Lords Sitting of 28 June 1864

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Railways Construction Facilities* (No. 160).
Second Reading—Valuation of Rateable Property (Ireland)* (No. 147); Cathedral Minor Corporations * (No. 157) [H.L.]; Pilotage Order Confirmation * (No. 150); Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation * (No. 151).
Committee— County Constabulary Superannuation * (No. 140); Coventry Free Grammar School* (No. 153).
Report—Coventry Free Grammar School * (No. 153).
Third Reading—Army Prize (Shares of Deceased) * (No. 106); Countess of Elgin and Kincardine's Annuity* (No. 149), and passed.

BROKERS BONDS AND RENTS BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.— (Lord Taunton.)
  LORD KLNGSDOWN LORD KLNGSDOWN moved that it be read a second time that day six months. He had no connection with either the promoters or the opponents of the Bill, and made his Motion solely on public grounds —namely, that it would perpetuate a great injustice upon the City of London, and that it ought to come before the House as a Public and not as a Private Bill: on that point, however, he was prepared to accept the decision of his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack, and the noble Lord the Chairman of Committees. The Bill proposed two things. The first proposal was to repeal so much of an Act of Queen Anne as required all brokers in the City of London to be admitted and sworn

  409
  before the Lord Mayor and Court of Aldermen; and the other was to repeal another Act which imposed certain securities upon brokers as the Lord Mayor and Court of Aldermen might from time to time think it right to adopt. His objection was mainly founded upon the fact that the Act which it proposed to repeal was an Act passed for the regulation of brokers in the City of London, with a view to the public benefit and the security of commerce within the City of London. It was a great mistake to suppose that the jurisdiction was introduced in the reign of Queen Anne, for the principle was established 600 years ago, in the time of Edward I., in whose reign an Act was passed, which Act provided that no broker should be admitted to practise unless he had been sworn in before the Lord Mayor and the Court of Aldermen. The reason for that regulation was obvious, because it prevented improper persons from exercising those privileges. Whether the Lord Mayor and Court of Aldermen were a good tribunal for regulating a subject of so much importance it was not necessary to consider, but whether it should be dealt with by public or private legislation. This was nothing but an attempt to deprive the City of London of an income which they purchased for a large sum of money, and which they had enjoyed for many centuries, and the only ground for depriving them of it was that the Corporation received from this source too large a sum of money. He trusted he had shown sufficient grounds for the Amendment which he proposed.
  Amendment moved, to leave out ("now") and insert ("this Day Six Months.")—(Lord Kingsdown.)
  LORD TAUNTONsaid, that the abuse against which the Bill was directed was one that loudly called for removal. It had in its favour the recommendation of the Commission appointed to inquire into the state of the Corporation of London, on which Sir George Lewis and Sir John Pattison were his colleagues, and it had been thoroughly examined by a Committee of the House of Commons and passed unanimously, and was warmly approved of by the commercial interests in the City. His noble and learned Friend had been supplied with all his arguments by the Corporation of London, who were interested parties, as it was they who benefited by the abuse. The Corporation levied the tax on the most respectable
  410
  brokers, whilst whole hosts of interlopers passed scot free. Sir Robert Carden had given evidence against the present system before the Select Committee of the House of Commons, and the late Mr. Charles Pearson, the City solicitor, and an exceedingly shrewd man, had advised his clients to get the tax when they could, never to enforce it, and above all things never to raise discussion as to its merits. It appeared that the case of the Corporation having broken down before the Committee of the House of Commons, in which there were many friends of the City, they had gone round to their Lordships' House, and were at last fortunate in finding an advocate in his noble and learned Friend. A Committee of their Lordships' House might inquire whether anything in the way of a compromise might be effected, and he was sure that any suggestion coming from such a source would be received with great respect by the promoters. He believed there never had been a Bill which had undergone a more searching or scrutinising inquiry in the House of Commons, and it would be a great misfortune if the two Houses of Parliament should come to separate views upon such a subject.
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, he had always been particularly careful to keep private legislation within its proper bounds, so that it should not interfere with public legislation; and the first thing he found in this Bill was that it is proposed to repeal a Public Act, and secondly that it sought to bring about a great measure of municipal reform by indirect means. Now, nothing would be more dangerous than to allow a municipal reform to be made by private legislation. On these grounds he thought the Bill ought to be rejected.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYhoped that their Lordships would pause before they rejected the Bill, which had been passed unanimously in the other House of Parliament, and which had passed through its several stages hitherto with the full conviction of those promoting it that it could not be objected to as a Private Bill. The promoters asked that the Bill should be considered by a Committee of this House; and it would then be competent for their Lordships, acting upon the Report of the Committee, to reject the Bill if they thought fit so to do. But he submitted that it would be an objectionable precedent to reject the measure in its present stage.
  LORD CHELMSFORDsaid, he should

  411
  not object to the sending of the Bill to a Select Committee if he did not think it contained a dangerous and destructive principle. It was the most undisguised measure of confiscation ever submitted to Parliament. No good reason had been shown for taking these revenues from the corporation, to whom they had been secured by successive Sovereigns for many centuries, and the only ground for doing so was that they amounted to a considerable sum. He should therefore cordially support the Amendment.
  On Question, That ("now") stand part of the Motion? Resolved in the Negative; and Bill to be read 2a on this Day Six Months.

BRAZILIAN SLAVE TRADE.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD BROUGHAMrose to call the attention of their Lordships to the subject of which he had given notice — he meant the state of the Brazilian slave trade—and it gave him the utmost satisfaction, having so often complained of Portugal rather than Brazil for the increase of that trade, to be able to state—as he did most confidently— that that trade had entirely ceased. Would he could say of the Cuba or Spanish slave trade, as of the Brazilian slave trade, that there remained of it not a vestige! He might be excused for stating the particulars of the cessation, because he meant on these particulars, and on the clear proof that the trade had ceased, to ground a recommendation to his noble Friend opposite for the repeal of what was called the Aberdeen Act, passed in 1845. They were all of opinion at the time of the passing of that Act that it was, he would not say a most violent, but an extreme measure, and only to be justified by the absolute necessity of the case. There was a Committee of the House of Commons in 1853 moved for and presided over by Mr. Hume. That Committee collected a great mass of evidence respecting the Portuguese and Spanish slave trade, and in that Committee there was also given the most complete proof of the entire abolition of the Brazilian slave trade. It had been increasing very much in 1845. In 1842 the number of slaves imported into Brazil was 17,000. In 1846 it increased to 50,000, and in 1848 it was no less than the enormous number of 60,000. In consequence of the nature of the Brazilian coast and its numerous small bays, our squadron, notwithstanding the zealous
  412
  efforts of our gallant officers, had not succeeded in extirpating the traffic; nevertheless, in 1849, the number had fallen from 60,000 to 54,000. In 1850 it fell to 23,000; in 1851 to 3,000; in 1852 to 700; and in 1853 there were absolutely none. The Emperor on all occasions showed the most determined resolution to effect the abolition of this trade, and, by the employment of additional steamers and the adoption of other regulations, he took measures both to put an end to it and to prevent its revival. In 1850 a law passed both Chambers without opposition which made the slave trade piracy and established a special court for the trial of such offences, which had a most admirable effect. The fact was that the general public feeling of Brazil was adverse to the slave trade, as was shown by the fact that at the elections for both the general Parliament and the provincial ones the successful candidates were persons who had been most active in the suppression of the trade, and the detection and punishment of offenders; and it was only supported by a few planters. The Government gave great encouragement to the immigration of free labour, and it was found that while the profits upon plantations cultivated by slaves amounted to only 8 per cent, those obtained from plantations where free labour was employed reached 14 per cent. The result was that the Committee of the House of Commons to which he had referred reported that the Brazilian slave trade had entirely ceased, and that there was no reason to apprehend its revival. The Aberdeen Act was always acknowledged to be an extreme measure, justified only by the extreme necessity of the case, and the refusal of the Brazilian Government to renew the convention which had then just expired, and Lord Aberdeen himself in his correspondence with our envoy at Rio spoke of it as only a temporary measure intended to meet a special occasion, and authorized him to assure the Government that as soon as the slave trade ceased it would be repealed. Since 1853 the slave trade with Brazil had entirely ceased, and the necessity for that Act must, therefore, have been removed. He could not, he might add, say so much for Spain as he had for Brazil. Spain had entered into a treaty with us, by which we agreed to give her a large sum of money in consideration of her abolishing her slave trade and taking actual measures for that purpose; but the only part of the stipulations of the treaty which she had performed

  413
  was to receive the money, leaving undone that for which it was to be given. He was afraid, indeed, that so long as Cuba was under the Spanish Government it would be found impossible to procure the passing of good local measures for the abolition of the infernal traffic. The result of the distribution of gold by the slave dealers, and the large profits which they made by the trade, was that they were able to corrupt the Governors of Cuba who, with but few exceptions, were thus made partners in the guilt. What was once said by a Roman orator against one whose name was chiefly known in connection with that of his illustrious accuser was equally applicable to the Spanish Governors of Cuba, Nihil tam sanctum quod non violari; nihil tam munitum quod non expugnari pecuniâ possit. As he had said before, the conduct of Brazil was different, and he was happy to find from a despatch of Mr. Christie, who bore no particular goodwill toward the Brazilian Government, to the noble Earl, that there was no probability of the slave trade being resumed in that quarter.
  EARL RUSSELLwas happy to say that the slave trade in Brazil had been abolished by law, and did not in practice exist; at the same time he could not state that in his opinion the abolition of the slave trade was entirely owing to the change in policy in Brazil, and the laws passed in that country on that subject. The Aberdeen Act was a very severe Act, and the operation of it was severe, because while the slave trade was going on and that Act was in operation, his noble Friend Lord Palmerston, then Foreign Secretary, gave orders, through the Admiralty, by which slavers were captured in the waters of Brazil. The execution of those orders gave great alarm to the slave traders in Brazil, and they soon found that it was not any longer a profitable traffic. At the same time he readily confessed, that under the policy which Brazil had adopted and followed for many years, the Aberdeen Act had be come inoperative. But if any party were to come into power who should endeavour to restore the slave trade, they would have the opportunity of doing so if this Act were repealed. His noble and learned Friend said the present was a favourable time for the repeal of the Act; he (Earl Russell) did not think so. The Brazilian Government had chosen to suspend diplomatic relations with this country upon a ground that could mean nothing more than objection to the measures taken merely for the
  414
  protection of the lives of British subjects in Brazil. He could not think that they were entitled under those circumstances to any great favour at the hands of this country. He regretted, with his noble and learned Friend, the continuance of the slave trade in Cuba.
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, that if his noble Friend would read the evidence taken by the Select Committee of the House of Commons in 1853, he would be convinced that no squadron on the coast of Brazil could ever put an end to the slave trade. He ought to have mentioned that the conduct of the Brazilians to the free negroes was an example to our kinsmen in America.
  LORD HOUGHTONsaid, if the Brazilian Government were so anxious to get rid of the Aberdeen Act, they ought to make some arrangement, as the Portuguese had, for the establishment of Mixed Courts. They had always refused to do that, and had insisted on standing on their extreme right. It was true that the slave trade to Brazil had lapsed—[Lord BROUGHAM: Ceased altogether]—but it was quite as much owing to the Brazilians finding it to be their interest to drop it as from any other cause. He could hardly understand his noble and learned Friend's laudation of a Government which had persisted more absolutely than any other Government in refusing any approximation to a measure of emancipation of their slaves. Something was due to Mr. Christie for the persistent manner in which he had done everything in his power to improve the condition of the liberated Africans, and to induce the Brazilian Government to take some steps towards emancipation, and his perseverance in this line of conduct had gained him no little ill will there.
  LORD FORTESCUEbelieved that Mr. Christie's conduct during his mission had obtained the approbation of two successive Secretaries of State, and he did not see any reason for introducing his name into the debate.
  LORD BROUGHAMdenied that he had introduced Mr. Christie's name unnecessarily into the debate—he had quoted Mr. Christie as the very best evidence of the discontinuance of the slave trade, and the impossibility of its revival. He had not a word to say against Mr. Christie. Quite the contrary.
  House adjourned at half past Seven o'clock, till to-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.