The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1858-11-04
THE PORTUGUESE CAPTURE OF A FRENCH
SLAYER.

From the Paris Correspondent of the London Times
The question in dispute between the French
and the Portuguese Governments, q to the
seizure Of the French barque, the Charles and
Georges, is a very unpleasant one but have
reason to hope that it will be settled without
serious consequences. So far as can learn
the facts, and have little doubt of their general
correctness, the French Government is in the
wrong, and, what is more vexatious, it half sus-
poets it is in the wrong. 1t is, of couree, vain
to expect any statement worthy of notice from
the Ministerial press, at least if we may Judge
by the extracts given below. We know that
the Charles and Georges was seized By the
Portuguese authorities in the Mozambique
waters, on the ground of her being caught in
an interdicted port, and that the French Gov
srnment demands that she shall be restored,
and satisfaction given for the outrage. The
French Government deny thst the ship was
engaged in the slave traffic, but that she was
merely engaged to convey free labcrers to the
Isle La Reunion. They also maintain as q
principle, which cannot and must not be called
in question by any foreign Government, that
the presence of French delegate on board a
french merchant 81 ant vessel is that the
consequently such ship cannot be visited, over.
hauled, and, much less, seized. They allege
that in the present instance the blacks who
we're on board we're laborers, who had engaged
of their own free will to proceed to La Reunion,
under regular passports furnished by the au-
thorities at Mozambique; and that under such
circumstances all interference was violation
of that principle and of international law, and an
insult to the French flag, and to the delegate
representing for the time being the French
Government To enforce the demands of the
French Minister, two French ships of war are
announced to have proceeded to Lisbon. Such
are substantially the arguments and demand of
France.
Now let US hear the other side. It's certain
that the Charles and Georges was found in a
place interdicted to general commerce known
and admitted to be so interdicted. When the
Portuguese cruisers off Mozambique visited the
ship, as it had perfect right to do under the
circumstances, Ito negroes we're found on
board. On inquiry of the captain and the dele.
gate, the Portuguese were informed, as have
said, that the negroes were free agents, and lad
voluntarily contracted to be sent to La Reunion.
On these unfortunate creatures being interro-
gated, they, as l am assured, declared one and
all, that the statement was untrue and that
they we're taken from Mozambique against
| their will. The delegate and captain were then
asked to exhibit the passports alleged to be-
| given by the authority at Mozambique. who
had received the usual fees as it was manifest
ly breach of duty on the part of any Portu
| guese authority to deliver passport or permit
to ship found hiring lsborers in an interdicted
port When the document WAS produced, Il
proved to be merely pass, not issued by any
Portuguese authority whatever, but by the
Sheik or chief of a savage tribe, who probably
was himself the purveyor Of this merchandise.
| The Portuguese Government do not refuse
to admit the pretensions put forth BY France
and her principle" as it is termed, of invioa
bility of vessel on board of which delegate
OF the French Government is present. But the
invlolability ceases the moment the character Of
a delegate is laid aside, and that character il
laid aside the moment the said vessel commits
a violation Of international law, and penetrate.
to spot interdicted to commerce, for the rea
son that in that spot the trading in slaves il
carried on. The Portuguese Government are
willing to believe, if equested, that the Nantes
ship Charles and Georges and the dele ate had
| no intention of trafiicking in Human 7lesh-tha
Is, of selling the ITO negroes they had or
board but it is not denied, nor can it be de
| MED, that she was found where she had no RICH
to be, where she knew she had no right to be
and the presumption is, that she was there
for an illegal purpose. With respect t.
the sut6ciency of the passes granted bv tn,
friendly Shiek, or by whatever name the amia
BILE chief of the tribe is known, the French Gov
eminent are asked, what would they say to {
similar case occurring in Algeria? Would the,
consider that an act of petty chief of an Aral
eucampment under French domination. II
opposition to, or in defiance OF, the Coverno
General, would be q sufficient plea O,
the part of the Portuguese? Would thew no
scout the notion of such plea For thes
reasons, therefore, namely, the presence of th
Charles and Georges in an interdicted mort. b
which the French delegate forfeited his oficia
character, the declaration of the negroes them
selves in presence the delegate, and the worti
lessness of the passes or permits given bv ii
chief of the tribe, the Portuguese Governmer
refused to accede to the demands made b
, France. Thus, believe, the ouestion stand
at this moment Several notes have aIread
passed between the Governments but. notv;tI
, standing the steps taken by France. there ia. :
> | have said, reason to hope that The matter Vi
be amicably arranged.
10 show how the Ministerial preas writ,
g about the matter, give the following from Il
/ Pays: A- y
? Our colonies, in place of being ruined
8 the abolition OF Slavery, have, since the ado
e ton OF the measure, increased In prosperity
e degree not anticipated by them. The black
e on all occasions, have preferred to contract 3
Q gagements with French planters rather Il I
2 English, declaring tina, thew ara ha,tar t,aa,,