The New York herald., 1876-03-21
SLAVERY.
EARL DERBYs DEFENcE OF THE DIsRAEII
SLAVE cIRcULARs-THE QUESTION OF DO

EARL DERBY's DEFENCE OF THE DIsRAEII
SLAVE cIRcULARs-THE QUESTION OF 'Do-
MEsTIc" SLAVERY IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES.
During the debate in the House Of Commons on Tues
day night 7th OF March, the subject Of the recent
slave circulars ISSUE Earl Derby said that he would
have been well content have left this question: far
the government concerned In the hands of the
noble lord upon the woosack for he had covered tho
whole ground Of argument and he the Earl Of Derby
could add but little what the noble and learned lord
had SAID. His department, however, had had much
to do with these questions, wherever they had been
raised that he remained absolutely silent he might
to take his fair share of whatever responsi
bity might accrue. This controversy turned upon
two questons-the first whether any circular
ought have been issued at ALL and then, whether
they had laid down the circular accurately fairly
the recognized principles OF international law Upon
the first point he had heard various objections raised
but he really did not understand the point Of them.
Wherever IL was possible to lay down rule
II the duty Of the government to give their officers
the benefit Of such rule, and even without a rule
sort OF general understanding better than rule
at ALL Every person. British foreign slave slave
holder had right to know how under certain gwen
circumstances the British government would The
practice Of issuing general instructions upon this
point by means one; and, therefore, in
issuing instructions the government had simply fol-
lowed precedent which they found In the absence
OF such instructions the practical Inconvenience which
would have arisen would have been serious, because
the officers would have been left under difficult
circumstances with contradictory decisions in different
parts OF the world If was meant that We had not got
into any diplomatic difficulty way, he agreed; but
our action in the matter had not been uniform or con-
sistent and II not unreasonable that they should
seek TO establish some uniform mode Of action. IL
did not follow that because these matters had settled
themselves before that II would be the In
tiles and gave rise to difficulty; but with increased
means OF Communication and with other altered cir
cumstances IL might be different now. Now the
wider question: whether II this circular enforced
II would lead TO difficulty II had been contended that
international law SUCH had nothing TO do with this
matter; but this TO him startling proposition.
(''Hear, hearr) 1t had also been said thai inter
national law should not DO applied TO these slavehold
ing Powers, because their right to hold slaves
founded force, not on law but when our ships were
Powers they should behave precisely in the same way
they would have behaved In the waters of the United
States before their civil war swept away slavery.
The question which lay ut the bottom OF the matter
was how far the law Of foreign state should be re-
spcc,ed board war vessels whom within the waters Of
such State; but that seemed, according TO Marshall
and Story 10 be matter not so much OF positive right
OF usage and concession. In the of Forbes,
Lord Chief Justice Best LAID down that while in the
OF Florida the laws of that State attached both
to the ship and the slave on board Rightly wrongly,
they we're dealing in an exceptional manner with
Brazil in refusing deliver TO the Brazilian
authorizes slaves captured by British cruisers. II
worth notice in this connection, that no previous
a slave escaped from the shore The point never
seemed to have been practically raised with Brazil
There were, however, cases OF demand made by the
Brazilian government for the surrender OF slaves
found board vessels captured by British cruisers.
In the first OF these cases, which occurred in lS41
the men had formed part OF the Of
the vessel The Queens Advocate was consulted,
and the Brazilian government was Informed that
though the British government declined to send these
men back to their masters, 1t was prepared to pay
compensation for them. In 1S43 q similar
CURED with reference 10 two men who were sent on
board the Crescent Lord Aberdeen refused 10 give
them up acting the advice of the Queens Advocate
and contending that the jurisdiction of the Brazilian
government did not extend TO the vessel on which
these men were placed The BRAZILIAN government
renewed the demand The matter was again consid
cred, and IL was held that the objection could not be
maintained and compensation was accordingly made.
That done by Lord Aberdeen, the author OF the
Aberdeen There other case of importance.
The instructions OF Lord Clarendon came in 1870
Lord Clarendon maintained that the captains of the
Nymph and Dryad were not justified in sailing away
with the slaves question board, observing that II
that principle applicable to Madagascar il would
equally apply TO any other country similarly
circumstanced One OF two things must happen
either the vessels be kept there by force which
would be o high handed way of doing things, and
would not be likely TO answer in the long rum or else
they must to have the power which they now
exercised. Domestic slavery institution which
belonged TO the Internal organization of each
try to regulate for itself II IL disappeared he be-
lieved it would II would not be extngushed by the
efforts of philanthropy alone, but in consequence OF
the moral indignation which prevailed against H. and
by the raising of the feelings OF men TO higher level,
and when that level was reached slavery would be
likely TO disappear They would do much harm fthey
sought to resort by force to accomplish that which
ought to done by policy and persuasion. This coun
try had strong and persistent efforts for the abo
| lition OF slavery and OF the slave trade, and Her
Majestys government had shown their earnestness In
furthering the work in many cases. and latest of ALL
! in Egypt and the Red Sea. (''Hear, hear. ~