The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-20 00:00:00

Denmark.—(Hear, hear.) Let me add to this
that is Africa, where the strongholds of the slave trade
. were erected, wo have seen that criminal traffic put an
end to, and the peaceful arts, and industry, and trade,
flourishing by those who were the accomplices of this
horrible traffic. I should be sorry to see the end of the
triumphs of humanity which I have thus shortly traced,
that we should be askel to begin the course of another
half century by retracing our steps—(Cheer:)—by going
back from all that has hitherto been done, by proclaim-
ing to the world by this first step that we no longer will
take those measures against the slave trade which we
have hitherto taken, and that we have no substitutes to
put in
their place, and thereby spreading discourage-
ment in every part of the world among those, who, ad-
miring our example, feeling the truth of those Christian
maxims we have professed, and wishing practically to
act in the same manner, have been endeavouring each in
their own country to spread the same maxims and to
abolish this horrible crime.—(flear.) To speak only of
that country to which thn Right Hon. Gentleman last
alluded—namely, Brazil, he has stated that my Noble
Friend near me gave evidence that there was a party in
Brazil springing up hostile to the slave trade. Since my
Noble Friend give that evidence we have had lat-r accounts
from Brazil, and these later accounts, I am sorry to say,
represent that the party is so utterly extinct, their lan-
euege being, that they fear England is about to cease
from her efforts; and if England ceases to take the lead
in this grand work, it will be a hopeless task for them
to attempt to raise their hands against this iniquity.
Now, in the beginning of the Right lion. Gentleman':
speech, he gave, I think, a not very correct account of the
object and effect of this measure. He stated that it was
necessary, as a first step in the matter, to consider what
office we were hereafter to do to relieve ourselves from
the obligation of the treaty with France. Now, if we re-
lieve ourselves from our obligations with France as well
as America, every gentleman will remember that that
treaty, more from the repugnance felt by France, and in
consequence of the objections made in the French
popular assembly to allowing the right of search to
the English cruisers, and as a substitute for that right
of search the French Government agreed to keep
cruisers of their own on the coast of Africa to pre-
vent the French flag being desecrated by that trade.
By the same treaty they gave the right of search,
although not what is technically called the right of
search. And well, although the number of vessels has
been diminished, most faithfully had that treaty been
observed by France, but I will not pretend to say that
either France, or the United States, or any country in
the world has the same feeling that we have, not only
hitherto professed, but sincerely entertain. No doubt,
if you ask France to be relieved of the obligation you
will be relieved.—(Hear, hear.) But, what then, will
be your situation? Will you be free to act as you think
proper? When you are once relieved from this, every
slaver may hoist the French flag. You cannot, accord-
ing to your stipulations with France, presume to search
those vessels whether they are pirates or bona fide the
national vessels of France.- The flags of France and the
United States will then be used to cover the slave trade,
and Great Britain having renounced those treaties, will
have no means to prevent its being carried on; there-
fore, it is not merely the giving ourselves the power of
acting as we think fit, because it would follow as the
very first step that the flags of France and the United
States would be used to cover the slave trade. But it
was not worth the while of the Right Hon. Gentleman
to put forward this excuse, because the Hon. Gentleman
who brought forward the motion, and the Hon. Gentle-
man who followed him, do not disguise that, although
this is a preliminary motion, their object is to re-
store the slave trade. Sir, it is that motion that I re-
sist—it is that I ask the House not to sanction, and
in asking that I do not prevent any consideration
of any substitute which may appear to the Government
or to lion. Members to secure a better suppression of
the slave trade. But what Ido denounce, and what I
ask the House not to consent to is, simply a reversal of
all our policy—that you will not take the means to put
down the slave trade by a marine force and that you
will take no other means. The Right Hon. Gentleman
referred to the language used by the Government; but
whether that language was too strong or not, the object
we had in view was to call upon the House and the
country not to relinquish the means of suppressing it,
but to induce the Parliament to sanction additional
means. There is all the difference in the world between
using an argument of this kind—between saying you
must give up the task, and saying the means are not suf-
ficient. We heard the speech of an Hon. Gentleman on
the subject of education a few nights ago. The Hon.
Gentleman spoke of the increase of crime, of the number
of criminals, pointed out the inefficiency of the means
of repression, police, courts of criminal justice, and
gaols, and said it was necessary to reinforce these
means of repression by means of education as
a means of preventing and checking crime.
The Honourable Gentleman did not mean to
say that the means were useless—he did not say
that crime was going on in spite of plice, gaols, and
criminal courts, and therefore that we aro to abolish
these things. That is just the difference in the argu-
ment. He said our means of repressing crime were not
sufficient—take the means of education. Now, I said in
1839, our means are not sufficient; let us endeavour by
an expedition to civilize Africa, to obtain additional
means of cutting off the evil at its very roots. The
Right Hon. Gentleman spoke of means, which made
him think that the plan of repression at present in force
is not sufficient. In that respect I think the Right Hon.
Gentleman has made a statement which. if I go through
it carefully, would hardly be justified by the documents
before the House. Sir, I have no reason to think that if
we were set free, and that the trade was left to itself, the
Brazilian Government would be able so to regulate the
middle passage as to prevent these horrors. If we look
at the evidence that bas been laid before the House with
regard to the probable effects of this change, we have
very little hopes that it will be satisfactory. One of the
grounds on which the motion has been advocated is that
of humanity—namely, that the slave squadron aggravates
the evils of the passage. Sir Charles llothatn, whose opi-
nion is looked to with great respect, says directly the
reverse. He says, if the trade is free small capitalists
will enter into it, and they will not provide the neces-
sary means of accommodation, and therefore the horrors
of the trade will be necessarily increased. Captain
Matson uses the very same argument. So much for the
state of the slave trade in Brazil—the natural conse-
quence of the exceeding cheapness of slaves. The witness
went on to say that when " a smaller and a worse class
of vessels for the slave trade was used the passage was
longer. Formerly the vessels had three decks—the
slaves were crowded in the hold, and the air was only
admitted by the centre opening. Now, though the ves-
sels were equally crowded, there was only one deck,"
So that the opinions of Sir Charles Hotham and Captain
Matson were in direct contradiction of the grounds of
the motion, that the decrease in the mortality of the
staves on the passage would be greater if we set the
trade in duxes free than under the present system.—
(Hear.) Another argument was the economy or saving
in the expense. Bur, Sir, I think the Hon. Members
who have produced this argument have failed in it
completely. The Honourable Member who introduced
the motion said the cost was about 700,000/. or it might
he nearer 800,0001. Now if a change were
to be made, Sir C. Hotham says we must still
keep 10 or 12 vessels on the coast—we now keep
26; so the expense would be about half of the present
expense, as nearly half of the number of vessels would
be required. The Right Honourable Gentleman said
he would not give up our whole means of repressing the
slave trade ; for if wo found Portugal and Spain willing
to suppress the slave trade, we should, if required, be
ready to aid them. How are we to aid
them? By our mere countenance and concurrence?
That would be of very little use ; but if we
gave assistance by our marines or our soldiers we must
incur expense—the very object which this motion pro-
fesses to put an end to. It would be impossible to be-
lieve either that you would diminish the sufferings of the
passage, or much diminish the present expenditure, un-
less you abandoned the African coast altogether, and
gave up the protection of your commerce—a proceeding
which, in all other parts of the world, you think to
be necessary. That, lam persuaded, you never will
do ; for if there is any commerce in the world that
requires the protection of the British naval force it
is the commerce that has sprung up on the
coast of Africa, where the slave trade once ex-
isted, and where it cannot thrive unless it receives
the protection of barracoons. Sir C. Hotham says
if the squadron were withdrawn, the lives of British
subjects would not be safe. Passion and revenge
would be exhibited in consequence of the steps we had
previously taken to suppress the slave trade, and he ad-
mits that great suffering and mischief must be the result.
So, therefore, it was absolutely necessary to keep up
some force on the coast for the protection of life and
commerce. If, then, the main reasons for the present
motion have been proved to fail, I ask the House to
consider what the evils would be if the motion were
adopted. I will state the opinion of Sir C. Hotham as
an authority to be relied on. He says—" If you with.
draw the naval force without any substitute, such a pro-
ceeding would not redound to the honour and dignity
of the country. I should regret if it were withdrawn
and nothing substituted in its place." Sir C. Hotham
may be right or wrong—but I say it is a fan. question to
present placeb esfyosrteem Parliament.anothersy system,
t mayeYmo,umo
more
efficacious
substitute
in finally
th
is e
extinguisning the slave trade—but that a totally differ-
ent question to the question before the House, namely.
whether we shall destroy the present means of
checking the slave trade without substituting
place.—(Hear, hear.) The first
in-
jurious to the honour of the country. In the next place,
oabnietchtiinogn, in its
is that it would be highly I
think it would be impossible, without a greater
force than we now keep up, to preserve from the slave
trade those parts of Atrica which we have wrested from
the slave dealers. In those parts where commerce is
now established attempts would be made—violently
made—to extend it to those places where it hiss been
destroyed.—(Hear, hear.) And seeing the large profits
that are to be gained by the slave trade, many African
(thief's who have renounced that trade, seeing the indif
ference of England on the subject, would again revive
the trade, and you would have to protect those places at
a considerable expense. The next objection is, that an
unrestricted slave trade will destroy the civilization of
Africa—it would destroy all hope of introducing civili-
zation and Christianity; for with the slave trade I say
it will be impossible to accomplish any such objects.—
(Hear, hear.) In the next place, consider what effect an
immense importation of slaves into the Brazils would
have. How large the importation might be may be es-
timated
costing 5
fromool. wihnstArLriocra would
dHv n
sell
value. If there are such gains to be made, it is ampo..-
sible not to see that a number of small capitalists would
enter into this trade and continue until they reduced
esfto art e
2so,otohoaltslaves
. in the
Brazils, being a profit of 500 per cent. on the original
the profits to the ordinary profits of trade, and that
iby
op
uortthede
Brazils??into the Brazils.
There
this means an immense number of slaves would be m-
yAou find
nwdhavtast wouldtract of bethneneeffuletcit.
rated land, fit for sugar; in Trinidad especially some of