Lords Sitting of 12 June 1828

SOUTH AMERICAN PIRACY.
Lord Strangfordrose, for the purpose of presenting three petitions, deserving their lordships' most serious attention. The first came from a numerous body of merchants and ship-owners in London. The petitioners complained of the vast losses which they continued to sustain, in consequence of the system of Piracy and depredation, carried on under the flags of Buenos Ayres and Colombia. They complained of the almost annihilation of their; commerce with that part of the world; but they complained still less of the grievances which they themselves suffered, than of the revolting atrocities perpetrated on their fellow-subjects;—atrocities, in one instance (that of a ship called the "Morning Star," proceeding from Ceylon to this country) of such a nature, that a sentiment of respect towards their lordships prevented him from describing the manner in which Englishmen had been treated by the subjects of governments, which England herself made it her boast to have called into being. He knew, indeed, that these atrocities would be excused by those who were determined to discover nothing but what was good and virtuous in republican institutions, and who thought that the crimes of young states were juvenile indiscretions to be passed over. He knew it would be said, that it was extremely unfair to judge of the many from the conduct of the few, and to condemn a government for the acts of its servants; but when he saw that no effectual steps were taken to punish or apprehend the authors of these enormities—when he found, on the contrary, that they were, on their return to their country, promoted, and furnished with new vessels and new commissions, and sent anew roving and bucaniering against the commerce of friendly and neutral powers, he had a right to say, that some of these republics were founded and sustained by robbery. England might boast of this creation, but he feared she had produced no creditable progeny; and if the time ever came when we should have again to contend with the United States of Northern America, we should find that we had been recruiting for their navies, and that for their benefit, those colonies had been torn from that Spain, under whose responsibility we should wish that they had been allowed quietly to remain.—The second petition came from the merchants and ship-owners of Jersey. Jersey employs—or rather did employ—upwards
1314
of twenty vessels in the trade of South America. Out of those twenty vessels, scarcely one half had been permitted to reach their destinations, without being molested by ships under the flags of those states to which he had alluded. This was no question involving the metaphysics of war, respecting an effectual or ineffectual blockade; but the plain case, that ships had been pillaged upon what was denominated the high road of nations. The third petition related to a case of individual hardship. The petitioner had been the commander of a ship called the "Huskisson." He did not address their lordships himself, but through the medium of Mr. Duke, his agent in this country. His ship had been partly plundered by a vessel bearing the flag of Buenos Ayres, and afterwards carried to Rio Negro, where the piracy was completed. This happened in May, 1827. An English ship was sent out to claim her, but no sooner had that ship left Rio Negro, than the condemnation of the "Huskisson" was proclaimed. Here, then, there was no case of violent blockade, and the act could only be justified by the law of the strongest. They thought, perhaps, that, because the ship was called the "Huskisson," there was a very fair opportunity of applying the principles of free trade [a laugh]. However, no explanation had been given of the circumstance. The "Huskisson" had been boarded in the middle of May, 1827, at the inauspicious hour of two in the morning; and the captain was obliged to strike his flag, and was now a destitute wanderer in a foreign land. It might be said, that peace would soon be restored between the two hostile governments, and that the present state of things would cease with the war. He must, however, think that the prospect of peace was not so near as a noble earl (Dudley) had given them reason to believe. But he was sure, if peace were to be made to-morrow—as he was sure it would not be for twelve months—his noble friend (lord Aberdeen) would not suppose its mere attainment sufficient, and that an account must be taken of that arrear of wrong which had accumulated during the war. His noble friend belonged to an administration which commanded the respect and confidence of the country, because she knew that her honour was intrusted to the hands of one, every act of whose life had been devoted to her interests. Under these feelings, he hoped.

1315
the government of this country would not forget that word, which injured and insulted nations had a right to utter—reparation.
The Earl of Aberdeenwished it was in his power to give that satisfaction which his noble friend desired, and which the subject to which the petitions referred undoubtedly deserved. He knew that his noble friend who preceded him in the office which he had the honour to fill, had made numerous and urgent recommendations on this subject to the South American governments; and he had great pleasure in stating, that the Brazilian government had promised that full reparation which the case demanded, and which was in the course of being made. With respect to the outrages mentioned by the noble lord, unquestionably the government of this country ought to extend protection to its subjects pursuing a lawful and peaceful commerce in those seas; and he trusted, that every possible reparation would be obtained. At least, those steps would not be wanting, which appeared most likely to obtain reparation. With respect to the subject of peace, he trusted that in much less time than the noble lord had mentioned, such a peace would be concluded as would afford the best opportunity of preventing future atrocities.
It being discovered by earl Grey, that the petition had no prayer, and was interlined in another hand, it was withdrawn.

PORTUGAL—LORD BERESFORD'S EXPLANATION.
Lord Dundassaid, that, in consequence of certain rumours which had been alluded to elsewhere, he wished to ask a noble lord opposite, whether or not there was any foundation for those rumours? He entertained no feeling of hostility to the noble lord in putting this question, which he was quite sure would be answered satisfactorily; convinced as he was, that that noble lord was incapable of carrying on any correspondence hostile to the interests of this country.
Lord Beresfordsaid, he wished to make no observation on the manner in which this accusation had been made, under circumstances which prevented the antidote from being applied to the poison. After a long residence in Portugal, and an intimate acquaintance with that country for upwards of twenty years, it was not extraordinary that he should have been on terms of friendly intercourse with many
1316
individuals there, or that he should have occasionally corresponded with them. Accordingly, he had been in the habit of corresponding with the late king, and with many of his ministers. Some of these letters were on matters of friendship, some on matters of business. He had been occasionally consulted, as an individual, on subjects of policy, and had stated his opinions in reply; but, whatever those opinions might have been, there was no great danger to be apprehended from them; for, in no one instance, had any counsel which he had given been followed. He repeated, that he had had correspondence, and should continue to have correspondence, with many people in Portugal. It was said, that he had had correspondence with the duke of Cadaval. He certainly had. From the friendship that existed between that, individual and himself in Portugal, some intercourse had been continued between them since his return to this country: they had each written three or four letters. Now, the charge which was stated or mooted in another place, he wished to meet fairly. The accusation against him was; first, that he had encouraged Don Miguel to pursue the course which he had adopted; and secondly, that he had given him to understand, that that course was approved of by his majesty's ministers. Before he went further, he begged to state, that the correspondence to which he had referred, had been well known to lord Liverpool, to Mr. Canning, and to other ministers of the Grown; and he never had the slightest doubt of the propriety of that correspondence suggested to him by any one of them. This was known to his noble friend, the duke of Wellington, he had shown him the letters as they arrived; but he had not shown him the answers. In looking over the correspondence, he could only find one part alluding to the opinions and intentions of his majesty's ministers; and, so far from giving any encouragement to the proceedings in Portugal, he had done directly the contrary. He would give to this part of the statement made in the other House, as strong a contradiction as words could give. It was most incorrect to say that he had encouraged Don Miguel in any one of his proceedings. He never had given him the least encouragement; he had advised him quite the contrary.
The Duke of Wellingtonsaid, his noble friend had shown him the letters which he

1317
had received. They were private letters. The last, written after the events in Portugal, desired him to suspend his judgment; and this letter his noble friend had not answered. As for authorising his noble friend to write to Portugal the opinions of this government, he never had done any such thing. He knew too well what was due to his majesty's representative at the court of Lisbon, to authorise any communication to be made to the government of Portugal, except through our ambassador.