself with a perfectly safe and harmless motion for papers,
and even in that he found o 53 members to support him.
(Hear, hear.) As to the right of search enjoyed by this
country in 1845, we hail not the right reciprocally over the
east coast of Africa, and only over certain portions of the
west, together with Cuba, Brazil, and Madagascar. His
belief was, that our right of search did not ex-
tend beyond the tenth degree of south latitude.
and did not extend to several parts of the western coast of
Africa, where the slave trade was carried on, and to no part
of the eastern coast. Under the treaty of 1845, France and
England were to grant warrants reciprocally, each to autho-
rise the right of starch to the cruizers of the other powers,
but England was not permitted to ask for warrants fur more
than double the number of ships employed by France in this
service. So that it would be in the power of Frauce. if at
any time she should entertain any jealousy as to the amount
of our naval force engaged on the coast of Africa to decrease
it by limiting the Dumber cf vessels employed by herself.
But the right of visit existed as it did before. France did
not carry on the slave trade—it had never been suspected
that she did, but it was apprehended that ships of other
nations engaged in that trade might assume the French
flag, and the right of search was effectual as to these. But
the right of visit was still possessed in all cases, and that
right was fully admitted by France. (Hear.) It uecurred
to the government in 1645 that if they could obtain the
cordial concurrence of France in tire endeevour to
put down the slave trade, the mural iulluenee of
the two powers acting together would be iatare
effectual in furthering that object than it we retained
the right of search and insisted on the treaty of 1839. (Hear.)
The house must not, however, suppose that the right of
search had been in any way affected by the treaty of 1845,
so far as it relatedto the vessels of those nations which carried
on the slave trade. His impression We, now the same as'it bad
been in 184.5, that the treaty then entered into with France
WAS an advantage rather than in injury, so far as the suppres-
sion of the slave trade was concerned.( Hear.) He should vote
against the motion of the hon. member for haulms. lie
meant not by that to say that it might not be a proper one
as an amendment under other circumstances. However
inconvenient a course it might be in some cases to call in
the aid of a select committee on matters which properly
fell within the province of the government, he was not
sure whether this was not a case in which the house was
specially called on to undertake an inquiry, for he
could not forget that the suppression of the slave
trade was a policy imposed on the government by the public,
of which the House of Commons was the representative.
He could not forget that in 1839 the house unanimously ad-
dressed the crown to enter into fresh treaties, and to invoke
the aid of other powers in concert with ourselves to put
down the traffic in slaves—(hear)—and surely it would not
be wise, without full inquiry as to the efficacy of the system
which had been established under the treaties entered into
in consequence of that address, now to oddness the crown to
negotiate for the abrogation oithose treaties. (Hear, hoer.)
Seeing that an inquiry was going on, in which the opinions
of those engaged in the suppression of the slave trade wouA
be elicited, and all the facts connected with the subject
brought out, he should decline stating any opinion he might
have formed, founded en the information which had reached
hies, and would postpone his judgment until the report of
the committee should be produced, and the whole evidence
should be before the house. Setting slide, therefore, the im-
portant consideration, es to whether our policy in respect to

the sugar duties had given an encouragement to tie
Lion of slave-labour sugar, and without reference to the sire
curnstances under which the etreaty with France was
n.
eluded, be thought that to fetter the hands of government by
e. resolution adopted, not only without inquiry, but in the
face of inquiry—( Hear, hear)—would be, not t• ingenue the
influence of the executive government with France, nor add
to the authority 01 the liuum of Commons. (Hear)
Mr. BOC VERIE said the whole question was, whether
the policy was right or wrong. The motion might
have been inopportunely introduced, but being beige
the nouse, he must vote for it. He could not cement to Toes
the public money ;or purposes unconnected with the govern-
ment of the country.
The house divided —for the original motion 216
For Mr. Baillie's amendment
DESTRUCTION OF TENANTS' HOUSES BY IRISH
LANDLORDS.
The question for going into committee of supply having
been again put,
' Mr I'. SCROPE rose to move an bumble address to her
Majesty, that she will be grecionely pleased to direct an
indictment to be preferred by her Majesty's law officer,against the parties concerned in the illegal destruction of
several lenses, and the forcible ejectment of their inmates,
which node place wi.hin t..e union of Galway, on or about
New Year's-day last, end which appears to have occasioned
the deaths of several of the unfortunate being* se ill-treated,
by the evidence taken on oath before Major IlsKie, poor law
inspector of that union, by order of the commissioners;
which evidence is printed at length in p. 467 of the fifth
series en papers relating to the relief of distress and state of
the unions in Ireland; thereby to show, by a tracheal
example to the people of Ireland, that the law affords its
protection to the lives and property of the poor as well as of
the rich, and that it car. and will be enforced by the govern-
ment when broken against the one no less then against the
other. The hon. gentleman on rieltig was ere, m: Li gene-
ral cries of " Oh," but on producing the blue hook. and
Essaying to quote evidence tin refrom, was met by such a storm
of disapprobation that he declared his reluctance to proceed
in the face of eo much impatience and diaconte rt, slid gave
no•ice that he would reproduce his motion on ;he next
supply night, which announcement gave rise to a general
cheer.
.Ir. E. B. ROCIIE e. pressed a hope that the hon. mem-
ber would not allow the impatience of the house to prevent
bins from persisting in his motion, which was really a most
important one. (Hear, Mar.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that there was no
doubt as to the law upon the subject. The landlord, upon
giving notice to quit,or upon the tenancy expiriug,ha 1 a right
to enter peaceably ; but if he did so forcibly he was liable
to be indicted for a forcible entry ; and if that force amounted
to a riot, he might be indicted for a riot. If the entry was
made before the notice to quit expired the tenant had a
remedy at civil law ; but it was not at all usual to make what
amounted to a private wrong the subject of a public indict-
ment by the goiernment.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD said that this qitestion was really
too important to allow it to be lurked, and he joined the
hon. member for Cork in hoping the boo. member :or etroud
would not wait for another committee of supply, but at oace
proceed with Ids motion. The barbarity committed in the
union of Galway, to which his motion referred, was worse
than anything that had occurred in any civilised country.
The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY had ascertained
that the act was a most monstrous and cruel one; and the
sooner the government made it their practice to institute
proceeding+ in such cases the better.
Mr. REYNOLDS asked whether Irish slavery and mur-
der of the Irish people were not more fitting for the eon-
, sideration of that house than the mitigation of African
slavery, upon which subject they bad been engaged for the
last nee hours ? (Hear, hear.) Mr. Blake, the landlord
involved in these sjectmente, had admittel that he was
guilty of an illegal act in taming these people out
in the bleak month of Dtheniber, by which wine of their
lives had been sacrificed; he therctore asked the peen:aunt
whether that gentleman was to be permitted to remain in
the conunireion of the peace for the county of tralway
Sir It. PEEL said the declaration of the Attorney-
General, that government had no power to interfere,
rendered it the more incumbent on that house to exercise
whatever moral power they possessed to put an end to such
practices as were described in the motion of the bon.
member for Stroud. The right hon. baronet then referred
to the report of Major M'Kie, from which he add it ap-
peared that a more grievous injustice had been committed
than they were likely to hod in any other country. I Hear,
hear.) Major hlshie, in reply to the commission, stated
that it appeared this forcible ejectment had been illegal; that
notice had not been served ; that it had been perpetrated
under circumstance! of great cruelty:; that the occupiers had
been turned out of the Muses at nightfall ; that they end
their helpless children had been Is ft exposed to a cold
bleak shore on a stormy winter night; that some of the
children were sick ; that their prayers for mercy were in
vain, and that many of them had once died ; that he had
visited the ruins of their huts, and found many of those
unfortunate people still living amongst the ruins, but many
of them so weak that they could scarcely stand. He was
sure that the mere ri cital of these facts, accompanied with
the expreeaion of a) mpathy and indignation on the part of
that house, would not be without its indueuce— (loud
cheers) ;—and he thought that the house owed an obliga-
tion to the hon. member for Stroud, in not basing per-
mitted this ponderous volume (alluding to the blue book)
to rest in oblivion, and that he had done right in drawing
the attention of the house to it. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. IlUelE wished to ask whether or not there Ina IL
government in Ireland; and, if to, why such a document
as that just read by the right hon. baronet the member for
Tamworth should have been allowed to have remained use
less for so long a time? Where were the public officer of
Ireland. If there were any it would be much better to
remove them, and leave the Irish to govern themselves.
(Hear, bear.) He was not surprised that repeal should be
demanded, when such atrocious procee'iags as those
disclosed in the blue book before the house were
allowed to pass with impunity.
Sir G. GREY said that if the honourable member would
read the papers now before him, he would find that it was
through the instrumentality of the government that these
transactions had been disclosed and made known. He begged
further to say that the question he had answered the other
day had no relation to this case of Mr. Blake, but referred ge-
nerally to the parties who had illegally destroyed the houses
of these poor people. The opinion he had then expressed
had been confirmed by that of the hon. and learned mem-
ber for the University of Dublin (Mr. Napier), sir. that the
papers contained no statement of facts upon which are cri-
minal prosecution could be instituted ; but at the same time
he had stated his views as to the character of those facts, end
had not attempted to conceal those opinions. (Hear, hear.)
His right hen. friend near him (Sir Wm. Somerville) wee
in communication with the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland upon
the subject, and any measure which the government could
take would be adopted by his noble friend. lie must re-
mark that there was a member of this house who was on-
nected with this case; he alluded to Mr. St. George, and ea
this matter he (Sir G. Grey) had himself communietted
with Mr. Hatchett, the Solicitor-General for Ireland,
who held that though there wits an apparent
illegality, still there had been no real illegality in die pro-
ceedings of that gentlemen, fee the middlemen having beet
served with notice, the law did not require service of notice
on the tenants in occupation. He stated this to show that the
subject had not escaped the attention of the government,
who had every desire to afford protection to parties who had
been thug treated. Let it not therefore be supposed that
there bad been a case for prosecution, and that the govern-
ment had shrunk from instituting it. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. S I'AFFORD thought that the conduct of the govern-
ment in Ireland wee free from blame. It was monstrous, after
all that bad been said about agrarian disturbances and
incendiary feelings in Ireland, to find that the greatest
oppressors of the poor were those who lived amongst them,
and who ought to be their protectors. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. O'CONNOR cane ived that the opposition to the
motion of toe hon. member for Stroud (Mr. P. Swipe) arose
from a general hostility to hear this question at all. (e No,
no.") He told the noble lord at the head of the
goverament,that looking at what was passing in other coun-
tries, this was not a time to trifle with the people of Ireland.
Sir H. VERNEY denied the assertion that the house
was indifferent to the condition of Ireland.
Mr. B. OSBORNE remarked that, after the extract read
by the riglht hon. baronet the member for Tamworth, he was
not surpnsed at the warmth of indignation which the hen.
member tor Nottingham had manifested, but at the same time
he thought the hon. member had done a great injustice to
the hon. and learned Attorney-General; for nobody Iraq naluted
with that honourable and learned gentleman could ever
accuse him of being actuated by heartless or unkind motives.
Unless the government took up this question with a screed
hand and with a searching inquiry, it would be impe.sible to
answer for the peruse of the country.
" Colonel DUNNE thought it was essential not merely to
inquire into the conduct of Mr. Blake, but into that of the
ri !teeing officer of the district, for net having supplied these
unfortunate people who had been turned out of their habi-
tations with food.
Mr. MUNSELL renmrked that they hsd net perished fur
want of food, but fro., exposure on a cold winter night, and
he was of opinion that it the gosernment proceeded with
vigour, they might establish against the perpetrators of this
act the crime of manslaughter. He entreated the govern-
ment to proceed with energy, in order to show the people of
Ireland that they were as mindful of the lives of the poor as
they were careful of the lives of the rich.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE said that as the question had
again been raised as to whether it was possible for the go-
vernment to proceed criminally against these parties, he
must state that therm papers had only reached him the day
before the debate on the quarter-acre clause, and that their
icomn.teedntaiwnrykceinmgma
.deeic.p
that the whole circumstances were at the present moment
under his most serious and attentive consideration. (Bear I
he had no doubt the Lord-Lieutenant had loot no time, but
tiemdpwnaitholnreluendnonhiithemisunbdiecjite, bad
Mr. NAPIER said he had heard of this case with thorough
indignation. If the stipeudiary magistrates of the district
would take informations and proceed in the regular wan,
to
doubt a prosecution might be instituted for miumilsogister.
It would be a disgrace to the British law if it did not reach
a case of this description.
Mr. SCROPE said his object bad been answered, since
the house had given its uttention to the case. It had been
declared on legal authority that the law did not reach out-
rages of this kind. Let them then lay aside the feintee.) of
there being Equal laws for the rich and the poor. (H.
It the law did apply, let it be euforeed by the government,
if not, let the legislature immediately pass a law for the
purpose. (Hear, heat.)
hoLnordmeLmlheNCrOftrN
haaiavdingthebrho
Mr. lIUME asked whether the police hail repotted ,c
Col. M'Grcgor, and ie so, why he had not reps 'o • elem
to the government
had been made by the police. The first information genre
merit bad received was on the 29th January.
Usurt wthalis inmdat(terbteifor,Wwerm.ths
Sir W. SOMERVILLE was not aware that any Wort

imommENNIIMINia