The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-05-10 00:00:00

,•

Courts, that to journal should be published unless the pro.
Obtained a lierese. One of the Judges, however (Sir F. Mac-
erten), ger! it a. h.. opinion that no property already invested
)0uT.41, u, leaded by sher.regulations. He (Lord J.
I) wows) t or point out all the steps taken to injure this
hue s o:en.h - Ler. , an order was given to suspend the pub-
Au," of th. c,,if wee Journal. lie had come to Eogland, and
eweerred grest expee-e in sending out the communications and ma-
terials nets s.asy for il.e amnion of hie property ; and this suspen-
sion. which continued for some time. was therefore the infliction of
rest pecuniary injury. During this period, one of his Indian car.
empondrnes emits hiui weed, that the procrastination which ensued
so ',riot/sir injured f. . :operty as to threaten almost the annillila-
ton of I t, ! • rut au end to she minima delay, it wit
reposed dirt some one -3se should conduct the journal ; and the
only peTs ... win .y would grant a license was Dr. Musgrave,
a soia.in-law A the members of the Council. They first
jars-ea the p. +per , then, and afterwards transferred the copy-right
to one employed op themselves. If ever an individual had a right
to complain of grievances. surely the petitioner bad of the coarse
pursued by the Indian Government. In consequence of these
Meessuree, be not only lust the twenty thousand pounds he
Originally embarked in the journal, but the subsequent proceed-
ing,' had lnrolvtd him in debt to the amount of ten thousand
pooled., He (lewd John Rnssell)should wily offer one or two re.
Meek* mote. -lime, it had been said the peteioner was warned by
Loyd Hostings that, if he persisted in offering opposition to the
measurer of the floiremmens, he would he sent out of the country.
. Plow. he had seen letters of his Lordship's, in which he stated that,
cheer, he so titreatered, be did rot intend carrying hi. threats into
touttution, eoraideting such a Murree would be ore of undue seve-
rity. Secondly, the hardship of the 'petitioner's cane involved
the liberty of the press in ledla, and the right also of the Govern.
mint to send people out of the country. The paint to which he must
per ieularly refer was the hatdship of the petitioner's cane. He had
embarked his property In the journal, when Lard Heating% thought
proper to abolish the law of censorship over the press; and, when
this was footed not to succeed, it was most unfit that the petitioner
should suffer by the change. He did rot mean to complain that
the Alamnia of Hastings acted with want of foresight, when he
abolished the censorship of the mesa in India. because be did out
see that it might not be beneficial for all time to corner but it was
a different thing when those who immediately succeeded him In.
troduced a change, and such a one as it was impossible for the
p•titiorter to conform his opinions to. Here were two opposite par-
ties—one a Oirvernouflenerat with absolute power, and the other
AA Editor, who established his journal when the eeosnn4ip sea
abolished. If the Governor had the power of banishirg the Editor,
ft might naturally be inferred that the time would come when that
• power would be used. Ceder die peculiarity of the circumstances,
instead or moving that the petition do lie on the table, be should
move that it he referred to a Select Committee.
Sir W.W.W YNN said. when this question was last brought be-
* fore the Hour, by the Hon. Member for Durham ( Mr. banibton),
-thew declined interfering, because it was understood that the pad.
eteletlef was bringing an action against Air. Adams, the Governor.
Goners!. This cause had gone off in consequence, unfortunately,
of the death of that Individual, which was one of the greatest lasses
the country could have susteined. He bad, however, an impren.
soon; almost amounting to &certainty, that, if the cause had been
tried, the issue would have been most triumphantly in favour of
Mr. Adams. 'The course adopted on the present occasion was
most unusual, it bring the practice of the House to receive notice
of widen,. In his opinion, the question simply resolved itself
into this—was the press in India to be as unshackled and free as
ewe It this wan die proposition, he would meet it by stating
that, in his opinion, it was impossible. (hear, hear.) The Noble
Lord had said the objectionable articles published would only be
offensive to an absolute Government, such as Madrid ; and so far
be (Sir W. Wynn) was ready to go along with him. Those arti-
cles in a free Government would probably Tint hare produced the
slightest mischief; but the Government of India was not fire; it
was not a representative Government ; in its essence it was the
very reverse of this; it was r3ponsible for its acts to this country
alone. It was his derided opinion, then, that a fret press could
toot co exist with an absolute authority. He would not enter at
large into the nature of the Government of India; but he would
remark., that the law is administered by foreigners, the natives
being of necessity excluded from any State err plovers et. He had
:1:;t1 e understood it to be the peculiar merit of a 'free press that It
0 rot rose:let with • iteepotic power. He had said the natives
were excluded from all share in the Governmeat. Now, if they
w-rs to he told that this was not according to the law of England,
it might light up • tiro-brand,' productive of mischief from one
end of the country to the other. He must say, unless they were
prepared to alter the system of Government fundamentally, there
meat saint an authority that could not exist in a repreeentattre Go-
vernment. In Hollend or France there were public Assemblies
which cauld dere id themselves; but that was not the case here.
Then who were the public ? For the most part they were officers
of the Government. It was said that Lord Hastings had tried an
experiment which had failed ; but if the regulations which he tete.
Wished were referred to, it would be found that the petitioner
bad lafringed diem. It was also said, that his Lordship did not
wean to carry his threats into execution ; but could It be supposed
that a public officer would lead Ilia colleagues to believe one thing,
while he intended another. In 1820 the petitioner was warned WI to
Wl`fti Wottht be the consetquence of a certain course. TO 1821 he was
a•lviaed by Lord H wings, that if he continued to observe on the
conduct of the Govetnment his license would be cancelled, and he
would be ordered to depart the country forthwith; The opinion
of the people was not, as here, the proper check on the Govern.
reent of India; its conduct was subject to the control of this country
share. The proper course for the House to adopt, if it cons'.
tiered any part of the law of India objectionable, would be, to
bring In a Bill to amend or abrogate it; but the Governor-General
was bound to enforce the law as it at present stood. As regarded
the sacrifice of property, it wan only required that it should get
into new hands. The tepee and o,her materials might have
Dern purchased, there not being any objection to a new
paper being established with the same materials. lie did
net concur with the Noble Lord that any great hardship
was suffered by the petitioner ; for when the censorship was em-
ployed. sir. Buckingham was fairly and fully informed that the
regulations which had been prescribed for its tractice would he car.
tied Into effect. He had duly received 'our successive intimation,
on the subject, end could net justly complain of enduring a griev.
ance, because he had neglected to act according to their tenor. If
the license had been renewed to the former proprietor. it would
have rendered the regulations nugatory, and it would not have
been rodent to let them be considered as a dead letter.
Mr. SCARLETT contended, as no action could be brought
against the India Government, when any wring was committed by
them, that the proper and only mote of Ickes' which the aggrieved
ledividual possessed was that which the Noble L+-rd had pro.
nounced to be correct—an appeal to the justice of that House.
Weald It be correct or equitable that the House of Commons,
which claimed the high distinction of guardians of the nightie of the
people, should allow the most veuable part of the petitioner's
property to be taken from him, and be presented as a tree
tree gift to the son-in-law of one of the members of the Govetn.
menu, without soy compensation to the individual who was so
haishly deprived of what belonged to him ? Such a case as that
stated by the petitioner was certainly one of great grievance, and if
the statement were true, it loudly called for the interference of the
House. The grant of the property in the manner alleged, without
any equivalent to the rightful owner, appeared an act of roes in-
jJatice.
Mr. W. WYNN explained, that when the petitioner soggested
that the license should be granted to Dr. Bustard, it vs. mph 01
that it would defeat the intention of the regu miens, if Mr. Busk.
Ingham were allowed to possess any control over the concern.
ale. JOHN SMITH thought the treatment of the petitioner
was of a very aggravated character ; for he had nut only been de-
rived of the property which he actually possessed, but he was also
eft greatly encumbered with debt. It was true that the Marquis
of Hastings did net wish to crush the petitioner, and in that kindly
spirit had given warnings of which Mr. Buckingliatn did not
avail himself. That neglect was neither prudent nor proper; but
still it did not justify conduct which took away Item him not only
hip property in possession, but also that to which he was entitled in
reversion. The punishment was excessive, and bore no analogy to
the premier of this couture. Ile should therefore concur in every
measure calculated to bring time matters connected with the case
into& train of inquiry.
Mr. ASTELL addressed the House ins low tone of voice, which
prevented us from hearing his observation a. He was of opinion
that whatever pinishment the petitioner suffered was recasioned by
his owe obstinacy. It was not unjust that he should suffer the
punishment of his own misconduct. Instead of the alleged hard.
ship, the petitioner bad experienced greet favour and lenity. He
had repeatedly transgressed and was pardoned, until It was at last
impossible to endure any longer the insolence which he manifested.
The case was, therefore. considered to be one which should not excite
sympathy. and the conduct of the Proprietors of East India Stock
mily accorded with the popular feeling; for of the 2,000 individuals
who conatimted the proprietary, only 120 could be found who were
in out 0t.%1r. Buckingham. He could not see any ground for
the petition, and should therefore oppose it.
The petition having been ordered to be brought up and read,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the petition be referred
to a Select Committee, mermen on it to the House.
Dr. PHILLIMORE said, if a case like that stated in the
petition lastly existed, there might be reason for at, epplication to
the Home ; but every person who had listened to the speech of the
Noble lard who introduced the petition, anti to the argiunems
of its other advocates, must immediately perceive that there never
was a ease more unsubstantiated, The taw of the land in question
provided that no person should be permitted to teeide in India
without a special license, which it was, however, in the power
tit the Goverror-Generel to remind. The newspaper of which the
peti i .ner was the proprietor was distinguished at its outset by the
most yin I •nt attacks on the transactions in which the Goyim.,
me, t was toncerned. It could oot be contended that it woe
consistent slth prudence, in a country of so numerous and diver.
sifted a population, which was held by the influence of opinion
more than by physical force, to suffer newspapers, or any
mode of conveyance, to diaperage the motives and conduct Of
ti,,vertimerd among the nations over which it so presided. It had
bee" stated by the Noble lard, that the Alarnets of Ilittb.g,
gate a free press to India; hut on that point he ditt're,t. fore to!
Noble filarmste only allowed acme matters to be submitted to a
moo-ship. and wts es mach disinclined as his predecessor, the
Marquis %Wellesley, to allow the emanation or any ?edifice-
non which *twill destroy the influence of that opinion which it
was so desirable to preserve 1011821 Lord 'halloos, in a COMA to
tics:ton to 31r. ltuekingham, stated that he shoed teal it very
disagremli e to exercise the discretionary power which he posessuid g
• bi t however reluctantly, he should, if Mn. Buckingham peak
sit d in the course ndopted, be compelled to act aceortlinti laths
tat wet Al A which he was invested. In August, 1822, Lowd
fl.e.;:igs tent :mother communication to the same ludividual,

in which he adverted to the long-tried forbearance of the Ooverr.nr-
°metal, who even then was reluctant to proceed to extrernifim
and willing to give him the benefit of one more and final warning.
Should Mr. Buckingham, however, continue the practice of dip-
pitting the validity of the statute, the consequence of that
addi-
tional /reponse itjtainat the regulations must be, that he would be
deprived of his lice.ise and sent out of the country: In the next
year, however, the provocation was renewal t in fact, there was
a scrim of provocations, and the petitioner was punished in strict
conformity with the regulations. Before he aat down, he wished
that the House would recollect the fragile and delicate nature
of the tenure of India, which ass retained by a handful of
Europeans bearing sway over millions of the natives. .The allow-
ance 01 free discussion et Calcutta and in this country was a totally
different matter. .

Mr. TRA NT spoke from under the gallery, end was in a great
measure inaudible. We understood the Honourable Member to
say that he thought Mr. Buckingham properly removed from In.
die, though he did not approve of all the proceedings connected
with that removal. He was never in his life more perplexed than
to decide whether strict justice wee done in the case. At the time
when the principal part of the nanvictinns occurred he was re-
siding in Imlia, anti had better opportunities of judging. anti per-
haps in that account differed from many Honourable Gentlemen
with whom he timely agreed. A case might occur where the
stretch of authority might be tiro severe, and he believed that the
present instance foimed a proof that such a case did occur. (Hear.)
In that permission he approved of the motion of the Noble Lord.
Ile thought Government should not interfere, unless when para-
graphs appeared in newspapers affecting the repose of the state.
The Honourable Member addressed the House for some time
longer, but was inaudible from the loud cries of " Question."
The question was then out, when the numbers appeared—
Fur the 'oration 4i L Against it 40—Majority 3.
SLAVE TR ADINO
On our reurn to the gallery we found
Mr. F. BUXTON requesting the attention of the House to the
state of the Slave Trade, and of the condition of the slaves m
the Mauritius. In 1807 slavery was, the lion. Member said,
abolished in England, and the example was soon after fol.
lowed by the Colonies. In 1811 the practice was (brewed piracy,
and subsequently treaties had been formed with foreign powers fur
is total suppreseien. Ile believed that there was no point on which
the people of this courtly were so unanimous as In reference to the
slave trade. They. were moat anxious on that subject that all the
acts and treaties with foreign powers relative to its abolition should
be inviolate. Yet tie regretted to say that the slave trade had been
carried on for several years past. lie did not mean the occurrence
of a few solitary instances involving some hundreds of individuals,
but he wished to state that a regular and systematic process of
slave trading was followed up. At the same time it was
his duty to mention, that there were places where intervals
of its cessation were experienced. For such beneficial effects buena-
oho was indebted to the exertions of some meritorious individuals.
The conduct of Governor Hall did him the highest credit, though
the consequence of It was, that he was severely persecuted whilst he
remained in the Mauritius, and was not much better treated by
persons here, having been immediately recalled. In 1822, for a
sheet time, the Slave Trade was abolished, in consequence of the
low price of Colonial produce. But, with this exception, and that
before referred to, during the government of General Hall, there
had been no cessation of the traffic in Slaves in this Colony. This
was the
.proiesition which he meant to impress upon the House,
and his lineation was to produce a great number of military, naval,
and civil officers, to depose to the poiot. He would net go through
all the evidence which he possessed en this subject; but would in.
vita the invention of the House to some of the depositions which
he held. Hie object in moving for a Co:nmittee was to examine
those officers before it. The lust deposition to which he should
draw the attention of the House, was that Ma military officer, who
Was in the Mauritius from 1810 to 1817. He was a Colonel in the
army. [lt was here suggested to the Hon. Gentleman that he
should name the individual alluded to.) Ile was not at liberty to
name the Gentleman ; but he should call upon him at the proper
time. This Gentleman declared that the Slave Trade was not only
tolerated. but encouraged in the Mauritius.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER asked across the
table, whether the Hon. Gent. meant to say that the Slave Trade
was encouraged b Government ?
Alr. F. BUX'T'ON wished to state this case with the utmost
fairness; but if he was Balled upon, he would hare no hesitation in
stating, that the Slave Trade was tolerated by the highest &nth.).
city in the Mauritius. The next evidence to which he should
refer wee, that of a General who had been in the Mauritius seven
years. He stated that the !sliding of Africans in that colony was
frequent and not clandestine. Another military officer, whose
letter was dated in June 1819, stated that 700 slaves had been
landed in the colony in one month, anti that not less than 30.000
had been landed in the Mauritius. In February 1812, Captain
Lyne, whose name was already known to the House, spoke of the
shameful use made of the indulgence of Government by the inita.
bitants of the 31auritiue. The proportion of 400 shaves belonging
to the French were ordered to be admitted into the colony, and
upon that pretence not less than 1700 eleven were disembarked.
Another naval officer stated that slave ships might be seen in the
open day entering the port of St. Louis. Another naval officer
wrote in 1824, that the Si eve Trade was going on under hie nose,
and in spite of his teeth. But besides the eviderce of the military
and naval officers, he had also the evidence of several civil officers
in support of his proposition. The Chief Commissioners, who re-
sided in the Mauritius from 1812 to 1823, united in descnbing the
open manner in which the Slave Trade was carried on, as well as
the extent of the traffic. They also stated that their efforts to
abolish it were not only discountenanced, but that a perseve.
ranee in such efforts only led to the ruin of the indivi-
duals who persevered. Besides all these various authorities, there
was the evidence derived from the Governors themselves. There
were three Governors from 1810 to 1818. General Hall. in a de-
spatch dated 1818, said that the traffic had attained a degree of
effrontery which was disgraceful to the Government. All the evi-
dences tended to the same point—that the local authorities, instead
of supporting the laws, encouraged the traffic. It was stated, that
in 1819, 40,000 slaves were in the Mauritius, who were not regis-
tered. Gen. Darling commenced a new system when he assumed
the government; but, in a few months, he wrote that the Slave
trade was termed with peculiar activity, and that when Gen. Hall
departed it was re-commenced with renewed vigour. It appeared,
that if the registration of the slaves was insisted upon, It would in.
'Ave the principal inhabitants in heavy penalties. Such was the
state of the Slave Trade in the Mauritius. It was well known to
foreigners ; and in the communications made between the Govern.
meta of this country and that of foreign countries with a view to
the abolition of the traffic, particularly that between the Duke de
I Richelieu and Sir C. Stuart, this knowledge was testified and in.
sister] on by the representatives of the foreign Governments. He
(Mr. F. Buxton), however, did not mean to found any charge upon
loose assertions of that kind; he depended solely upon facts and
the met imony of eye-witnesses, and only asked the House to con.
alder the unanimous statements made by the civil and military
officers and by the Governors of the Colony. Ile now came to
at other branch of the subject—the number of vessels actually em-
ployed in the Slave Trade. Of these it appeared that only
two . Is were captured in the West Indies, and that no
lees than 44 vessels engaged in the traffic were captured in the
j Mauritius. He was entitled to suppose that the capture was not
made on the first voyage. lo sonic cases, those ships had made
• several successful voyages. At all events, 44 had been actually
capered in the Mauritius, and, as he before stated, only two were
captured in the West Indies. The next information which he had

to lay before the House was derived from military officers and
itoldien who had witnessed successful disembarkations. One soldier
deposed that he was placed on the estate of the Secretary of the
Colony, :.h. Telphair, who was now the Registrar of the Colony,
and had seen a vessel belonging to Mr. Telphair land slaves. Ile
knew the vessel and the Captain, whose name was Lewis. There
were many other evidencesto the same effect, which should be
brought before the Committee. From the evidence of several of
the soldiers, it appeared that those stationed up the country were
not allowed to attend to the Slave Trade. One soldier deposed that
he had seen a disembarkation, and said to his officer, Captain Rossi,
that he could prove a disembarkation had taken place. and Captain
Rossi's reply was, " don't you mind what is going on amongst the
slaves, or I shall have you punished." Another soldier deposed that
ins wee aemaiiy *egged for intertlerinsto mime the hilave trade.
He (Mr. Burton) did not roach or this assertion ; butlhe &idler
had so stated. But this discouragement was not confinedlO the
soldiers: a Captain who interfered was fined, and a Colonel in the
army said he did every thing in his power to put a stop to the Slave
Trade, until he brought down persecution on himself, and Mt that
he must connive at it. The coast shountled with creeks and bays,
In which slaves could be disembarked with scarcely the itossibility
of detection; but he could prove thst many disembarkations
had taken place in the presence of living witnesses. It was
not easy to find perrone who had witnessed disembarkations,
because many of the witnesses were dead, and many remaineel
in the colony and were inaccessible. lie could produce 20 wit.
nesse*, however, to this point, consisting of officers and soldiers,
and item 20 persoas would psove no less titan 99 afloat dl em. I
barkations. He pledged himself to prove this. lie next note to
the inspected disembarkations. Captain Lyne, of his 3lajesty's
ship Eclipse, spoke of a brig having brought 200 slaves to the
colony from 31adagascar. In 1012, a General stated that there
were so many slave ships hovering about that he became alarmed,
and ordered out the military, fearing a French invasion. Another
officer, describing a storm, said tiled in the late storm seven slave
ships were lost ; and it was stated on good authority, that in one
year seventeen vessels wens equipped for tire 'Live trade. The
mass of evidence on what he termed suspicious cases was very
large, but he wished the House to dismiss it altogether from their
month. Many circumstances tended to render disembarkations
difficult of detection. The Chief Judge of the island, who was
unfriendly to the cause which lie (31r. Buxton) advocated, in ac-
counting fur so few persons having been brought to jueuce, ob-
served, thatthe whole body of the population of die Colony was in
It of the traffic, and curt:delete! those who pursued it as engaged
hi a meritorious service. (Hear.) No evidence could be stronger
then this observation, to prove the difficulty of detection ; but yet,
calling upon the Route to dismiss front consideration all cases in
which disembarkation took place before the capture of the vessel,
and all cases io which disembarkation took place without airy
capture at all. he was prepared to prove that there had been 99
distinct disembarkations, besides the 41 vessels captured, makiitg
i . ail 143 instances of slave-dealing. But there were much strong r
proofs to support the proposition with which lie had commenced
Tie re were certain observable circumstances affordin; the strongest
internal proof. There were pcculiareircumstances watch marked all
Colonies in which the slave trade was abolished, and diatitiguished
them from those in which the slave trade was still pursued. The
proportion of the sexes was one of those circumstances. Where
no slave trade existed the sexes were found to be equal, or nearly
sot but in Colonies where the slave trade prevailed, the proportion
of males greatly metaled that of (malts, as the traffic naa ait

•

THE BRITISH PRESS.

Knot reetueively. In males. Of the sixteen West India Colon ie a
in twelve the females exceeded the males, and in lPtlf the ma le
exceeded the females. But in the whole of the sixteen West India
Colonies the females exceeded the males ; there were 32000
feniales and only 325,000 males; so it was in the Went Indies ; but
in the 31suriiiits' it appeared there were 41,000 niales and only
22.040 females.. In the Seychelles, which were dependencies of
the )Mauritius, there was a proportion of live males to one female.
If this statement proved anything, it proved that the slave trade
was carried on to a very great extent—that it was not, as an lion.
Member had stated. an occasional deviation from the laws; but a cum-
stent system, revised to a vast extent, as it must haveheen to have
stance was evidence as to the abolition of the slave trade, or its con-
created so great a disproportion bet ween the sexes. Another eircutn-
tinuance—that was, the proportion between foreign slaves and
natives. Where the slave trade was abolished a vast majority of
the slates were natives of the soil ; where the *lave trade prevailed,
the foreign slaves were numerous, in proportion to the extent of the
tridlic carried on. He (Mr. B.) had procured an accurate account
of the proportion of foreign and native slates in the two ‘Vest
India Islands; but this was not easily procured in the Mauritius.
The registers of that colony were In a state of fraudulent and
wilful confusion, which rendered it impossible to derive any ac
wrate Information from them. He was thrown to seek for informa-
tion on this point therefore from other sources; and he conceived the
evidence of the proportion of foreign and native slaves in the Mau-
ritius was to be known by reference to the a :vertisements. A na-
tive slave, being Inured to the climate, was more valuable than a
foreign slave, and therefore it was the interest of those who
wanted to dispaee of their slaves, to represent them as natives; when
they represented them as foreign slaves,it might be fairly presumed,
that the statement was not deceptions. Judging from the evidence
supplied by the advertisements in the Mauritius. there were three
foreign slaves to one creole ; whilst In the two West India Islands
to which he before alluded. there were three melee to one foreign
slave; for In the Vest India Islands there were 95,000 sieves ;
85,000 were natives, and the remaining 10,000 foreigners. In the
Seychelles, which contained a population of 6,500 slaves, IGOO
only were natives, and 5,590 were
foreign slaves. This was a pro-
portion infinitely too great to have arisen in try other way but
from an extended system of slava dealing. It h:d been admitted
the decrease or Inceease of the gedwth of sugar in any colony was
connected with the Slave Trade carried on by that colony. Ytew.
ing the produce of the Mauritius in this point of view, it
formed an important evidence. In 1810 there was eery little
sugar produced in the Mauritius. In 1819 the produce was about
half a million pounds, and in 1822 the produce had increased to
30 millions of pounds. Now, this increase had taken place, not
because the price of sugar lied risen ; on the winery, it had greatly
decreased at the very time that the produce was augmenting.
Sugar was Ws. a cwt. In the Colonies in 1819, and in 11122 it had
fallen to the ruinous price of 17s. a cwt. 50,000 cwt. was pro-
duced in 1819, and V.O 000 cwt. In 1022, so that the increase in
the produce was four-fold, whilst the reduction in the price was
nearly one-half. Now, as to the number of slaves captured, in
Dominica there were 24, in Jamaica 40, In Trinidad 8, in the other
thirteen West India Colonies none, and in the Mauritius 2.492.
Thus it appeared that there were ten times as many slaves cap-
tured in one single Colony as in all the others. As he had before
observed, there were only two ships car wed in the West Indies,
and 41 in the Mauritius. Taking al tine circumstances together,
the disproportion of the sexes of the slaves, the proportkm of
foreign slaves, the increased prodoction of sugar, the number cap-
tured and the number of disembarkations, he thought there could
be no doubt that the slave trade was carried on to an im-
mense extent in that Colony. It was tbought that the registry
adopted would have effectually prevented the continuance of
the Slave Trade. It was suggested by Lard Bathurst with
this view, and deemed by him a complete barrier against the
slave traffic; but, anxious as he was to make this statement
In the fairest manner, he felt it his duty to state that not one
of the important regulations recommended by the Colonial Office
had been carried into effect In the Mauritius. (Hear.) Not to tire
the House with details, it was usual to invert in the Registers
many important particulars relative to the slaves, and, amongst
others, from whom the possessor acquired the slave, and front what
estate he was got. In the Mauritius those important particulars
were not Inserted in the Register, and there was no knowing whe-
ther the slave came from the estate of a proprietor or the hold of •
slave ship. If the Committee rested for proofs, said the Honour.
able Member, upon the registers of Mauritius, they must he din.
appointed—they would find it used only as a cover to the slave trade.
In 1816 the number registered was 07.361, in 1819 20,000, and in,
1822 only 7,000, so that there wete 80,000 omitted, and by this
oiniesion penalties were Incurred to the amount of 40 millions of
money. The slaves, ton, who were omitted to be registered were
clearly forfeited. This was a serious consideration for the Govern.
mem. Ile (Mr. Buxton) did not pretend to dictate in what manner
the Government should act in such a case, but it was a matter for
serloas consideration. It could not be denied that the negroes im-
ported since 1810 were free by the laws of England, and from the
information possessed by him on that point, he believed that the
number of slaves of that description in the Mauritius amountel to
0,000 or 50,000. Mr. 'f elphair, whose name was before mentioned,
returned an account of 260 slaves in 1816, but there were witnesses
who would depose that they had seen groups,of new slaves on Mr.
Telfair's estate, and that they had reckoned from WOO to 1200 slaves
on the estate at different periods. There wes another subject he
should call the attention of the/louse to more fully hereafter; he
meant the dreadful. treatment bf the slaves In the Mauritius. lie
regretted to be called upon to make such an assertion, but he could
not conceal it from his mind, that wherever there was slavery there
was oppreesion, but wherever the slave trade prevailed slavery was
clothed with tenfold ferocity. Such dreadful horrors as had been
related to hint, of the sufferings of the slaves in this Colony, he
believed had never been brought before an assembly. These state-
ments did not rest upon the etidence of one person nor of ten, but
of all who had resided in the Mauritius. The common soldiers,
who were not a class, one sltould think, likely to sympathise very
warmly with the wretched negroes, were unanimous in their
opinions on what they had witnessed. They seemed to be haunted
with the horrors they had seen in the Mauritius. Could it be won-
dered at that in such a state of things the mortality amongst the
slaves was so great ? In 1815 the slave population of the district
of Port Louis was estimated at 11,000. An officer was then ap.
pointed to return an account of the number of buriale, and front his
returns it appeared, that out of 11.000, 6,558 died in the six years
following 1815, making a mortality of more than one.half in six
years. But the most extraordinary circumstance was, that not-
withstanding the mortality the population increased. (blear.)
Population flourished under this destruction of human life. He
was moat anxious not to overstate the case, but he thought
he had already said enough. to prove the proewitiorr with
which he had commenced. The population of therSeycliel-
les, as he before remarked, was In the proportion of five
males to one female, and of five foreign staves to one native.
If any Gentleman eneertained the least dotibt of the accuracy of his
statement, lie would request their attention to the documents which
he had it in his power to refer to in confirmation of what be had
represented. According to the Tax Rolls Return of the Slave
Population of the Maurinue in 1810, the number of slaves
amounted to sixty thousand. It might be said that these official
returns were erroneous : but he thought their accuracy was to-
lerably ascertained by this circumsemee, filet, by the Fr.'nch re.
tunic, the slave population at a previous period for the Mauetius
was sixty thousand ; and .the official return made by the English
authorities soon after was fifty-nine thousand. The Honourable
Gentleman (Mr. Borten) hid said, that :here was a reductiontince
1812, in the slave porulation of that coliny of tire p.r c nt. per
annum. Now if this reduction eon. tnued up to 1817, the slaves
would have been reduced twenty-five per cent. in the course of those
five years ; that was to say, they ought to amount, in 1817. to
forty-five thousand. Now It appeared, by the return trade in that
year by the authorities themselves, that the number cf slaves was
eighty-seven thousand ; so that, by official uloeuments,it was shown
that there were, in 17117, forty-too thousand slaves in the island of
Mauritius more than there ought to have been. In addition to
this, it was stated by General Hall, three years afterwards, that he
could prove there te have been forty thousand slaves in the island
not registered at all. This, he conceived, was a mathematical de.
monstration that the slave population in the Mauritius was consi.
densbly higher titan what the law allowed. There was another
proof, also equally conclusive of this fact. The Honourable Gen.
tleman had said, that in 11112 there were in the Seychelles, three
thoutered nerreemse Now, 40-11115, when the.census of those Wends
was taken, these .Were five 'thousand five hundred ; so that there'
were two thousand five liondred more slaves than there ought to
have been. The House might feel It wearisome for him to go
through these various accounts, and some Gentlemen might be in.
dined to any to him—why did you not bring these celculations be-
fore the House sooner ? His reason was, that be would not rely
upon his own private information, as lie thought it wan quite in.
credible that things of this kind. in our own day, and in our own
colony, could have been upheld by the English authorities there.
The Ilonoureble !krona (Sir it. Farquhar) had, previously to his
connexion with the 31autittue, said that he was a friend of the free.
doin of mankind, and an inveterate enemy to the slave trade. What
must have been the iefittence on that Honourable Baronet's mind,
and how strengely. must his better judgment have been abused,
before he could have been induced, unfortunately for himself and
for Ids country, to put his hand to such a despatch as the one to
which he (Mr. Buxton) wan about to call the attention of the
lieuee. The despatch was dated February 15, 1811. The lion.
Baronet first contended that the Act of Parliament which prohi-
bited the slave trade did not extend to the 31auritius ; and ae-
condly, he argued, that even if it did, yet this country had, by
their capitulation, graqted to the proprietors in the islund their cus-
toms and religion, which included the slave trade. Then he went
on to say (but in which matt-went the Honourable Baronet was en-
tirely mistaken), that this country haul, after the Act of Parliament
was passed, permitted the slave trade to be carried on at the island
of Trinidad (but which was never the rase); and, therefore, he sr-
Vied, a finliori, that it ought to be allowed at the Mauritius, the
very existence of which as a colony depended on the odious traffic,
so that, wehout a constant frcah impoetation of slaves, the 'el Ind
dwoonnid "of limowan kainnyd ,P dicindantoopitnhieonf;reore.
would become a desert. Now he (Mr. Buxton) could only
alt,tadnespbeeceinallyofa
Ruh
how he could have prevailed whit himself to ask the Earl
of Liverpoul to guarantee thee practice which by the law of
England was felony, and which, ill point of moral ft cling, far ex-
cteded any other felony that could be committed. It was in the
eyes of every man who knew whet the Slave Trade meant—lt was
in the eyes of men who hart seen the reality, a crime of the very
deepest anal most enormous kind. Ile bad now gone through the
contents of his case. Ile had succeeded, he thought, in proving
that the Slave Trade did exist, by showing vessel, to have been
taken actually laden with slave., and by disembarkations having
been made in the island ; and !resides these specific facts, he had
the concurring testimony of officers of the highest credit, who were
I stationed to prevent the carrying on of the trade. Ile haul proved
it upon a calculation of the slave population. He had proved it by