HC Deb 15 July 1861 vol 164 cc878-80
MR. T. DUNCOMBE

said, he rose to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he had received any further complaints of the treatment of British subjects in the secession States, and to make a statement upon the subject? What he particularly wanted to do was to set him- self right with the House with regard to a statement which he had make on a former occasion, when he thought he was rather hardly treated by the hon. Members for Liskeard and Galway (Mr. B. Osborne and Mr. Gregory). The question he then asked of the noble Lord—

MR. SPEAKER

The hon. Member is out of order in referring to a former debate.

MR. T. DUNCOMBE

said, he merely wished to set himself right on a personal matter. On the former occasion he was told by the hon. Member for Liskeard that his statement was "an old woman's tale;" and by the hon. Member for Galway, that the information which he had received was from persons who knew probably less than he knew himself. He (Mr. Duncombe) on that occasion stated that the Southern states of America, the Confederated States, had offered 20 dollars for any prisoner, whether man woman or children, taken dead or alive. This was contradicted; and he was told, and the House was told, that this statement was not accurate. Since that he had endeavoured to ascertain from the United States how far he could be borne out in the information which he then gave to the House; and he had received an answer which fully bore him out, in the shape of an Act of President Jefferson Davis and the Congress of the Southern states passed at the end of May. From the 10th Section of that Act it appeared that the Confederated Congress offered a bounty of, not 20, but 25 dollars for every man, woman, and child captured on board a United States vessel and brought into port alive, while a bounty of 20 dollars was offered for every such person if dead. He also had to make a grave charge against one of our Consuls in the Southern States for having neglected his duty towards a British subject. He (Mr. T. Duncombe) wished to know from the noble Lord whether he had received information upon that point? The last post had brought him a letter form New York to the following effect:— New York, June 21. We have several Englishmen here, who have experienced the tender mercy of Southern hospitality and also the inutility of any appeal to our Consuls at Southern ports. Three or four complain most bitterly of their treatment, and state that they had to escape concealed in the cargo of a steamer, and had appealed in vain to the Consuls. One intelligent young man spent some time in Savannah, and was present at the period of the tarring and feathering an English captain, and he assures me he saw there the Consul wearing Secession colours; and that when a reward was offered for the discovery of those guilty of the outrage on the British captain, the ringleader delivered himself up, claimed the reward, and, after a few days of imprisonment, was liberated to pursue his career of lawlessness. I understand the British Consul of Savannah, in the right of his wife, is a slaveholder, and I cease to wonder no proceeding can be taken in defence of Englishmen. He thought this was a matter that required looking into, as it was impossible that justice could be done to British subjects under such a state of things. He wished to know whether the noble Lord had received any complaint to that effect from any of those parties, and, if he had, what steps he had taken, or would take, with respect to it?

LORD JOHN RUSSELL

said, he had not received any complaint of the conduct of our Consul at Savannah. There was a complaint with respect to the outrage in tarring and feathering the captain of a British vessel, and some correspondence took place with the British Consul on the subject. But he thought that occurrence happened before the Secession, and it had, therefore, nothing at all to do with that question [Mr. T. DUNCOMBE: It occurred in May last.] There was a rumour that a British captain had been ill treated and beaten. A great mob assembled, and he was tarred and feathered. But the British Consul did all that it was possible to do under the circumstances. He had received no complaint that the British Consul had worn Secession colours. If that was true it was a very improper thing on the part of a British Consul to wear party colours.