HC Deb 10 April 1843 vol 68 cc747-9
Viscount Palmerston

wished to ask a question of the noble Lord, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, with reference to the papers laid on the Table on the subject of the negotiations respecting the Washington Treaty. In a letter from Lord Ashburton to Mr. Webster, dated the 7th of August, 1842, in answer to Mr. Webster's application with regard to the case of the Creole, his Lordship said — In the meantime, I engage that instructions shall be given to the governors of her Majesty's colonies at the southern borders of the United States to execute the laws duly, and that there shall be no officious interference with American vessels. What he wished to ask of the noble Lord was, whether, in pursuance of the engagement thus entered into by Lord Ashburton, any instructions had been given to the governors of British colonies on the southern borders of the United States with reference to that particular point? He also wished to ask what was the general purport and nature of those instructions, supposing any to have been issued, and whether the noble Lord would have any objection to lay those instructions upon the Table of the House?

Lord Stanley,

in answer to the question of the noble Lord, had to state that her Majesty's Government had not thought it necessary to issue any instructions subsequent to, or consequent on, that assurance on the part of Lord Ashburton to the American Secretary of State, to which the noble Lord bad referred. A short time before the correspondence in question, or almost simultaneously with it, her Majesty's Government had had under their deliberate consideration all the circumstances connected with the case of the Creole, out of which the correspondence had arisen; and the whole of that case, with the questions of law to which it bad given rise, had been submitted to the con- sideration of her Majesty's law officers. Their opinion with respect to a number of cases had been confidentially communicated to the Government, and transmitted by them to the governor of Bahamas both with regard to the course which had been hitherto pursued, and with regard to the course which should be pursued for the future. The governor of Bahamas had asked for further instructions with respect to a number of hypothetical cases; and respecting those cases also, instructions had been given previous to the communications between Lord Ashburton and Mr. Webster. He need not, he hoped, say that those instructions maintained to the fullest extent the right of personal freedom on the part of every person within a British port, on board a vessel of whatever nation and under whatever circumstances; and that right the noble Lord might reply upon it would never be given up by her Majesty's present Government. But he had reason to hope and believe that the instructions sent out with regard to those hypothetical cases to which he had referred were of a nature substantially to comply with the request made on the part of Mr. Webster, and the assurance which had been given by Lord Ashburton. It had not, therefore been thought necessary to send out any fresh instructions. The opinions of the law-officers upon the legal points submitted to them had been confidentally communicated to the Government; am he did not think the noble Lord would consider it desirable that the Government should lay before the House conditional instructions upon hypothetical cases which might or might not arise.

Viscount Palmerston

said, that certain papers on this subject bad been laid on the Table of the House in 1839, exhibiting the views of the then Government in reference to it. He wished to see from the instructions whether, and to what extent, the present Government differed from the late Government in their view of the operation of British law in our colonies, in reference to slaves coming into those colonies, under whatever circumstances.

Lord Stanley

said, if he understood the question of the noble Lord right, it was, whether the instructions sent out by her Majesty's present Government, arising oat of the Creole, were different to the instructions sent out by the previous Go- vernment. He (Lord Stanley) had not those instructions before him; but to the best of his belief there was no deviation from the instructions issued by the late Government. The instructions were, that in case any complaint was made to the British governor, upon credible testimony, that any persons in a British port were detained against their will, it was the duty set forth, to afford such persons relief and protection.

Forward to