Lords Sitting of 30 May 1853

Preamble
MINUTES. PUBLIC BILL.—2a Sales of Bullion.

RUSSIA AND THE PORTE.
The EARL of HARDWICKE: My Lords, I regret extremely that I do not see my noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in his place, as I had taken the liberty of writing to him a private note, stating it was my intention to put a question to Her Majesty's Government, through him, this evening; but seeing my noble Friend the Prime Minister in his place, and knowing well how conversant he must be with everything which relates to the foreign affairs of this country, I do not scruple to put my question now. In consequence of the great importance of the subject to which it refers, and the very pressing and momentous state in which the affairs of the Turkish Empire and Russian diplomacy now stands, I took the liberty the other evening of expressing what I believe to be the anxiety of the public, and what I know to be my own, as to the state and condition of the negotiations as then pending. Upon that occasion I ventured to express my regret that the course which had been usual in cases bearing upon diplomatic questions in reference to the Turkish Empire, had not been followed by the Government of this country—meaning thereby, that I regretted that at the time when this important question was raised, when it really seemed to involve the existence of the Ottoman Empire, and when we were in communication with Russia, we did not give a moral support to the feelings of the Turkish people in the man-

759
ner in which we had then recently and upon other former occasions done. The question which I meant to put to my noble Friend had he been present, and which I now put to my noble Friend the Prime Minister, is simply, whether instructions have been sent to Admiral Dundas, at Malta, to hasten his departure to the Dardanelles or Constantinople? I am induced to follow this course from the circumstance of the public being now informed that, on the evening of the 22nd of this month, Prince Menschikoff took his departure from Constantinople, not having succeeded in the object which he seemed to have had in view. That appears to me to bring the state of things to a very critical juncture. Believing, as I do, that the feelings of all parties in Turkey have been raised to a pitch bordering on that degree of excitement which tends to hostile operations, and that nothing has been done in the way of military preparation of any sort by any nation but France, I am led to think that the question is so critical, and the speed at which operations may now be conducted on the part of the Emperor of Russia as against the Ottoman Porte so great, that I believe it is necessary the public should be informed, not only of the opinions of our Government, but likewise of their acts and intended proceedings. I will now state why I presume to put this question, and upon what grounds; for I believe, as I said before, that it is only necessary to look at and reflect on the manner in which information may now be transmitted from point to point, and movements made, to see in what position precisely the various affairs of the different nations likely to bring about anything approaching to a collision are now placed. If it be true, as reported, that Prince Menschikoff left Constantinople on the 22nd of the present month, it is not at all improbable that on the evening of the same day, seeing his mission was entirely at an end, he would despatch a courier to his Emperor, informing him of what had taken place; and if that was so, it is probable that on this very day the courier would arrive at St. Petersburg. Assuming that everything would be done with great rapidity, and that the Emperor would despatch a courier to Sebastopol with directions for any military movements he might think fit, I think the Imperial messenger should arrive at his destination about the 6th of June. Supposing, then, that military movements are actually intended by the Emperor, and
760
that he has a fleet and an army ready at Sebastopol, which is about three hundred miles from Constantinople, and giving the ordinary time allowed for the passage of ships between those two places, it is probable that his forces could be transported to the capital of the Turkish Empire in three days by steam power and fair winds; but I give them double that time, and assuming the troops would have to be embarked, and various contingencies causing delay, I will say that the Russian vessels could not arrive at the Bosphorus before the 12th of June. Supposing, on the other hand, that Admiral Dundas was still at Malta on Saturday last, and that Her Majesty's Government, seeing the difficulty which was likely to take place, immediately despatched information and orders to the Admiral, it appears to me that he might receive those directions on Wednesday next by telegraph. No doubt the Admiral is perfectly ready to sail, and that not a moment will be lost. He has six sail of the line and seven or eight powerful steamers, and doubtless he would proceed with all haste to Constantinople, a distance from Malta of about 800 nautical miles. I take it that the best steamers run from Constantinople to Malta in four and a half days, and I take it that the Admiral could do the same, if he had the fairest possible winds and the most favourable circumstances, either for towing or sailing; but I will give Admiral Dundas double that time, and reckon that he should be at the mouth of the Dardanelles on the 10th of June, while, as I said, the Russian forces might arrive at Constantinople on the 12th. Now, it is unquestionably true that every one of these suppositions and calculations are based on probabilities, not likely, perhaps, to be realised on either side; but I still think I have shown a case which warrants me in putting the question to Her Majesty's Government, whether they have given any directions to Admiral Dundas to leave Malta, and, if so, at what period we may expect him to take his departure?
The EARL of CLARENDON[who had now entered the House] said, he had to apologise to the noble Earl for not having been present in time to hear his speech, having been unavoidably prevented from attending in his place in Parliament at an earlier moment. His noble Friend, as he was able to gather from what he had heard of the noble Earl's remarks, wished to know whether any orders had been sent to

761
Admiral Dundas to proceed with his fleet from Malta to the Dardanelles. Now, in noticing that question, he (the Earl of Clarendon) had to observe, that on Friday night the House had appeared to concur in the propriety of Her Majesty's Government not giving any explanation upon a matter with respect to which they were but imperfectly informed; and he was sure they would still more readily concur in the propriety of their declining altogether to state what directions they had given to the Admiral in command of the Mediterranean fleet.

CONVERSION OF STOCK—FUNDS IN CHANCERY.
LORD ST. LEONARDSwished to know from the Lord Chancellor what the operation of the recent Act for the Conversion of Stock was likely to be upon the interests of the suitors in Chancery?
The LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he was glad that his noble and learned Friend had given him an opportunity of explaining this matter. By the Act of Parliament the Accountant General might signify his assent to take any one of the three species of stock, or, not signifying any such assent, he would have the money paid on the 5th of January as to some sort of stock, I and on the 5th of April as to the other. The Act received the Royal assent upon the 9th of the present month; and the time for signifying assent was to be the 3rd of June. This might appear to be a short interval, but it became perfectly obvious that the Act would have received the Royal assent some days before it did, and he therefore turned his attention to the consideration of what he had better do with reference to those suitors who had funds in that species of stock in the Court of Chancery. The sum involved was a large one, amounting to between 400,000 l. and 500000 l. His own impression was that it was not the business of the Chancellor to be entering into any speculations on the subject, but rather to be passive, and receive the money when it became payable. He had thought it right, however, to consult with the other Judges of the Court, and several of them were of opinion that he ought to assent at once to take the lowest denomination of stock, because it was the principle of the Court to invest in the lowest description of stock. As, however, their opinions were pretty equally divided, he had thought it best to see what had been done in similar cases of the con-
762
version of higher stock into lower stock; and he had found, that in all those cases, whether the new stock was to be taken by, assenting, or only if no dissent was signified, in every one of such cases his predecessors, from Lord Eldon downwards, had always elected to take the new stock. He had thought it, therefore, best to make an order directing the Accountant General to take the 2½ per cent stock, unless any one came forward to state that it would be more to his interest to take either of the other rates. He had yielded rather to precedent, and the opinions of the other Judges, than to conviction; but he had reserved three days for parties to apply for any alteration in their particular cases, and he had signified that no application should be made later than the 31st of this month, meaning to reserve from that time until the 3rd of June, to alter the course of the Accountant General in cases where it might not be thought beneficial. The Accountant General had his instructions not to signify his assent until he heard further from him. He should see what the state of the market was, and should endeavour to do the best he could in the matter; and if he thought it would be at all imprudent, he should desire the Accountant General not to signify any assent at all.
LORD ST. LEONARDSwas understood to say that he should revert to the subject again on another day.

IMPORTATION OF SLAVES INTO CUBA.
The EARL of CARLISLErose to present a petition from ladies, inhabitants of Kingston and its vicinity, in the island of Jamaica, and to put a question to Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs respecting the observance of the treaties relating to the slave trade by the Government of Spain. He said: Your Lordships are aware that it is not much my disposition to obtrude myself unnecessarily upon your Lordships where I feel that I have no especial duty to perform; nevertheless, I felt myself called upon even before the recess to give a formal notice of my intention to present the petition which I now hold in my hand, both because it is upon a subject with reference to which it seems to me that any appearance of indifference would be almost criminal, and also because I should have much liked to know whether my noble Friend at the head of the Foreign Office of this country, or any Member of

763
Her Majesty's Government, could Lave communicated any fresh information upon the point to which it mainly refers, and which constitutes its prayer. This last object has, indeed, in some degree, been met by the conversation which took place upon the first evening when your Lordships reassembled after the recess, upon the occasion of a petition being presented by my noble and learned Friend now on the woolsack (Lord Brougham), and in whose wake, not for the first time in my life, I shall be proud to follow on the subject of the slave trade. He will not forget that I had the honour of sharing his triumphal return for the county of York—an occurrence which I shall always regard as the turning-point in that great emancipation struggle which has been brought to a victorious issue in this country. Events which have occurred since that conversation give me a fresh inducement to offer a few observations in addition to the statements which were then made. I should first of all state that the petition which I hold in my hand is very numerously signed, and comes from "the undersigned ladies, inhabitants of Kingston and the vicinity, in the island of Jamaica;" and I certainly feel, my Lords, that slavery is a question upon which women have every motive, as they have shown that they have good qualifications, to bear their part. Those ladies state, that it is under a deep conviction of the enormities of slavery and the slave trade, as they exist in various parts of the world, but more especially in the adjacent island of Cuba, that they express their confidence in your Lordships' desire to enforce the fulfilment of those treaties with the Government of Spain, by which it was provided that that inhuman traffic should be finally extinguished. They say that "nothing but a deep sense of the amount of the injury sustained would have induced them to come forth from the privacy of domestic life to endeavour, by every legitimate means, to rescue these unhappy persons from the wretchedness of their condition." They also state that they "deem it their duty to add their testimony to the many representations already made by the clergy, ministers of the Gospel, and other inhabitants of Jamaica, in reference to the present depressed condition of all the interests in the island;" and "while they would not pretend to enter into the various causes to which it may be attributed, they cannot resist the conviction that the evils of which they complain have greatly in-
764
creased since the alteration of the imperial policy respecting the British colonies, and the encouragement it gives to the cultivation of slave-grown productions." I, my Lords, of course, cannot deny my own complicity in the adoption of that policy; and, at this time of day, I still feel great doubt whether, in the course I took in this matter, I was right or wrong. This I know, that in the whole course of my Parliamentary experience I never acquiesced in any measure with so much doubt or hesitation, and there is none with regard to which at this day I should be so glad to be quit of all responsibility. However, my Lords, after several successive Administrations, consisting, like the last, of persons wholly opposed, or, like the present Administration, of many who were also opposed to those original measures—after the results of that policy have been repeatedly under their consideration, and they find themselves unable to move in the matter, I certainly cannot entertain any expectation that there is any probability, or I will say possibility, of such policy being now reversed. The petitioners go on to state that "they therefore implore your Lordships to adopt such measures as in your wisdom may appear effective with the Spanish Government, in order to put an end for ever to the iniquitous operations still going on with the connivance of the Spanish authorities in Cuba, to the detriment of their own Government, and in violation of the solemn convention into which that Government entered with Great Britain for the extinction of the slave trade." My Lords, I think it cannot be said that the ladies of Jamaica, in expressing these complaints, have not great reason for doing so. It would be superfluous in me to remind your Lordships, even apart from the conversation which look place the other night, of the engagements, under which Spain is now bound with this country in reference to the suppression of the slave trade. If your Lordships needed to be reminded of it, I could not refer you to any better quarter than to the despatch of the noble Earl the present Prime Minister, dated the 31st of December, 1843, in which the whole question is most fully, clearly, and forcibly set forth. It appears that by a treaty which dates so far back as 1817, which came into operation in 1820, and which was further confirmed and enlarged by subsequent treaties—in one of which the noble Lord now at the head of the Foreign Office took a dis-

765
tinguislied part—Spain solemnly stipulated to suppress the slave trade upon the part of Spanish subjects; and in consideration of that treaty and that undertaking Spain received from this country the sum of 400,000 l. Now, my Lords, I fear there is no reason to doubt that ever since the passing of that treaty its provisions have been systematically, wilfully, and all but continuously violated. I fear that in the long series of captains general, or governors of Cuba, very few indeed can be named who have not received bribes or hush money, to use the plain terms, for every single slave landed upon the island of Cuba, through their guilty connivance. I believe, indeed, that Generals Valdes, Concha, and Tacon, might be quoted as honourable exceptions to a course so unworthy and so deserving the most serious animadversion; and, considering the universality of the practice which had obtained, and the amount of temptation held out to them, these three officers do deserve to be mentioned with honour; but you can judge how dreadful that state of things must be when honour, in our opinion, does attach to persons merely because they have refused to enter into partnership with those whom I must look upon as the worst "manufacturers" of their species, and because they have not derived unlawful gains from fostering a traffic which, in my conscience, I believe has been the cause of more wrong and suffering than any other curse which ever blighted our globe, and which, in my mind, is sufficient in itself, even if revelation and reason had been altogether silent around us, to prove the necessity of a future state of retribution in which redress may be afforded for wrongs perpetrated with so much impunity in this life. But, my Lords, I am bound to say that when I mention the long series of captains general who have so grossly violated the engagements of their country with ours, it is still more painful to me to state that I fear suspicion does not stop with them, but that it ascends to persons who occupy much higher positions. Of course I do not pretend to address any inquiries to my noble Friend opposite respecting the justice of such suspicions; and I admit that no one ought lightly to infer the "deep damnation" which must be the consequence of their truth. But true is it, my Lords, that no sooner does any Captain General of Cuba show a disposition to respect the faith of treaties, and the laws alike of humanity and honour,
766
than very speedily, for some reason or other, he is sure to be removed in order to give place to some less scrupulous and more accommodating functionary in his stead. True it is, too, my Lords, I hear that under the present Captain General, Don Canedo, the slave trade is being carried on with unexampled vigour and audacity on the coasts of that unhappy island of Cuba, which, I can depose to by my own experience, our God has fitted to be a paradise, but which ever since the white man first set his foot there he has converted, I can use no softer phrase, into a hell. I do not propose to dwell now, except for one moment, upon the case of the Emancipados—a class of men consisting of those who were taken into the island since the treaty, and who were fully entitled to freedom under the stipulations of that treaty in their regard, but who, with a few exceptions, have been retained in slavery from that hour to the present, that slavery being the field labour of Cuba. I am aware that an announcement has lately been made that the Government of Spain would undertake to set immediately at liberty those who were entitled to their freedom in 1828, and, as to those who up to 1835 had been under contracts of service, that they should be sot at liberty at the expiration of their respective periods of service. But, my Lords, I feel that that concession, miserably short as it falls of what we had a right to expect and to exact, must be considered wholly illusory, as your Lordships will, I am sure, admit, when you remember that the calculation is, that the slave population of Cuba employed in field labour dies off in every recurring period of ten years. [A Noble LORD: Seven years.] Seven years! But even if it were ten years, you may judge how few of those who were entitled to their freedom in 1828 and 1835 respectively will now be found able to avail themselves of this "timely" boon. But if we direct our attention to the new and ever recurring importation of fresh negroes, what is the state of the facts of which we hear at present? I am informed that between the months of November and February last 5,000 slaves were landed in Cuba—that is, were known to be landed—and I fear that a great many landings take place in retired parts of the island of which we never hear. Then, since I gave my original notice, there has been a landing of 1,100 negroes, who were kidnapped from a part of the Portuguese dominions in

767
Africa, which has already been the subject of conversation in the House, and to which I need not further allude, except as to one point. I believe upon that occasion my noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Clarendon) stated that, through the exertions of our Consul in Cuba, to whose zeal and activity he paid a very just tribute, 300 of those slaves had been rescued from bondage. Now, I do not pause to inquire how satisfied we ought to feel at 300 being rescued, and 800 being left in hopeless servitude, because our experience of the proceedings of the Spanish Government has taught us to be thankful for small mercies. But, my Lords, can we be sure even that those 300 are effectually rescued—that they have been effectually restored to that liberty to which they are entitled? I should be glad to learn from my noble Friend that they are. I see, however, that such is not the opinion entertained by the persons who wrote the account of the transaction which appeared in the American journals. After giving an account of the landing of the slaves, of the exertions of our Consul, and of the inquiry consequently instituted, the account goes on to say:—
"The Government inquiry, as was to be anticipated, ended in additional fraud and corruption. Neither the captain nor any of the crew have been arrested. The investigation was confined to the partners, and the defendants agreed to compromise their crime by delivering 300 of the negroes to the Government. The result has only made the insular Government a larger participator in the profits of the iniquity. Some few of the negroes were released, and the rest allowed to pass into the mass of hopeless negro servitude."
I understand, from the account which I perused of what transpired the other evening, that my noble Friend himself stated that by the laws of Cuba—such laws as are observed there—it is impossible to follow the slaves into the interior when they have once passed into the possession of any proprietor, and are there enrolled among the rest of the gangs. I find it is part of the law of 1845, passed in Spain professedly with the view of putting down the slave trade, that it is in fact an express stipulation that in no case, and at no time, shall it be permitted to institute any proceedings against, nor molest in their possession, the proprietors of slaves, under pretext of their origin or precedency. A precious stipulation for relief that is, which effectually shuts the door to all inquiry after those poor wretches are consigned to the miseries of a tropical servitude! Then
768
it is suspected that in the island of Cuba this system—I was inclined to call it a "dodge," were it a proper word to apply where so much suffering forms the topic—is frequently resorted to. On those plantations on which Emancipados are employed upon contracts of servitude, when one of the original slaves whom it would be lawful to keep in servitude dies, the name of an Emancipado is returned to the Government in his stead, and the Emancipado is transferred into the name and place of the slave who died, so as effectually to put a stop to all further inquiry. Now, when we are told that these things take place—and I fear where there are slavetraders and slaveowners, and, I must add, where the Spanish Government are concerned—you must take for granted that all that may be done or can be done, will be done. I would very earnestly recommend it to the attention of Her Majesty's Government whether they could not give directions—I cannot take upon myself to say whether, under the existing law, they have not the power; but if they have not the power, whether they could not, by negotiations with Spain, acquire the power—to send the captured slavers, not into the slave courts, or before the mixed commission of the Havanah, where, even if a condemnation takes place—and I do not believe that so much complaint exists upon that ground, or that the mixed commission court, on the whole, does not perform its duty—but even if it does do its duty, it turns out out to be much the same thing for the slave as if no capture or condemnation had taken place at all—but into some free court for adjudication. I wish to know whether, instead of sending the captured slavers into a slave port for adjudication, they cannot be sent to some free port, before some untrammelled mixed commission, where justice is sure to be done? I have mentioned the 5,000 slaves who were imported into Cuba between November and February, and the 1,100 who were the subject of conversation here the other evening. Since then I have read in an American paper that 600 more slaves have been landed in Cuba in the open day, near Matanzas—the same slaves, I imagine, whom my noble Friend incidentally mentioned the other night. Amid all these disgraceful and revolting proceedings it is most satisfactory and refreshing to find how efficiently our gallant naval service is discharging its duty in these seas. The noble Lord mentioned the other even-

769
ing that in the course of this year six slavers have been taken on the coast of Cuba. Three of these slavers were taken in one day by Captain Hamilton, of Her Majesty's war steamer Vestal; and I have had the good fortune to read an account of the transaction, written by an eye-witness, which presents some of the most striking illustrations I have ever perused of British heroism on its most congenial element, and which I cannot refrain from describing to your Lordships. There was in port with the Vestal a steam-schooner, the Venus—so named, I suppose, from its being the model of piratical beauty in naval architecture—a schooner noted as the fastest vessel in those seas. It was reported to Captain Hamilton that the Venus, taking advantage of the Vestal's undergoing painting and repairing, intended to slip out of harbour, and be off on a slaving expedition. Captain Hamilton did not mention the information thus received to any one, but kept himself prepared for the contingency. That same night a tornado, accompanied with heavy thunder, springing up, the Venus seized the opportunity, and at daybreak it was reported to Captain Hamilton that she was off. The captain immediately sprang out of bed, and in less than three minutes the Vestal was under press of canvas, on her way out of the harbour in pursuit. There were 11 ships of war in the harbour at the time, and among them were some vessels belonging to the American navy; and the American crews, like good brethren, saluted the Vestal on her way with three cheers. As soon as the Vestal got outside the harbour, several vessels were discerned in the distance, mere white specks on the horizon, and at first it was not known which of these was the chase; but the Venus was presently identified by the peculiar whiteness of her sails, and pursuit was eagerly directed after her. The Vestal gained upon her; but in the course of the night another tornado came on, and the Venus was once more lost sight of. Thereupon came the question, which way should the Vestal direct her course? After some consultation it was conjectured that the Venus would steer for the Bahama Shoals—a locality of dangerous navigation for vessels of a larger description than herself. At sunrise it was found that this conjecture was accurate, for the Venus was seen in the shoals. The Vestal proceeded after her until, the lead giving as the soundings only a quarter less four, it was impractica-
770
ble for the Vestal to get nearer to the chase, and the sea was roaring with breakers. Under these circumstances Captain Hamilton thought he would try the effect of a long gun enormously charged. The shot told upon the slaveship, and she came to. Captain Hamilton at this moment discovered two slave schooners further on among the shoals. He could not follow them in the Vestal, hut, proceeding without hesitation on board the Venus, he put his revolver to the captain's head, and compelled him to steer after the two schooners, which were speedily captured. They were found laden with arms, slaving implements, &c., and there were on board one of them documents which implicated a number of persons besides those taken upon the occasion, and which authorised Captain Hamilton, on his return to the harbour, in taking possession of a large brig there, La Arragonese. As the Vestal came into harbour, towing her three prizes, she was received with loud cheers by the shipping in port, and one of the American captains made this speech in honour of her exploit:—"Well, it made my heart run over to see the old country come out so proud, and the ship pass through the Spanish fleet so silent and calm with her prizes." But, what I want your Lordships to consider is this: If these things are done in the harbour of Havannah, in the capital of the island, under the guns of the Mole, and before the very windows of the Captain General, what may not be going on along the wild and unfrequented coast of the island—an island as large as England? In bringing these statements under the consideration of your Lordships, I have no inteution of casting the slightest reproach on Her Majesty's Government for the course they have pursued in reference to this question. I know the arduous and indefatigable exertions that were made by Lord Palmerston, when he was at the head of the Foreign Department, on every subject connected with the suppression of the slave trade; I have no reason to believe those efforts were slackened under the late Administration, and I am sure I have no suspicion to express that there will be any slackening on the part of my noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Clarendon). Indeed, I am not without hope that his intimate acquaintance with, his profound knowledge of, the Spanish people, their habits and character, may give him some facilities and advantages in the matter, which were not enjoyed by any of his predecessors. My noble Friend will, I

771
am sure, not deny that gross derelictions of their duty have been frequently manifested on the part of the Spanish Government. Why, talk of causes of war with Spain, sure I am that this country has been over and over again embroiled in long and ruinous war on grounds which, in my judgment, were absolutely paltry in comparison with this. Let me not be understood as expressing an opinion that this country is called upon to go to war with Spain, even for the suppression of the slave trade. I know the apathy and indifference which prevail among a large proportion of the inhabitants of this country on all such external topics, and that many of those who feel most zealously and ardently on the subject would be the foremost to discourage our having recourse to a violent physical mode of interference. But Spain ought to be told that if she does not observe her treaties—if she, almost alone of all the nations of the earth, persists in this infernal traffic—she must, if her possession of Cuba is ever endangered, be at least prepared to find this country neutral in the conflict. I do not either desire to throw the sole blame upon the Spaniards, for I am not sure that the United States, considering the liberties they possess, considering their freedom of origin, have not, by their abominable Fugitive Slave Law, committed an even greater outrage upon liberty. I will not, however, detain your Lordships by dwelling upon that point. I wish to ask my noble Friend if he has any additional facts or information to give us relative to the question of the slave trade in Cuba? I wish further to say, that I should be very glad if the Government would take into their consideration the practicability of carrying captured slavers into some free port for adjudication. Above all, this they can do, and I hope they will be disposed to do it—I trust they will maintain, nay, more, increase the efficiency of that naval force, which has done, and is doing, such admirable service on the coast of Cuba. I have now only to present the petition I hold in my hand, and to apologise for having trespassed upon your Lordships at such length.
The EARL of CLARENDON: My Lords, I should be wanting both to my noble Friend and to my own opinion, did I not, in the first place, express my admiration of the eloquent speech which he has just delivered, and bear my testimony to the perfect correctness of all the melancholy and appalling facts which he has brought
772
under the consideration of the House. I only wish it were in my power to give my noble Friend a much fuller answer than I was able to give the other night to my noble and learned Friend now sitting on the woolsack (Lord Brougham). I have nothing further to communicate; but I must repeat the same regret I then expressed, that the treaties to which my noble Friends alluded have been constantly, scandalously violated. What has been said with regard to the past Captains General of Cuba, I cannot deny to be the melancholy fact. I was glad to hear my noble Friend mention with honour the honourable exceptions to that conduct in the instances of Generals Valdez and Concha. I have not much additional information to give to your Lordships beyond that which I gave you the other night, but that little is not altogether of an unsatisfactory character. I will first refer to the suggestion of taking captured slavers into free ports for adjudication. The fact is, that Her Majesty's cruisers have no option in the matter. By the treaty it is provided that there shall be two mixed courts of commission, one in the colonial possessions of Spain, the other on the coast of Africa; and the naval officers who capture Spanish slavers, are therefore bound by their instructions to take their captures either into the port of Havannah or into Sierra Leone, whichever is the nearest to the locality of the capture. Of the vessels which my noble Friend has described as having been taken by Captain Hamilton, two out of the three were condemned in the Court at Havannah. With reference to the present Captain General, Canedo, it cannot, I am sure, be expected that I should pass any very warm eulogium upon that functionary. It is right, however, that your Lordships should have placed before you everything that officer may have to urge in justification of the course he has taken. Anticipating that allusion might be made to this functionary, I have brought down with me two despatches, which I may be permitted to quote, considering the great importance of the subject, and the desire of the country to have all possible information on it. The first document I will cite, is an extract from a letter which the late Foreign Minister of Spain addressed to Lord Howden, in which that Minister says—
"I think it expedient to state that the Captain General tells me he is making every possible effort to cheek the slave trade, and that in consequence of those efforts the slave traders are becoming very disheartened."

773
Had these words not been followed by action in corroboration of them, I should not have thought it worth while to occupy your Lordships' time with repeating them; but I have just received another despatch from Lord Howden, containing a letter from the new Foreign Minister of Spain, which conveys the actual intentions, as announced by the Government of that country, on this subject, and I am inclined to think it deserving of your Lordships' attention. It is dated the 7th of May, and the Minister says—
"In consequence of the peremptory instructions lately transmitted to the Captain General of Cuba to spare no exertions in putting down the slave trade, we have received a communication from that functionary assuring us that he was putting into execution the most energetic means for the purpose of fulfilling his instructions; and he added, that, finding the observance of the strict letter of the law impede this object, he had not hesitated to adopt extreme measures, and that, suspending the penal law of 1805, which forbids the pursuit of newly-imported slaves after they have once passed on to their purchaser's estate, he has resolved to pursue such slaves wherever he can find them, and to release them from their holders."
The Minister added, that he trusted this course of proceeding would be taken as a proof of the desire of Spain to fulfil the engagements she had made. My noble Friend may, perhaps, consider this communication as merely a promise of something that may or may not be done. I have, however, this afternoon received a further letter from Lord Howden—whose zeal in this matter has never been surpassed by any Minister of this Urown in Spain—in which he states that a communication had been received from the Captain General of Cuba, in which he informs his Government, acting upon the announcement he had made, having received information that some negroes having been landed on the island from some slave ships that had escaped the vigilance of our cruisers, and been conveyed to the estate of their purchaser, he had followed them thither, and released them, to the number of 100. I, therefore, think—however we may be disposed to withhold for the present an implicit confidence in this reformation—we may, at all events, concede that the Captain General appears disposed to act more honestly towards this country—more consistently with the honour of his own. I have only further to advert to that portion of my noble Friend's speech which had relation to the emancipados. On this subject I have the satisfaction to state, that I have received a
774
despatch from Lord Howden, in which he informs me that the Spanish Government has agreed to settle the question which has been so long matter of discussion, and that the emancipados will be placed at liberty before the expiration of the present year, on the terms which have been severally agreed upon with regard to them—the Government even, in some respects, conceding something beyond that point. The emancipados who were entitled to their liberty under the treaty of 1835, will be set at liberty at that time; and with respect to those who do not come under that class, they will obtain their liberty at the expiration of their term of servitude, or before that time, if possible. My noble Friend has expressed the wish that the Government of Spain may become more alive to the honour of their country and its true interests in this matter, than they have hitherto, in his opinion, shown themselves. I have the satisfaction to inform my noble Friend that I have received a despatch from Lord Howden that bears upon that point, and is of considerable importance; it tells me that there is a growing desire on the part of Spain to listen to the just expostulations of England, or, I may express it, to consult more its own honour; and that as a proof of this, the Foreign Office has received from the Royal Council a recommendation to furnish the Captain General of Cuba with the larger powers requisite to enable him effectually to deal with the evil—the first time, I believe, that any such recommendation has issued from that Council. I trust that the information I have now given, small as it is in amount, will not be considered altogether of so unsatisfactory or hopeless a character as that which I supplied to your Lordships the other night. I will only repeat, in conclusion, what I said on the former occasion, that it is mainly to our own exertions we must look for the effectual suppression of this abominable traffic. I have lately been in communication on the subject with my right hon. Friend at the head of the Admiralty, and instructions have been, and will continue to be, given by him to the officers on the station to insure that nothing which can aid this great object shall be omitted.
The BISHOP of OXFORDsaid, he rose to return his thanks to his noble Friend on the cross benches (the Earl of Carlisle) for calling the attention of their Lordships and the country to this subject. Nothing struck him more in his noble Friend's

775
eloquent speech than the graceful way in which he expressed his regret for his complicity in a political movement which must be regarded as a fatal step in this country in respect to these unfortunate slaves. He could acquit himself of any share in that Bill. He felt then that the question of free trade ought no more to have been permitted to enter into the question of the admission of slave-produced sugar, than it should have in a question of the purchase of the property of pirates, or of sharing the produce of robberies; and the more he considered the question the more did it appear to him that we were bound, as a nation, to use all lawful means in our power to undo the evil which had been incidentally done. He rejoiced, therefore, to hear that the Government were prepared to adopt a more manly tone towards the Government of Spain on this question. He could not agree with the noble Earl who had introduced this subject, that the people of this country were so apathetic upon foreign subjects, that they would not hold a Government justifiable in taking any very strong measure upon this subject. For his part, he believed that, great as might be the general apathy of the people upon all foreign and distant matters, this had always been a subject excepted from that apathy, and always would continue to be so. He believed that if the people of this country knew how they had been mocked as a nation on this subject—how treaties solemnly made had been feloniously evaded, they would, as one man, maintain any Government in any reasonable, right, and justifiable measures which they might propose for the enforcement of those treaties. He believed it was our duty to take every possible means to deliver ourselves from any complicity in this greatest of all national sins. So intermingled now-a-days were commercial and financial matters throughout the whole world, that he believed it would be capable of demonstration that that slave trade which our cruisers were endeavouring to put down upon the coast of Cuba, was, at least indirectly, if not directly, maintained by British capital; and, therefore, bethought that it became the duty of a nation which supplied capital for eyery lucrative speculation to take all possible means for compelling the enforcement of treaties so religiously and solemnly entered into.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, that having on a recent occasion brought charges against the Government of Cuba, he
776
thought it right to express his gratification at hearing from his noble Friend (the Karl of Clarendon) the account he had just received of the good intentions of the Captain General of Cuba. He must, however, be permitted to wait some little time before he could be at all disposed to withdraw his charge against his Cuban Excellency; for, as they all knew, there was a place which was proverbially paved, not more with good intentions than with broken promises. However, he would wait to see whether these good intentions were followed up by performance. As to the charges against the other Captain General, two exceptions had been made; but he was still disposed to limit the exceptions to one of those generals, and that one, General Valdes. With respect to Concha, that he differed from O'Donnell and the others in one material particular, might be admitted—Concha was free from the foul stain of having profited by receiving any share whatever in that detestable traffic. It was notorious that the slave trade was carried on in Cuba—so much so, that a case mentioned that evening had occurred in open day. His noble Friend had mentioned the Americans with just praise, as having shown a proper feeling not only towards this country, but also on the subject of the slave trade, on witnessing the slaves brought into the Havannah as prizes by a British ship of war. He trusted that feeling was not confined to these individuals; he hoped that it was prevalent in the United States. But if it was so, then must be wholly groundless those accounts which we had heard of the bulk of the slave traders employed by other nations having been fitted out in the ports of the United States with American capital, manned by American seamen, and commanded by American captains. He hoped that there was no foundation for those statements; but he knew that they were rife and general throughout the country at large.
LORD WHARNCLIFFEthought both their Lordships and the country were indebted to his noble Friend for having brought forward this subject, and thus elicited the information which had been communicated. It was no small step to have obtained a promise that the liberated slaves should be followed to the estates on which they were settled; but he thought the noble Earl the Secretary for Foreign Affairs underrated the importance of the information he had received; for no small

777
step had been gained by the promises obtained from Spain by this Government, to which the noble Earl had referred. The existence of the slave trade at Cuba depended entirely on the conduct of the authorities, as was evident from the fact, when slaves could no longer be landed at Porto Rico, they were taken to Cuba under false papers. After hearing such information as he had done that evening, he thought there was a chance of improvement even in Cuba. Of all the infamies practised in Cuba, none exceeded the treatment to which the Emancipados were subjected; and he feard that if the island fell into the hands of the United States, neither their position nor that of the actual slaves would be at all ameliorated.
Petition ordered to lie on the table.

MALDON ELECTION.
The EARL of ABERDEEN The EARL of ABERDEEN moved that the House should agree to the Address to the Crown sent up from the House of Commons, for the appointment of a Commission to inquire into alleged corrupt practices at the borough of Maldon during the last and previous elections. He understood that a noble and learned Lord opposite (Lord St. Leonards) intended to oppose this proposition, but he was unable to conjecture on what ground. These, however, would shortly be explained. In the meantime he could only say, it appeared to him a case in which there could be no difficulty whatever in their Lordships giving their concurrence in the Address. In the Clitheroe case the House had declined to agree to an Address, but that was because the Act of Parliament had not been complied with—an objection which did not hold as regarded Maldon. In the present instance they had the report of the Committee, which stated that corrupt practices had extensively prevailed at the election of Members to serve for this borough, and they had embodied in that report all the proofs which that Committee obtained, and sufficient to support the description given of the practice prevalent in this borough. He believed that the general character of the evidence, and the fact that the reputation of Maldon was one of the worst in England for corruption on former occasions, fully justified his proposition.
Moved—To fill up the blank in the Address of the Commons to Her Majesty with ("Lords Spiritual and Temporal.")
LORD ST. LEONARDSthought the mode in which the noble Earl had dealt
778
with this question very unsatisfactory, the ground of objection to his Motion being the insufficiency of the evidence to support; the finding of the Committee of the House of Commons. It was upon that evidence that they should go, not upon mere general charges, or even a decision by the; Committee of the House of Commons.
LORD BROUGHAMhad read a part of the evidence, but did not feel himself bound to answer the questions, yea or nay, which the House of Commons Committee had dealt with in their Resolutions. His ground for voting for the Motion was, that he found that the Committee of the House of Commons had inquired, and had come to a unanimous decision. ["No, no!"] He said, "Ay, ay!" for though upon particular cases of bribery the Committee were not unanimous, yet they resolved unanimously that there was reason to believe that corrupt practices had extensively prevailed at elections for Members to serve in Parliament for the borough of Maldon. Their Lordships, on reading the evidence, would sec that there had been a good deal of bribery; and though he was not going to say that, had any of them been on the Committee, they would have been sure to find that corruption extensively prevailed, he must, on the other hand, remind them that, as it was, they saw only the minutes of the evidence, and had not the inestimable benefit of assisting at the actual examination. They had not seen the questions put, nor observed the demeanour of the witnesses; they had not had before them that vast variety of circumstances which, as his noble and learned Friends could testify, made the difference between evidence reported and evidence heard. It was just these things—the tones of the voice, the appearance of the witnesses, and their demeanour under examination—that gave rise in numbers of cases to the final impression on the mind of the Judge, an impression wholly different from what it would have been if he had only seen the questions put down, with the answers returned to them. He therefore felt himself, not merely entitled, but bound to assume, that the opinion which the Committee had come to they had come to on sufficient grounds. And whilst on this subject he would fain have made a remark or two on the conduct of the Committees with a view to preventing bribery and corruption; but for the present he purposely abstained from going into that. He might say at once though, that it was impossible that a

779
long time could elapse before their attention was called to this most important question, and then he should have the opportunity of asking whether they thought that the best mode of preventing bribery, corruption, or other abuses at elections was by punishing certain individuals (the Members returned) for that which had been clone, without their knowledge, by other individuals (the agents). He wished to get at those "other individuals;" and he hoped the Session would not pass over without such an amendment of the criminal law as would make it dangerous for those "other individuals" to repeat the practices they had hitherto been engaged in.
LORD ST. LEONARDSsaid, that though his noble and learned Friend had determined, in consequence of the Report of the Committee of the House of Commons, to vote in favour of the present Motion, yet he (Lord St. Leonards), acting judicially in the matter, had felt himself bound to consider the evidence; and he had carefully studied it, both before and since the noble Earl's statement that he intended to bring this Motion on, and both times had arrived at the conclusion that there was nothing on the face of that evidence to support the conclusions at which the Committee had arrived. His noble Friend had said he was satisfied with the finding of the Committee; but it certainly was not the intention of the Act that their Lordships should form their opinion on that ground. The Act of Parliament was framed for the express purpose of calling on their Lordships to form their own opinion on the matter according to the weight of evidence. This was, in effect, a judicial inquiry, and their Lordships were not at liberty to agree to the Motion, unless they were of opinion that the evidence produced showed that there was reason to believe that corrupt practices had extensively prevailed, and at the particular election, as he believed, which had led to the inquiry. The noble Earl at the head of the Government said that this borough had an evil name, and that its corrupt practices were perfectly well known; but he (Lord St. Leonards) was of opinion that they were not at liberty to act on such a statement, which ought not indeed to be made, for they were bound to act only upon evidence given on oath. Their Lordships, therefore, instead of taking for granted statements that Maldon was a corrupt borough, should make themselves masters of the evidence, and decide from it whether they were justified in
780
agreeing to this address. With respect to the Report of the Committee of the House of Commons, he did not conceive that it was worded according to the provisions of the Act of Parliament. The Committee divided upon two questions: first, whether there was bribery by agents; and, secondly, whether particular persons were bribed; and on both points the Report was carried by three to two. Then came the general Resolution, which in his opinion was not worded according to the provisions of the Act. The Resolution was—"That the Committee had reason to believe that corrupt practices had extensively prevailed at elections of Members to serve in Parliament for the borough of Maldon"—not that at the last and other elections, but at elections corrupt practices prevailed. He apprehended that, according to the right construction of the Act of Parliament, the Committee must find that corrupt practices prevailed at that particular election into which they had been appointed to inquire. This Committee did no such thing. Their report read "at elections," and that might mean two, three, or four elections before the one which was referred to their consideration. [Lord CAMPBELL: Read the words of the Act of Parliament.] Did the noble and learned Lord mean to say he could not state the effect of an Act of Parliament without reading it? [Laughter. The noble and learned Lord then left the Souse apparently in anger at the interruption.]
The LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he thought it extremely important that their Lordships should distinctly understand what was the principle which ought to regulate them in concurring or not concurring in addresses to the Crown for commissions of inquiry. He entirely differed from his noble and learned Friend (Lord St. Leonards), if he meant to say that they ought not to concur unless they saw, in reading the evidence, that the Committee must have inevitably arrived at the conclusion which they had reported to the House of Commons. On the contrary, he thought they ought to concur, unless they saw the evidence was directly contrary to the conclusion at which the Committee had arrived. In this instance no one could read the evidence without being perfectly convinced that it had been the practice at Maldon, at each succeeding election, to pay the expenses incurred at the preceding one. That might not have appeared by distinct evidence on the printed minutes; but, nevertheless, the

781
whole evidence, coupled with the demeanour of the witnesses, might reasonably have satisfied the Committee that such was the fact. In this instance, however, three or four different persons had sworn that they had so received payments of their bills; and without knowing the names of the witnesses, to which his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) had alluded, there was sufficient to satisfy the Committee that such was the universal practice in the borough. Under these circumstances, he thought their Lordships would not hesitate to concur in the Address.
The EARL of DERBYsaid, with great deference to his noble and learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor) he must differ from him as to the duty which devolved on the House, when considering whether they would or would not concur in these addresses. Before the Act of last Session authorising the issue of these commissions passed, it was necessary that in each particular case, where it was intended to apply for the issue of a commission, with a view to ulterior proceedings affecting a borough, and not to individual Members between whom the contest for the seat might have been carried on, that an Act should formally pass through Parliament. That Act constituted an extraordinary judicial tribunal, and vested it with extraordinary powers—powers of investigation beyond the ordinary judicial proceedings of the law, and possessing in every respect exceptional jurisdiction. Such was the state of the law previous to the Act of last Session, and their Lordships would recollect the precision and accuracy with which they examined each case, to ascertain whether there were sufficient grounds for passing the Act with regard to that particular borough. Their Lordships must recollect also that on several occasions when the House of Commons, having heard evidence before a Committee, sent up a Bill for the disfranchisement of a borough, their Lordships not only examined the evidence taken before the Committee of the House of Commons, but admitted the parties to appear themselves and plead at the bar the reasons why the Act should not be carried into effect. In the notorious case of St. Albans—the first in which there was the new proceeding of a commission of inquiry—before their Lordships would consent to the Act to issue that commission of inquiry, and according to ordinary practice, they requested to have laid before them the evidence taken before the Committee of the House of Commons.
782
Considerable time was then given for the consideration of that evidence, and upon the consideration of the evidence it was his duty, in the position he then held, to state the case and the evidence, and to ask their Lordships' assent to the passing the Bill constituting the commission of inquiry. In that case, on a subsequent occasion, application was made by the parties themselves to be heard against the Bill for the disfranchisement of the borough. In order to issue a commission to inquire, it was necessary to have a previous Act of Parliament, and before passing that Act their Lordships required to be satisfied that there were sufficient grounds to authorise the passing of the Act. To simplify the proceedings, a general Act was passed in the course of last Session, on the principle of the General Enclosure Act, to prevent the necessity of a separate Act for each inclosure. The Act ordered that the commission should be issued in the event of both Houses concurring in a joint address; and consequently their Lordships were placed with regard to the address to the Crown precisely on the same footing as previously, in giving their assent to the adoption of each Act. If, therefore, previous to assenting to the adoption of an Act for the issuse of a commission with extraordinary extra-judicial powers, they felt bound to examine and sift the evidence taken before the Committee of the House of Commons, he submitted, with great respect, that the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack was mistaken in his doctrine, when he contended it was not necessary to surround the parties with the same protection in the issue of a commission upon an address as they before thought necessary when a special Act was required. He thought, too, the noble and learned Lord could not sustain his argument—that the onus fell upon this House of proving that the House of Commons had come to a wrong conclusion, and that without such proof the address ought to issue. He considered their Lordships were no more competent or justified in issuing an address, than they were of passing an Act, unless they were satisfied the House of Commons had come to a reasonable and fair conclusion, and that the evidence gave sufficient grounds for the adoption of ulterior proceedings. And now (continued the noble Earl), having stated generally the argument as it occurs to me on this subject, I must deprecate the manner in which it has been brought to an untimely close, and

783
caused my noble and learned Friend (Lord St. Leonards) to abandon the case, and leave the House; for, my Lords, I do think that, whether you look to my noble and learned Friend's great judicial abilities, his great skill, and the deference which ought to be paid to his high position and his age, or whether you look to the circumstances of the case, and the interests involved, this is not an occasion for that levity and offensive and sneering laughter which I regretted to see the noble Earl (the Earl of Aberdeen) permitted on the part of some of his subordinates. I think my noble and learned Friend has acted in the manner due to his own character and position, in refusing to continue to discuss the question under circumstances such as those to which, for the first and I hope for the last time, he has found himself exposed; and I am sure your Lordships cannot blame him for the course which he has chosen in declining to remain where he meets with so much disrespect.
The EARL of ABERDEEN, with considerable warmth: What does the noble Earl mean? Does the noble Earl say that I permitted "my subordinates" to sneer or laugh? Who does he mean by "my subordinates?" And what does he mean by saying that I gave them permission to laugh or sneer? I can only say for myself, that I have the most unfeigned respect for the noble and learned Lord, and that I neither sneered nor entertained the slightest feeling or anything but the greatest respect towards him, and that I listened attentively to his observations. The noble Earl charges me with "permitting" my "subordinates" to do so and so; but I know none in this House who are not perfectly free either to laugh or cry, as they please.
LORD CAMPBELLregretted the course which the debate had taken. If there was blame anywhere, he took the blame to himself, for having originated what had ended in a manner that was much to be deplored. His noble and learned Friend (Lord St. Leonards), for whose learning and character he had the most sincere respect, in reasoning upon the question before them, said that the Report did not comply with the terms of the Act of Parliament, because it did not say that those practices had prevailed at the last election. He (Lord Campbell) asked him to refer to the words of the Act of Parliament, that it might be seen that it did not require reference to the last election; for the Act only said, that if there was reason to believe that corrupt practices
784
were extensively carried on in any county or borough, or division of a county or borough "at any election or elections of such Member or Members," &c. He therefore, without meaning the least disrespect, asked him, as was done day by day in courts of justice, to read the Act of Parliament. Something subsequently happened behind which he certainly regretted, but for which he did not take blame to himself, or to any of his noble Friends, and he fully believed that his noble Friends who sat near him, did not mean the slightest disrespect to the noble and learned Lord who had just left the House. With reference to the question before the House, it was, no doubt, their Lordships' duty to see that there was evidence to justify the Committee in the conclusion at which they had arrived. The noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) had confounded the disfranchisement of a borough with proceedings that were merely intended to institute inquiry. This was a proposal, not to disfranchise the borough of Maldon, but to make inquiry—to put the prisoners upon their trial—and to that proposal he was prepared to give his support.
On Question, agreed to.
Then the said Address was agreed to; and a Message sent to the Commons to acquaint them that the Lords had agreed to the Address and had filled up the blank.

PROTEST.
The following is the Protest of Lord St. Leonards against the Resolution of the House of Lords upon the Maldon Election.
"DISSENTIENT,—
1. Because this House ought, before it agrees to join with the other House of Parliament in an Address to Her Majesty praying an inquiry to be made under the Act 15 & 16 of the Queen, to be satisfied that a primâ facie case is made out by evidence to authorise the Crown to appoint a Commission to try the allegations, against the borough or place complained of. The two Houses have to inquire whether corrupt practices have, or there is reason to believe they have, extensively prevailed; and in this House no attempt was made to show from the evidence that such practices had, or that there was reason to believe that they had, extensively prevailed; and the Resolutions as to bribery were carried in the Committee of the House of Commons by divisions of only three to two.
"2. Because the Resolution upon which the Address is founded, and upon which there was no division in the Committee, manifestly because of the majority on each of the previous divisions, is not such as to authorise an Address by the two Houses under the Act of Parliament. The Resolution is, 'that there is reason to believe that corrupt practices have extensively prevailed at elections of Members to serve in Parliament for the

785
borough of Maldon.' But the Act of Parliament does not seem to warrant any such Resolution as a foundation for an Address. The enactment is, no doubt, general that a Commission may issue upon a joint Address representing to Her Majesty that a Committee appointed to try an Election Petition, or a Committee appointed to inquire into the existence of corrupt practices in any election or elections, have reported that corrupt practices have, or that there is reason to believe that corrupt practices have, extensively prevailed in any county, &c., at any election or elections of a Member or Members to serve in Parliament; and these words seem to point at any election or elections, but they were rendered necessary in consequence of the power to address the Crown upon the Report of a Committee to try an Election Petition, or of a Committee to inquire into the existence of corrupt practices in any election or elections. The Act did not intend that a Committee to try an Election Petition should, although they could not report that corrupt practices had extensively prevailed at the election referred to them, have liberty to make a Report as a foundation for an Address, under the Act, that corrupt practices had prevailed at some given former elections, much less that they should report that there was reason to believe that such practices had extensively prevailed at elections of Members for the place in question. Such a Report would be satisfied if such practices had prevailed at elections twenty years ago, although they had not prevailed at the last, or at several immediately previous elections. The intention of the Act is shown by the sixth Section, which authorises the Commissioners to inquire into the manner in which the election in relation to which such Committee may have reported to the House, or, where the Report of the Committee has referred to two or more elections, the latest of such elections, has been conducted, and whether any corrupt practices have been committed at such election. If the Commissioners find corrupt practices at the election into which they are authorised to inquire, then they may carry hack their inquiry, step by step, until they come to a pure election, when they are to stop, and not to carry further back their inquiries. Taking all the clauses of the Act together, they admit of a rational construction, but that construction renders the Resolution of the Committee in this case an insufficient foundation for an Address.
"3. Because the Address should be founded upon the Report of the Committee, supported by the evidence, and not upon any rumours or extrinsic facts, and in this case the mover of the Address in this House relied upon the fact that the borough of Maldon was notoriously corrupt, but of which notoriety there was no evidence.
"4. Because the Resolution of the Committee of the House of Commons was wholly unsupported by evidence of corrupt practices at previous elections. It appeared that large bills were left unpaid at the previous elections in 1847, but they were publicans' bills for refreshments; and, therefore, they fell under the head of treating, and, moreover, the Members had refused to pay them. The Act of 15 & 16 Vict., as it came up to this House from the House of Commons, included treating in the sixth Section; but, as treating stood on a different ground from bribery, that part was struck out in this House, and the other House acquiesced in the Amendment. The Committee
786
failed in their attempt to obtain evidence of previous corrupt practices. They asked William Lord, a bricklayer's labourer, 'They generally are pretty well paid at Maldon, are they not?'—Answer: 'I never got nothing.' 'Had you ever a vote before this time?'—Answer: 'Yes.' 'You had never got anything before?—Answer; 'No.' Mr. Oxley Parker, a warm partisan at elections for Maldon, upon being asked why he would not have acted in a particular manner, answered, 'Because I should have considered that I should be implicated in an act of bribery, and in all my transactions at Maldon I have never been asked for money for a vote, and I have never given it.' 'Do you apply that answer to this election?'—'To all elections'. 'That you say upon your oath?'—'On my oath I do, most distinctly.'
"5. Because the only bribes proved were the four mentioned in the Report; and even as to the proof of them the Committee were divided in opinion. But beyond these trifling cases there was no evidence of bribery—no fund provided, no voter applying for money, no person appointed to bribe, no general payment of expenses, and the two Members, in the plainest terms, swore that no bribery existed to their knowledge, and they had furnished no funds for the purpose; in short, from the outset, that they had determined to conduct the election upon the purest principles. The Committee resolved unanimously that it was proved to the satisfaction of the Committee that the acts of bribery were committed without the cognisance or privity of the sitting Members.
"6. The four acts of bribery relied upon were payments under the colour of payment of expenses—one of 5l. to W. Hearn, one of 2l. to W. Forster, and two of 1l. each to W. Lord and John Hills. W. Hearn, who gave his evidence in a way which drew down upon him the severe animadversions of the Committee, went from London to Maldon to vote. He claimed 5l. 11s. 7d. for banners and painting at the election of 1847, and, because Mr. Dick's people would not pay him that demand, he voted for the sitting Members. He alleged that he had been put to much expense in having another to perform his work in town; and after the election he asked 2l. 10 s. for his expenses, and he was paid 2l. The evidence clearly proves that this was all that was paid to him, and that it was paid for his expenses. Three weeks afterwards he wrote a begging letter to Mr. Oxley Parker, but not naming any sum. That gentleman sent him 3l., which he swore was a donation from himself, and that he never intended it to be repaid to him; and this is proved by an account of a few pounds which he subsequently made out and received, and which included the 2l. paid to Hearn for his expenses, but in which no mention is made of the 3l. It is perfectly clear from the evidence that this is the true view of the case; and, therefore, the Report was not warranted, as far as it stated that Hearn was bribed with 5l. Forster also went from London to Maldon to vote, and required his expenses to be paid before he voted; he demanded 2l. 5s., and obtained 2l. He attempted to make out a promise by Mr. Miller to provide him with a situation, in which he was contradicted and wholly failed. The only remaining cases are Lord's and Hill's. They were relations, and resided some twenty-five or thirty miles from Maldon, and they were taken over to Maldon by Mr. Oxley Parker's bailiff. They claimed and obtain-

787
ed 1l. each, which was paid a few months after the election for their expenses. It would be difficult to make out that any of these payments were really bribes, although they might be liberal allowances for expenses, and excessive payments under that colour may well be deemed bribery. In all the four cases the voters might lawfully be paid their expenses. There was no proof of any other payments for expenses, or in the nature of bribes, and these four cases cannot, I think, be deemed sufficient to put the borough of Maldon upon its trial. "ST. LEONARDS."
House adjourned till To-morrow.