Lords Sitting of 8 February 1841

MINUTES.
Bill. Read a second time:—Copyhold Enfranchisement.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of Redesdale, from Wigan, for the Better Observance of the Sabbath.

ROYAL MESSAGE—LORD KEANE.
The Lord Chancellorannounced a message from her Majesty relative to Lord Keane, for which see the Commons' report, post page 387.
Message to be taken into consideration the next day.

TRIAL OF THE EARL OF CARDIGAN.
The Earl of Shaftesburypresented an additional report from the committee appointed to inspect the journals of the House upon former trials of Peers in criminal cases, and to consider of the proper methods of proceeding in order to bring James Thomas, Earl of Cardigan, to a speedy trial, as follows:—
"That it having been intimated that her Majesty does not intend to be present on the occasion of the trial of James Thomas, Earl of Cardigan, it is the opinion of this committee that no directions shall be given for making those preparations that are usual on the occasion of her Majesty's appearance in that House.
"That it is the opinion of this committee, that during his trial, James Thomas, Earl of Cardigan, shall be allowed a stool inside of the bar, where he may sit uncovered and without his robes.
"That it is the opinion of this committee,
364
that four tickets be given to James Thomas, Karl of Cardigan, two for the gallery, and two for the space below the bar.
"That it is the opinion of this committee that a room be allowed for the attendants of James Thomas, Earl of Cardigan.
"That it is the opinion of this committee that the judges be allowed to sit covered at the trial of James Thomas, Earl of Cardigan."
Report agreed to.

MR. M'LEOD—UNITED STATES.
The Earl of Mountcashellsaid, he perceived that some correspondence had taken place between Mr. Fox, the British Minister to the United States, and Mr. Forsyth, the American Secretary of State, relative to the arrest and imprisonment of Mr. M'Leod, by the state of New York, on a charge of murder and arson; but no official information had been laid before the House on the subject. It appeared from the public prints that certain members of Congress had spoken in a violent manner—not alone disrespectful to the Government of this country, but in a manner exceedingly harsh and violent towards the accused individual. He therefore felt it to be his humble duty to bring the matter before their Lordships, for the purpose of eliciting some information or statement from her Majesty's Government. At the same time, he much feared that what transpired in that House would not arrive in America in sufficient time to save this unfortunate gentleman, who appeared to be most falsely and unjustly accused. He begged leave to state, that he had the opportunity of knowing, through the means of Captain Drew, that Mr. M'Leod was not present when the schooner Caroline was burnt, and that he was, in fact, on shore at the time, doing his duty, in obedience to the commands of his superiors. It would therefore appear, that the persons who came forward with the charge had made a false and unjust accusation. He had, in the hopes of saving the life of a British subject, brought this matter before the House. It was, in a public point of view, a matter of more importance than some individuals might suppose. It was, in fact, very nearly connected with our honour as a nation; and he did hope and trust that the Government would take active and energetic steps to assert, maintain and uphold, the character of this great country. He hoped that they would not, by tamely submitting to insult and wrong, suffer the national character to

365
sink into contempt. Looking to the hostile feelings that had been manifested in the United States, it was evident to him that if they did not take a dignified position they would be trampled on, and on every occasion insulted wherever they went. In short, there would be no safety abroad for British subjects. He hoped, therefore, that Government would exert themselves for the preservation of the valuable life of this worthy individual, who was now suffering in a dungeon of the United States, and that they would fully vindicate the character of this country. The vessel in question, the Caroline, was actively employed during the late troubles in Canada, in assisting those who were armed against British authority. A party of marauders from the United States had, at that time, taken possession of an island belonging to Great Britain; and this vessel was employed in carrying thither men, provisions, and ammunition. The vessel was originally engaged in smuggling between the coast of the United States and Canada. She was next employed in that most illegal act which he had described. Now, he would ask, had she letters of marque, or any other authority, for acting in this manner? She had not. She was as a piratical vessel, and treated as such. If an English vessel were taken on the high seas, without letters of marque or any proper authority for cruising in a hostile way by a French man-of-war, or a Russian man-of-war, would the English Government accuse the French Government or the Russian Government with having acted improperly if a force belonging to them captured such a vessel and hanged her crew at the yard-arm? No; they would say, that such a capture was perfectly defensible. But it would appear that the Americans had one law for themselves and another for other nations, or else they could never think of punishing a man for destroying a piratical vessel. He wished the Americans would act on those principles which we adopted. When, in 1818, the Americans purchased the Floridas from Spain, and found themselves engaged in a war with the Seminole Indians, did not General Jackson, when he found in one of the forts that were captured, two English subjects, order them to be executed? He did; and this Government did not interfere, because those parties were acting in a hostile capacity, without any authority whatsoever.
366
The noble Lord concluded by asking whether any information had been received from Canada of the capture and detention of a British subject in the State of New York, upon a charge of murder, and on suspicion of being one of those who had been engaged in the destruction of the Caroline steamer, and, if so, what steps her Majesty's Ministers intended taking in consequence?
Viscount Melbournewould answer the question without entering into the facts and arguments with which the noble Lord had prefaced it. Her Majesty's Government had certainly received information that an individual of the name of M'Leod had been arrested by the authorities of the state of New York, and by them committed to prison to take his trial upon a charge of murder and arson, which it was stated he had committed upon the occasion of the seizure and destruction of the Caroline steamer. Upon hearing this Mr. Fox, our Minister at Washington, demanded his liberation from the General Government, and received for reply, that the matter entirely rested with the authorities of the State of New York, and that it was neither in the power nor the inclination of the Federal Government of America to interfere. That was the way in which the matter stood at present. What her Majesty's Ministers meant to do their Lordships would not expect him then to state. At the same time, the noble Lord might be perfectly sure of this, that they would take those measures which in their estimation would be best calculated to secure the safety of her Majesty's subjects, and to vindicate the honour of the British nation.
Adjourned.