MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS. (Hansard, 13 February 1872)

§ MR. WHEELHOUSE
, in rising to move— That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying Her Majesty to be graciously pleased to appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into the circumstances attending the seizure and sale of the steamship 'Redgauntlet,' then the property of one Charles Cameron, at the Island and Port of St. Thomas, in or about the month of August 1807; and that such Commission be directed to hold it sittings for the matter of such inquiry at the said Island of St. Thomas, in order to allow the said Charles Cameron to adduce evidence and give proof before such Royal Commission there of certain facts connected with such seizure and sale. said, that the ship was unjustly seized at the instance of the Spanish authorities, in consequence of a claim made with respect to a debt for £600 contracted at Cuba on a bottomry bond, and sold far below its value, being bought by a firm at St. Thomas, with which the acting Consul of Her Majesty's Government was connected. This transaction, which he contended was illegal, involved the master of the vessel in very heavy loss, and he accordingly wished that the Commission should sit at St. Thomas, and inquire into the whole circumstances of the case.

§ MR. CRAUFURD
, in seconding the Motion, said, he considered that Mr. Cameron had made out a case requiring an answer and redress for the grievance he complained of.

§ VISCOUNT ENFIELD
said, this subject had occupied for a considerable time the attention of successive Secretaries of State for Foreign Affairs. The circumstances extended over a period of five years, but all Her Majesty's Government had to do with the subject was in reference to Mr. Lamb's conduct as the Consul representing this country. The whole of the circumstances were referred by Lord Derby and the late Lord Clarendon, when Foreign Secretaries, to the Queen's Advocate, and he was of opinion that Mr. Lamb had acted legally and properly as Consul. That opinion had been forwarded to Mr. Cameron's legal representative in this country. The only other complaint against Mr. Lamb was that he was partner in the firm in Havannah, which had advanced £500 on a bottomry bond on the vessel. The proper notice for repayment was given, and as Mr. Cameron could not raise the money to pay that sum, the vessel was sold, and it was to be regretted that a vessel supposed by Mr. Cameron to be worth a considerable sum had not realized more than about £1,500. Mr. Lamb had acted strictly legal in detaining the register. There was nothing to prevent Mr. Cameron from enforcing any rights he might possess against Mr. Lamb for anything he might have done other than in his official capacity as Consul. The Queen's Advocate still maintained the opinion that Mr. Lamb, in his consular position, had done nothing to warrant censure; and concurring in that opinion, the Government must oppose the Motion for a Royal Commission to inquire into circumstances which took place so far back as 1867.