Commons Sitting of 5 March 1811

SLAVE TRADE FELONY BILL.
Mr. Broughamrose, agreeably to notice, to move for leave to bring in a Bill for rendering more effectual the Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade. He moved, that the Resolution of the House of the 10th of June 1806, be read; and the same was read as follows: "Resolved,
234
That this House, conceiving the African Slave Trade to be contrary to the principles of justice, humanity, and sound policy, will, with all practicable expedition, proceed to take effectual measures for abolishing the said trade, in such manner, and at such period, as may be deemed advisable." He also moved, That the Resolution of the House, of the 15th of June, in the last session of parliament, respecting the Slave Trade, be read: And the same was read, as follows:
"Resolved, nem. con. That this House has learnt, with great surprise and indignation, the attempts which have recently been made to evade the prohibitions of the Act abolishing the African Slave Trade; and that this House will, early in the next session of parliament, take into its consideration such measures as may tend effectually to prevent such daring violations of the law."—The resolutions being read, the hon. and learned gent. said that he now rose, in pursuance of the notice he had given, and of the resolutions which had just been read, to move for leave to bring in a bill for the more effectually preventing the dealing in slaves. When he remembered the almost unanimous feeling of the House on this subject, when the resolution which had been last read was come to; when he reflected on the triumph with which the exertions of his hon. friend, the member for Yorkshire, had ultimately been crowned in this glorious struggle, he was induced to believe that it would scarcely be necessary for him to do more than to state, that, notwithstanding the acts of the legislature, notwithstanding the more recent resolution of that House expressive of their determination to see that act strictly enforced, still it appeared that there were persons who, in despite of their authority, did deal in this horrid trade, and did contrive to evade the penalties which they had imposed for the purpose of preventing it. He might appeal for the truth of this statement, to the evidence on the table of the House, and to various other sources of information which had come to his hands, and which were also known to many other members of the House, and which could leave no doubt whatever that a considerable traffic was still carried on in the trade in question, by subjects of this country, resident in our colonies. It would be better for him, however, instead of referring to the evidence generally, to notice one or two instances

235
which had come to his own knowledge, and which must satisfy any man, that the trade was persisted in, not only in defiance of the acts of the 46th and 47th of the king, but even in defiance of the last resolution of the House. In doing so, he should have a disagreeable task to per-form; and, as he should have to allude to persons against whom he had such evidence as would be sufficient to lead to their conviction, were they to be sued for penalties, or even to bring home to them a capital felony, had it pleased the legislature to make it an offence of that nature, while he made his statement with full confidence of the truth of what he stated, he should, on account of the heaviness of the charge, not mention the names of the parties, nor even allude to them in any pointed manner. The trade was now carried on, not by vessels supposed to be employed in such a traffic, but in the more innocent one of trading in wood and ivory. One ship, the Neptune, belonging to persons who had formerly been large dealers in this trade, had lately been sent on a voyage for the purchase of wood and ivory. After its return, however, two of the men, persons of excellent character, had stated that the captain also took on board thirteen slaves and two boys, who were carried to the isle of Princes, belonging to Portugal. The captain, after this, bought a smaller vessel, and carried on a traffic between the African coast and some foreign possessions, which served him as an entrepot. Another vessel, named the George, but the name of the captain of which he should not mention, it had been confessed by the captain himself had sailed expressly on a slaving voyage. The captain had been heard to express his anxiety to get safely out of the port from whence he was to clear, not doubting that if he did so, he should be sure of sailing without interruption. Three months ago one of our king's ships stopped a merchant vessel, of which suspicions were entertained, and on examination, the carpenter declared that he had been ordered to fit her out with bulkheads and boards, which are the never-failing symptoms of a slave-trader. On the 12th of December, after the House had expressed its indignation at the attempts to continue this trade, a king's ship fell in with a vessel which bore the name of the Marquis Romana, but which was in reality the Prince William, an English vessel, the owners of which were well known, and on
236
board of which vessel there were not fewer than 109 negroes. There were others in the same situation, but which he should not mention. He could not help, however, alluding to other two vessels, which passed by the names of the Gallicia and Palafox, it being pretended that they were Spanish vessels. It was made incontestibly evident, however, that they belonged to English owners resident in this country, and were in part manned with English. These vessels were stopped on another ground, and were on the point of being released, when it appeared from the deposition of one of the masters, that they were the Queen Charlotte and Mohawk; that they were well known to be the property of English owners; were under the superintendence of English supercargoes; and that the name of one of the captains was George Woodbine, which he had changed to that of Giorgio Mandesilva, for the sake of carrying on the deception. Not to trouble the House with more instances of this kind, he begged only to call their attention to some letters from colonel Maxwell, and from the judge of the Admiralty at Sierra Leone. These proved, that though the traffic was greatly diminished, and bore no proportion to its former extent, yet that there still existed sufficient to render it highly worthy of the attention of parliament, and that it well became them to consider how they should best free themselves from what still remained of it. The judge mentioned that since his arrival in March, 1809, no fewer than 1091 slaves had been brought for condemnation in his court. He was, therefore, warranted in saying, though the trade was greatly diminished, that what remained of it was well worthy the attention of the House. He was not disposed to state that many of the slaves so carried off were introduced into the British colonies; but he did say that they were carried to St. Bartholomew's, and St. Croix, for the purpose of being sent from thence into other islands. In the latter island, advertisements for the sale of such slaves were even exhibited publicly and in open day. It was not necessary for him to accuse those interested in our West India possessions with violating the act of the legislature of this country, and the resolutions of the House; it was sufficient if these slaves were carried to Demarara, Berbice, and the other newly conquered islands. If necessary, on this point he could refer to a contest between the governor of Demarara

237
and the planters of Beibice, where, in a memorial by the latter, signed with their own names, it appeared, that they not only continued to import negroes, but that they were even ignorant of any law to prevent them from doing so, or if they were aware of such a law, that they were not disposed to attend to it. What these memorialists principally complained of, was the frequent seduction of their weak-minded and new negroes. Gentlemen might suppose that this was before the expression of the feelings of that House on the subject. But no such thing. This was only in November, 1809, no less than four years after the resolution of the House, and two years and a half after the passing of the statute. In defiance of these resolutions and of the statute, therefore, the House saw the importation of new negroes encouraged. If such a trade was suffered to be carried on, it would be better to stiller it to proceed as formerly, so that the honest dealer, as well as the smuggler, might have the means of carrying it on. It was unjust to the fair trader, that he should be excluded, while the unfair trader made a calculation of the chances in his favour, and was suffered to be in a better situation than before the trade was put a stop to. The West Indian himself must be anxious to cut down a trade in which he himself had no share. If, again, the House looked to the shipowners, they had now little or no interest in such a traffic, having diverted their capital into another channel. The trade was so much reduced, so far as they could be concerned, that a love of contraband alone could induce them to wish its continuance. Thus, it was only from one description of persons that the House could now look for opposition to the effectual abolition of this traffic; and they were the persons who, so far from being objects of favour or compassion, were those who ought peculiarly to be struck at, being those who were now concerned in an attempt to continue this trade in defiance of the resolutions of the House, and of the acts of the legislature. It was enough for him only to allude to this fact, to take from such persons any portion of the favour of the House. One successful adventure, it appeared, was sufficient to cover three or four failures, and with such prospects of advantage, not having the benefit of insurance, adventurers of this kind finding it necessary to be their own insurers, saw their advantage in having three or four ships out at one
238
time. If the House only considered that such persons could not but be aware of the nature of the trade in which they were about to deal, they could hardly fail being satisfied that there was not a single object more appropriate for criminal legislation. A person fitting out a vessel for this trade knew that he was to arrive on the coast of Africa, and that in various ways he was to get into his possession a cargo of human beings; that he was to sell them into a state of slavery, infinitely exceeding every other, and with circumstances too disgusting to be dwelt on. It was impossible, that a person engaged in such a speculation could have his eyes shut to the evils he was about to inflict; so that instead of being a malum prokibitum, it must be seen to be a malum in se. Without going further into the cruelties of the trade, without looking to the hardships of the middle passage, it was impossible for any man to shut his eyes against the horrors of such a traffic: and, what then should be said to a person in this country sending his deputies abroad to inflict miseries and cruelties greater than any other? That such would properly fall under the cognizance of the criminal law, it would not be necessary for him to adduce many instances to prove. By an act in the reign of George 2, any waterman on the river, carrying above a certain number of passengers in his boat or wherry, if by any accident a life should be lost, was declared guilty of felony. So even while the slave trade was tolerated, it was punishable to carry above a certain number, in proportion to the tonnage of the vessel, through the middle passage. There were many other instances which he might mention. It was declared to be felony, without benefit of clergy, to damage any public works; to damage London bridge, Fulham bridge, &c. &c.; to destroy any lock or sluice on a canal; to destroy any turnpike house or gale, &c.; and by the 48th of the king, it was declared to be felony to steal oysters, for which the persons offending were subject to transportation for 14 years, or to hard labour for three years. The House would recollect that he was talking of that which was robbery, torture, murder, and they would not fail to punish such an offence with something at least equal to the punishment imposed for stealing an oyster. It was said that the great bulk of this trade in slaves, was carried on by the Americans and the Spaniards. It would appear, however, that both of those countries

239
were putting down the traffic as we had done, and the message from the president to the congress of the United States, recommended the taking of further measures for the complete abolition of that trade. The measure he proposed to introduce would have the effect of making the supercargoes liable, who would be struck at by the act; and if foreign cruizers should endeavour to come into any of our settlements, they might be brought to trial, as a foreigner in this country trying to escape might be brought to punishment.
The hon. and learned gent, concluded by moving "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to render more effectual the Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade."
Mr. Marryattsaid, he had received information of one ship having been seized laden with slaves, and that there were three others in similar circumstances which were following. From every information the trade was still carried on to a great extent, and he trusted every measure would be adopted totally to prevent it.
Mr. Wilberforcestrongly supported the measure now recommended to the House, and begged his hon. and learned friend to accept his warmest thanks for the great trouble and anxiety he had shewn in bringing the matter before the House. He hoped, that as they had a great deal to answer for in allowing so horrid a traffic to exist for such a length of time in this country, the House would now do all they could to make a compensation for the evils they had so long suffered to exist, by providing, by every means in their power, for its total prevention in future. The measure of his hon. and learned friend, he trusted, would have this effect. He had no doubt it would be unanimously agreed to; but, if it should prove ineffectual, other measures must be resorted to.
Mr. Barhamwas sorry to understand, that the illicit trade in slaves had so greatly increased, that if not effectually checked, it seemed as if it would shortly exceed that slave trade which had been abolished. The Chancellor of the Exchequer fully agreed in the necessity of taking every step for stopping so unjust a traffic. He could not suffer the business to pass, however, without distinctly stating that the object of the hon. and learned gent., as imparted to him, did not go to make the offence a capital felony, but one punishable by transportation or imprisonment.
Mr. Brougham explained,that such was
240
his object in the first instance. He should propose transportation for any period not exceeding it years, or imprisonment for not more than three nor less than two years. It was impossible, however, for him to pledge himself that he might not afterwards, if the present measure was found inadequate, move that the punishment be made capital.
Mr. Canning,though no person viewed the traffic with more horror than he did, was still of opinion, that having been so long suffered to exist, the House ought not at once to go the length of punishing it with death. To the proposition of the hon. and learned gent, as now stated by him, he gave his hearty assent.
The motion was then put and carried nem. con. and Mr. Brougham, Mr. Wilberforce, and Mr. Whitbread, had leave to prepare and bring in the bill.—Shortly after the bill was brought in and read a first time.

IRISH PUBLIC BUSINESS.
Sir John Newportrose, pursuant to notice, to move a resolution, ordering that no Public Bill should pass that House, unless the same interval should occur between its first and second reading, which took place between the first and second reading of every Irish, Private Bill. He said that it was but fair,. that the Irish should have a fair opportunity of knowing the exact state of their public business in that House. This he conceived to be impracticable under the existing regulations. There was an act then pending in the House, limiting the number of persons concerned in stagecoaches. This would considerably affect private property in tolls, and would in all probability be passed into a law before any portion of those most interested in its-provisions would know any thing of any-such measure having been agitated. After some further observations, he concluded with moving,—" That, in order to afford to the people of Ireland an adequate opportunity for communicating to parliament their representations on the probable effect of the legislative regulations about to be enacted, exclusively affecting that part of the united kingdom, and thereby to lessen the inconvenience to which they are subjected, by the removal to a considerable distance of the seat of the legislature, it is just and expedient that such an interval of time should be required to elapse between the second reading and the committal of every Public Bill, exclusively

241
affecting Ireland, as is now directed between the first and second readings of Irish Private Bills by the standing order of this House of 30th June 1801."
Mr. Fosteropposed the Resolution, on the ground that no inconvenience had arisen out of the regulation now existing, and that the one proposed would have the effect of unnecessarily retarding the public business. He objected also to the preamble, the wording of which implied a direct censure on the Union between both countries—a measure which, although sincerely and strenuously opposed by himself, had yet been cordially supported by the right hon. baronet.
Mr. Hutchinsonthought the objection of the right hon. gent. to the preamble rather singular: the preamble was disapproved of because it censured a measure which had been supported by his right hon. friend. Did that preamble stale what was not the fact, or rather did it not speak the language of the commercial interests in Ireland? Were not those interests from day to day, in every session, obstructed and injured by the pernicious system of hurry, precipitance, and inadvertance which marked all their proceeding upon Irish questions? One ground of the right hon. gent.'s objection to the proposed regulation was, that no inconvenience resulted from the present mode. His personal experience enabled him to set the right hon. gentleman right on that head. He had known repeated instances, in the course of the last and former sessions, in which measures involving the interests of one of the first commercial cities in the empire, the city which he had the honour to represent (Cork), were rapidly carried through that House, though he had made earnest but ineffectual applications for time to consult with his constituents upon them. He had, then, no doubt that the present mode was a bad one. Whether that proposed by his right hon. friend could completely remedy the evil, he was not equally certain; but sure he was, that some change in the present regulation was imperiously necessary; and as the resolution proposed must, in some degree, effect that change, it should have his cordial support.
Mr. Parnellsaid, that the right hon. bart. who had brought forward this motion, did not merit the imputation cast upon him, of having unnecessarily made an attack on the Union. That Ireland would suffer by the loss of her local legislature
242
was an evil that even the friends of the measure allowed. They argued, that though this evil would arise, the advantages that Ireland would derive from the concessions that were promised as the immediate consequences of the measure, would more than compensate it. The right hon. bart. therefore, adopted only the language of the best friends of the Union, and did now act I in a manner inconsistent with his former conduct. In respect to the impediment which the right hon. gent. opposite alledges would he thrown in the way of public business by the adoption of the proposed regulation, he has not been fortunate in selecting the instance with which he endeavoured to support his argument. It is not required to make the regulation an act of the legislature, but merely an order of the House to govern its own proceedings. If, then, circumstances should arise, requiring a Bill to pass in the same expeditious manner as that in which it was requisite to pass the Treasury Bills, the House would be able, on a special case of necessity properly made out, to suspend its order for the occasion, and prevent any detriment to the public by making an exception to the general rule. The right hon. gent. had argued, that as most of the Irish business related to taxation, and as no petitions could be received against a tax, the proposed regulation was on this account unnecessary. But though it be true that no petition can be received, still the members representing Ireland ought to be allowed time to communicate with their constituents, and the people had an undoubted right to have the opportunity of making their opinions known. They possessed the privilege of being able to meet together for the purpose of instructing their representatives, and no obstruction ought to exist in the way of their free exercise of this valuable right.
Mr. Wellesley Polesaid, that until some case was made out of actual inconvenience under the present mode, he should not vote for any change in it.
Mr. Shawof Dublin said, that he could not agree with the right hon. gent. who spoke last, in thinking that no inconvenience had resulted from the present mode. He had had personal experience of many, affecting his constituents in particular, where measures were hurried through the House: amongst others, the Dublin Police Bill had not been treated with that consideration which it called for. Upon this and many other occasions, he

243
himself had in vain applied for time; striking instance of the hurry and inadvertence which had prevailed in hurrying bills through that House, without due consultation with those who were more immediately to be affected by them, was, that when the magistrates were about to enforce a certain clause in the Wide-street Commissioners bill, they found, for the first time, that that very clause had been repealed by the provisions of the Dublin Coal bill, passed the preceding session. Such was the negligence and haste with which these bills had been hurried through that House. Circumstances of this nature could not but create that dissatisfaction and distrust, which it must be the wish of every honest man to remove. The effects were, however, but too obvious; and the general complaint in all the public meetings in Dublin was, that any thing was attended to in the House of Commons but Irish business.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwas surprised to hear the hon. gent. who spoke last select the Dublin Police Hill as an instance of that hurry and neglect of which he had complained. That Bill was brought into the House some time before Easter, and was not passed into a law till some time after Easter. What had appeared so very absurd in the repeal of the clause of the Wide-street Commissioners Bill by the Dublin Coal Bill, would not be thought so extraordinary when it was known that 'the Wide-street commissioners fund was principally supplied by the product of a duty on coals; here however it was evident that the hon. gent.'s observations could not apply, because that Bill was a private Bill, and therefore its delay could not have been owing to those alledged inconveniences which the resolution of the right hon. bart. meant to remedy.
Mr. Shaw,in explanation said, that he meant the Paving Bill.
Mr. Crokerhad the satisfaction of knowing that the Bill alluded to by the last speaker, so far from having been hurried through the House improperly, had been brought in on the 17th of February, and postponed for various reasons to the 14th of April, and even then it had been still further postponed. Neither the Police nor the Paving Bill bore the hon. member out in his statements. When such charges were brought forward, he was anxious that it should be proved there were solid grounds for them, or that they should be flatly contradicted, that it might be known
244
not only here but in the sister kingdom, that they had no foundation. He defied the hon. bart. to name one Irish Bill which had been hurried through the House, if an Irish member had wished it to be deferred. If the hon. baronet could not do this, he would not consent that the House should throw a slur on itself, and, by acceding to such a motion, seem to evince a conviction that such a measure was necessary.
Sir J. Newport,in reply, instanced the inconveniences which had been experienced through a money Bill being hurried through the House, imposing a tax on advertisements, which Bill was passed before the representations and explanations of the people of Ireland were received. He also mentioned another instance of the tax imposed upon hand bills. He thought it his duty, however friendly he might be to the legislative union of the two countries, to bring those circumstances forward, and to communicate to the House the general feelings of the people. Nothing could be more injurious to the interest of the empire than to oppose such a Resolution; nothing more likely to counteract the efforts of the Union.
Mr. Foster,in allusion to what had been said by the hon. baronet respecting the Bill which he had spoken of as having been passed before the remonstrance of the people of Ireland could be received, appealed to the House (having stated the progress of it) if it could be said to have been hurried through the House. He then replied to the other statements of the hon. baronet, and vindicated the conduct of the House, in the instances to which allusions had been made. He denied that the House had been in the habit of neglecting the business of Ireland: so far from that being the fact, every degree of attention was paid to it which the importance of the subject could require.
Mr. Hutchinsonwould not take individual instances that might be adduced, as proving that general inconvenience was not experienced.
A division then took place, when the numbers were, for the motion 29—Against it 74. Majority 45.

RESOLUTION RESPECTING ORDERS OF THE DAY AND NOTICES.
On the order of the day being read, for resuming the adjourned debate upon the motion, made upon Wednesday last, "That in this present session of parliament all Orders of the Day set down in the Order Book for

245
Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, shall be disposed of before the House will proceed upon any Motions of which Notices shall be entered in the Order Book,"
Mr. Whitbreadbelieved the right hon. gent, who brought forward the motion did it from the best of motives; but the alteration, if carried, would, he had reason to believe, be of great detriment to the liberties of the House. He did not see the necessity of it. The press of business in the three last sessions of parliament could alone give a colour to its necessity; but in each of these sessions important public inquiries were carried on. The present session was not likely to be attended with a similar press of business. The great evil was the shortening the period of the sitting of parliament, which had taken place since the union. It was, it seemed, inconvenient for the Irish members to come over till after Christmas, and it was inconvenient for the English members to sit after Midsummer; so that something was cut off from the beginning and something from the end, and the session reduced from 26 to 20 weeks. If the motion was carried, it should be followed up with other measures to make it complete. All Orders of the Day should be called on in succession; and no new Bill should pass the House, the debate of which began after 10 o'clock. He complained of the want of perception in many respectable members of the House, of the evils that would follow the motion; and he was afraid, though the order was only to remain for a session, it would in all likelihood become an annual vote. He then adverted to the days—the House had never sat any time on Saturday since 1793, and that day went for nothing; while the minister had Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. He hoped he would limit his days to Wednesday and Friday.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerthanked the hon. gent, for his candour. He conceived, however, that the imagined dangers to the liberties of the House were merely a phantom of his own creation. With respect to the business of the House being less in this than in former sessions, it was too early yet to determine so. With respect to the curtailment of the period of the session, nothing of importance was really ever done before Christmas. He did not see the necessity of the hon. gent.'s additional regulations. With respect to the days, he had no objection to taking Monday and Friday for the Orders
246
of the Day, and leaving Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, for Notices.
Mr. C. W. Wynnenlarged upon the increase of business, and the diminution of the periods of the session of late, and stated that if members did not chuse to attend in summer, Calls of the House ought to be resorted to.
Mr. Bastarddeprecated the idea of members consulting their own convenience in preference to the public interest.
Mr. Canningsaid, that there were inconveniences in the present practice of the House, and he was afraid of inconveniences from the present order, but, upon the whole, he was inclined to give it a trial for a session.
Mr. Whitbreadwished to have Monday for the Notices, as from the two. days' rest, members came fresh to the House on Monday.
The House then divided on the original question: Ayes 82—Noes 30.
The Resolution, therefore, stands as follows: Resolved, "That, in this present session of Parliament, all Orders of the Day set down in the Order Book for Mondays and Fridays, shall be disposed of before the House will proceed upon any Motions of which Notices shall be entered in the Order Book."