Lords Sitting of 20 March 1876

MINUTES.
Public Bills—First Reading—County Palatine of Lancaster (Clerk of the Peace* (34); Burgesses (Scotland)* (35). Second Reading—Telegraphs (Money)* (29).
FUGITIVE SLAVES—COOLIES.

  QUESTION.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether in the Instructions to be issued to naval officers respecting Fugitive Slaves, Her Majesty's Government will provide the same measures of protection for fugitive coolies as fugutive slaves? Before putting the Question he would observe that the Anti-Slavery Society and those who worked with it were decidedly of opinion that there was no difference between the status of the coolie and that of the slave, and they were going to make hay while the sun shone, and do their best, now that public attention had again awakened, to alleviate the hardships endured by coolies. It was not, however, necessary for his argument that any of their Lordships should accept that view. It was sufficient that it had been laid down by the "leading journal" that not only danger to life, but also the fear of a brutal flogging justified running away, and a captain of one of Her Majesty's ships in protecting the fugitive; for it was undeniable that coolies were flogged and subjected to ill-treatment. A Cuban correspondent of the Aborigines Protection Society wrote as follows:—
  "On arriving at Havannah the Chinese are treated exactly like the negroes. They are confined in large barracoons, and sold individually or in lots by a mere endorsement of their contracts, and then taken to the sugar plantations. On the plantation the Chinese labourer is treated as a slave. His scanty wages—a fourth less than is earned by many of the negroes—hardly suffice to supply him with the necessaries which, from the poverty of his own fare, he is compelled to buy. The frequency with which the Chinese commit assassination or suicide is the best proof of their desperate condition in Cuba. Formerly the Chinaman recovered his liberty of action on the expiration of his original period of service; but recent ordinances imposed by Spain compel him to be always under a master or patron, or at once to leave the country, which, of course, for want of means he is unable to do so. Thus the servitude of the Chinese practically becomes life long."
  If that statement was not sufficient authority, he could cite some cases from our own colonies, which had been judicially proved. There were the two Hindu coolies who died of flogging in Province Wellesley. There was a coolie in Mauritius who was trampled to death, and whose case was thus described in a recent address of the Aborigines Protec-

  255
  tion Society to the Secretary of State for the Colonies—
  "We refer in the first place to the trial of a Frenchman named Tampier, for causing the death of an Indian labourer on the estate of M. E. de Chazel. The evidence unquestionably disclosed the most brutal violence on the part of the prisoner, and yet on the trial the jury only convicted him of a common assault, and at the same time strongly recommended him to mercy, while the columns of the local Press have since borne witness to the public sympathy which was felt, not for the victim, but for his murderous assailant."
  These were facts established. Now suppose that one of Her Majesty's ships was at anchor in a Cuban port, and at night two men came off in a boat or swam to her—one was a negro slave born in Angola, the other was a Chinese coolie kidnapped at Macao. Next day before noon an official came on board with a request from the authorities of the port for the delivery of the two fugitives. Well, what would the captain do with the coolie, if his instructions had not prepared him for this contingency? There were some who quoted Vattel to prove that a nation might disregard the comity of nations—or what was due to other nations—in obedience to its own judgment of what its conscience prescribed to it, and others had blamed the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs because he had preferred to respect the comity of nations and the law of nations, and in order to do so, had not scrupled to trample on the reputation and judgments of the great Lord Stowell. There was another possibility. The French nation had set up the principle that there should not be any "exploitation de l'homme par l'homme," and this was one of the principal cries of the Revolution of 1848. It was very difficult to translate the phrase. The nearest translation he could suggest was, "No man shall make a profit out of another man to his disadvantage." The French or any other nation, acting on those principles, might in the ports of our colonies rescue discontented coolies just as we rescued fugitive slaves. The mere possibility of such a thing showed that we had also a vulnerable point if the comity of nations was to be made light of. The noble Lord concluded by putting the Question.
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he did not think it would be advisable to lay down any fresh instructions bearing upon the particular case to which his noble
  256
  Friend had referred. In the first place, it was not desirable that any new instructions respecting fugitive slaves should be issued at all, pending the inquiry which the Commission had already commenced, and whose Report he hoped would not be long delayed. In the next place, whereas it was certain that many cases of fugitive slaves coming on board Her Majesty's ships had occurred, he was not aware of any instance in which a fugitive coolie had so presented himself. Such a case might, perhaps, have occurred; but if it had, he had been unable to find a record of it in any of the Papers which he had felt it his duty to look through. Therefore he did not think that any advantage would be gained by laying down general rules which could not have any application; in other words, he did not see the advantage of providing against a contingency which never had arisen and possibly never might arise. Having said that in answer to his noble Friend's Question, he would point out that there was a very wide distinction—looking at the matter in its legal aspect—between the case of an escaped slave and that of a coolie who took refuge on board our ships. It might be true that in some places coolies had suffered much, and that in those places their condition did not practically differ much from that of slaves; but from the legal point of view there was this great distinction—that where the coolie had been treated as a slave, that was done, not in accordance with the law of the land, but in violation of that law, while, on the other hand, the fugitive slave sought to be taken out of the operation of the law of the country from which he was escaping. When anything was done in the case of the coolie contrary to the law of the land in which he was serving, he had an appeal to the authorities of the country. If he happened to be a British subject, it was competent to the captain of one of Her Majesty's ships to represent his case to the British Consul, and through him to the local authorities. If he were not a British subject, we should have no locus standi for interference, except on the simple ground of humanity, and in that case the matter would probably best be dealt with by an unofficial representation from the British Consul. The matter was one in which it was not, in his judgment, necessary or expedient to lay to lay down a general rule.

EGYPT—THE SLAVE TRADE.

  RESOLUTION.
  LORD DE MAULEYrose to move—
  "That this House regrets that the policy of the Government was not directed to the suppression of the Slave Trade, in its recent transactions with the Khedive of Egypt."
  The noble Lord said, he thought the Circulars of the Government which had been, and probably would be, handled over and over again, did credit to the zeal of the Government in the cause of suffering humanity. He only wished they had gone further, and compelled those whom we had the power to coerce to co-operate with us in the extinction of the slave trade—that it would have left no slave to seek shelter under the protection and authority of England. He was aware of the difficulties. There was the religious profession of the Mussulman, which recognized property in man; there was the value of a trade so lucrative that if one victim out of four survived it was remunerative; there was the duplicity of Rulers, ready in profession, but backward in action, to contend against—but with all the difficulties of position, the nature of the trade, and the supineness of Rulers, England had only to insist, and the slave trade ceased. We gloried in the exertions of a Clarkson and a Wilberforce—the still more practical efforts of a Palmerston; but while we were successful in checking the exportation of slaves to the West, that success drove the full force of the traffic on the Continent of Africa. The North and the South and the West were comparatively free from it; for although slavery was a national institution, the worst features of the trade were absent from those quarters—it was the centre which was the plague spot of the world to supply the Mussulman nations of the East. The two chief upholders of slavery were the Mahomedan nations of Turkey and of Egypt—one a country existing merely for the convenience of Europe, the other a country rising into importance under the combined influence of England and France, the two most civilized nations of the globe. The Khedive, in answer to a deputation, said that were the demand to cease the slave trade would die off in 15 years. He calculated the life of a slave at 15 years' purchase—a most horrible fact of statistics, when
  258
  human life under Christian rule could be counted at 30 years. The second generation of slaves in Turkey were rarely seen; the third never—the gaps in the population had to be supplemented from the populous regions of Africa. He turned from that branch of the subject to its practical side, and he thought that if the matter were viewed in detail the difficulties which appeared to surround it would vanish. There were three preserves for the slave marts of Africa—the borders of the Nile, the interior of the country, and the shores of the Indian Ocean. There were three routes by which the slaves were conveyed—the banks of the Nile, the river itself, and the Red Sea. Slaves from Abyssinia were driven towards he Red Sea, on their way to the markets of Arabia; those from the Nile followed the same course, after leaving supplies for Egypt; those from the interior it was more difficult to trace from the boundless expanse of the deserts, but their destination was the same—towards the Nile, to supply the Mussulman nations of the world. They had, then, two routes out of three which would be closed by the vigilance of a friendly Power. But there was no such interference. The slave trade, as far as the banks of the Nile and the river itself, were mere matters of police, and the Red Sea could be effectually guarded by cruisers. Those from the interior, he admitted, it was more difficult to deal with from the trackless wastes through which they travelled; but the destination of the victims was the same. The goal they reached was Egypt, which ought to be a Liberia; practically it was a slave-hold. No reliance could be placed on the professions of Mahomedan Governments; slavery was sanctioned by their religion, custom, and tradition; neither Rulers nor servants could be trusted. The most powerful offender was the Khedive; both from position, character, and resources. When Egyptian journals announced the decline of the trade, it was active; when vigilance was relaxed, the caravans were moving; and the Khedive was quiescent. Were he honest in his professions he would make property in man felony, their transit by water piracy. Khartoom was little better than a barracoon, where agents appointed by English Consuls placed the flag of England upon the roofs of their houses, within a shop for the

  259
  barter of slaves—the emblem of liberty flying over the shackles of slavery! The land routes all converged to the same point, Egypt, the Nile bearing its living cargo to the same point, the authorities cognizant of the fact—cognizant also of the lukewarmness or duplicity of the Khedive. He was aware of the inconvenience of bringing this subject under their Lordships' notice in the absence of any statistics. There were none. They only knew that slave marts existed for the purpose of the slave trade, and that no steps were taken to check it. It was supposed that 100,000 were annually driven to slavery, a remnant only representing the bloodshed and barbarity of their capture. As long as the Potentates of those countries allowed the supply to continue the demand would exist, until they learnt, or were compelled to learn, that the labour of the man was of more value than the man himself—that he was of more value on the land than off it. As the Khedive of Egypt had just been raised by our wealth and was supported by our counsels, he ought to be compelled to learn that that the worst commerce which could afflict a country was the traffic in human beings. It was supposed that the Khedive of Egpyt ruled over a population of 10,000,000. How many more were to be driven into the vortex of slavery by his armed forays against unarmed nations it was impossible to calculate. The idea of commerce in such a case was a delusion. Free labour would not exist with slave labour. It was as impossible of fusion as oil with water. They had seen that in the Southern States of America extension of territory meant an extension of the slave trade. But if there was no limit to territorial aggrandizement, there was a limit to the forbearance of society. Would England allow the chains of bondage to be cast over these vast and unprotected nations, when the mere expression of her opinion could regenerate Africa and save countless millions from the horrors of slavery?
  Moved, to resolve, That this House regrets that the policy of the Government was not directed to the suppression of the Slave Trade in the transactions with the Khedive of Egypt.—(The Lord De Mauley.)
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, it was impossible for the Government to accede to the Motion of the noble Lord, but he
  260
  thought he could give a satisfactory answer to the statement contained in the noble Lord's Resolution. His answer was, that during the last four months Her Majesty's Government had been engaged in negotiating with the Khedive for the suppression of the slave trade, and he hoped those negotiations would result in the effectual suppression of that trade. He was not able to go into particulars; all who were experienced in negotiations knew that, however well parties might be agreed as to principles, there were always a good many details to decide upon, which were surrounded with difficulties, and the settlement of which took time. The negotiations in this case had been going on since November last, and the Government had found the Khedive very willing to meet them in a spirit of friendship and co-operation. It would be premature to speak of the results of a negotiation which was not closed, but he hoped it would be such as to be satisfactory to Her Majesty's Government and their Lordships' House. That being so, he did not think their Lordships would ask him to enter in a general discussion of the slave trade. It was admitted that as far as the East African slave trade was carried on by sea, if not entirely put down, it had been to a great degree suppressed. With regard to the inland slave trade, we had not been able to exercise any active influence such as we had on the seas; but there could be no doubt that if that trade were suppresed throughout the Egyptian dominions, such a suppression would go to a great way towards the total extinction of the traffic. He would only remark on that point that whatever might be the power of the Khedive to deal effectually with the slave trade in his territories, he thought there was no reason to doubt his good will. Everybody could understand that it was not easy for him to make his authority respected in some of the remoter parts of those lands, and consequently in the more distant parts of the Egyptian territories many things might be done which were not in accordance with English views, or with the policy of the Egyptian Government. The Khedive had manifested a good will to suppress the trade by the introduction of legitimate commerce. He believed, indeed, that no Viceroy of

  261
  Egypt had ever given more consistent and persevering help towards the accomplishment of that object. He supposed the noble Lord would not feel it necessary to press his Resolution.
  LORD DE MAULEY: said, that after the satisfactory statement of the noble Earl, he was willing to withdraw his Motion.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD BILL—THE COMMISSIONERS.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEasked the Secretary of State for India, Whether he will communicate to the House the names of the Commissioners to be appointed under Clause 4 of the University of Oxford Bill on a day earlier than that fixed for Committee on the Bill? He added, that he trusted the noble Marquess would not suspect him of having placed this Question upon the Paper, either with the view of gratifying an idle curiosity, or in the hope of embarrassing the progress of the measure. He had placed the Question on the Paper solely in the belief that it was one to which they were entitled to obtain an answer; and that, without the information for which he asked, they would approach the Bill in Committee under very considerable disadvantage. It was stated in the late debate by the most rev. Prelate that this was a case in which everything depended not upon the nature of the measure, but upon the character of the men who were to carry it into effect. He asked the noble Marquess to tell him who those men were to be? Some of their Lordships were no doubt preparing Amendments, and information upon this point might have an important bearing in reference to those Amendments. The more he looked at the Bill the more he was filled with apprehension at the prospect its various clauses offered. The Commissioners were to have vast and undefined powers, which would extend over a period of no less than seven years, and the only restriction on their action was an appeal to the Queen in Council. Therefore it was most desirable that their Lordships should know who they were to be. He was anxious to learn whether they would be few or many;
  262
  whether they would be persons not only holding high positions in the Church, or in the law, or in their professions, whatever those professions might be, but whether they would be persons well acquainted with the system of the University, and with the position occupied in it by the different Colleges. He wished also to know whether the interests of Science would be represented on the Commission? He wished to know also whether the Commissioners would not only be men of high attainments, but whether they would have the time necessary to be devoted to the purposes of the Commission? The members of the University were watching these proceedings with great anxiety—not because they had an aversion to change, but because they saw the prospect of a diversion of revenues from purposes to which they had been hitherto appropriated, without any security that the new appropriation would be a wise one, because they were threatened with the substitution of a new and untried reforming agency for that power of self-reform, which had already been used with advantage in many of the Colleges; because, in a word, they were threatened with a new order of things without any guarantee that it would be an improvement upon the old. These apprehensions could only be quieted by a knowledge that the Commissioners were to be wisely selected, and that their names would inspire confidence in the University itself. He hoped, therefore, that before the Bill went into Committee the noble Marquess would give their Lordships the information for which he had asked.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYwould say at once that he thought the request of the noble Marquess an extremely reasonable one. Only that he was afraid that he might be unnecessarily occupying the attention of the House, he would have himself announced that it was his intention to state the names of the Commissioners on Monday next. He confessed he had been a little puzzled that, in making so simple a request, the noble Marquess should have found it necessary to preface it with an elaborate argument; but as the noble Marquess proceeded he thought he saw that the noble Marquess had intended the remarks just delivered for a speech on the second reading of the Bill, but

  263
  had shrunk from delivering it on the evening when he (the Marquess of Salisbury), as the person having charge of the Bill, could not avoid the painful task of addressing a speech in reply to the weary and forlorn half-dozen Peers who were at that time in the House. He admitted that the powers of the Commissioners under this Bill were large; but when the noble Marquess said they were unprecedented, he quite forgot the legislation that had gone before. They were not larger than the powers given to the Public School Commissioners and the Endowed School Commissioners. The noble Marquess had referred to the Act of 1854, and asked why not give the Colleges the powers that were conferred by that Act? It was true that under the University Bill of 1854 the Colleges had a restraining power over the Commissioners which was not given by the present Bill; but those who made that an objection to this measure forgot the difference between the objects of the two Bills. The object of the Bill of 1854 was to apply the revenues of the Colleges for the benefit of the Colleges themselves. The object of the Bill now before their Lordships' House was to apply them not for the Colleges, but for the University to which the Colleges belonged. The statutes under the Bill of 1854 proceeded on what was conducive not to the interests of the University, but to the interests of the Colleges; those to be drawn up under the present Bill would proceed on what was conducive not to the interests of the Colleges, but to the interests of the University. Again, the Quorum of three Commissioners would have to sit besides another Quorum of three appointed by the College itself; so that the Colleges, instead of being reduced to a dead veto over the whole scheme, would have an opportunity of following the scheme stage by stage, and suggesting changes and voting for each particular proposition in the scheme. He acknowledged that the Bill had been received in the most candid spirit; and though the Government had put forward arrangements for carrying out the measure, they would not adhere to those arrangements with undue pertinacity, but would agree to changes if changes were thought desirable after the provisions of the measure had been considered by their Lordship sand outside that House.
  264
  When laying the names of the Commissioners on the Table he would give Notice of the Amendments which he meant to propose in certain clauses of the Bill, and he hoped that such of their Lordships as had Amendments to propose would give Notice of them at the same time.

WEST AFRICAN SETTLEMENTS— CESSION OF THE GAMBIA.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD COTTESLOEsaid, he rose to ask the noble Earl the Colonial Secretary a Question of which he had given him Private Notice. It was in reference to the negotiations with the French Government as to the exchange of the Gambia for the French Settlements upon the West Coast of Africa. The noble Earl the Secretary of State brought the question before the House some weeks ago; but the result of the debate was far from being satisfactory, as it did not appear from noble Lords' speeches what policy the Government intended to pursue upon this important subject. The question had rested from that time to the present without anything more having been said upon it; but it was desirable that their Lordships should know something more from the noble Earl. He now wished to learn whether the Government would consent to the appointment of a Select Committee of Members of that House to inquire into the whole question—one which involved a great many considerations not only as regarded the interests of the people of the Gambia, but also those of this country? It was said there were French settlements on the Gold Coast, but the extent of their authority was not known, nor were we informed at what places they had any military or naval stations. The question was worthy of consideration, and therefore he begged to ask, Whether the noble Earl was prepared to give any further information in regard to it, and whether a Committee would be appointed?
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, he knew the interest which his noble Friend took in reference to this subject, and therefore was not surprised that he should desire to have the fullest information in regard to it that could be obtained. Considering that in "another place" the Government had appointed

  265
  a Committee of Inquiry, it was only natural that a similar proposal should be made in this House, seeing that it was particularly strong in colonial experience and knowledge—for he saw on the opposite side of the House three ex-Secretaries of the Colonies (Earl Granville, the Earl of Kimberley, and Viscount Cardwell) and another noble Lord who had obtained great experience at the Colonial Office (Lord Blachford). Therefore a Committee appointed by this House would be eminently fitted to sift such a question. But the objection which he saw to the appointment of such a Committee was, that the Committee of one House might come to a different conclusion from the Committee of the other; though that difference of opinion would, no doubt, be useful by bringing into relief points of difficulty in the case. But since the discussion in this House the circumstances of the case had undergone a considerable alteration. The prominent feature in the statement he then made to their Lordships was as to the acquisition of the exclusive and undivided control by the British Government of the whole of the seaboard in question. Nothing short of that, in his opinion, would have satisfied the requirements of the case or would have made it desirable for them to consent to the proposed transfer. Since he made his statement further communications had passed, and it now appeared that the French Government were unwilling to give up to them that entire and exclusive control of the coast which Her Majesty's Government expected, and upon which, of course, the articles of agreement were based. Under these circumstances they had no option but to abandon the negotiations. They had always held that the bargain was eminently favourable to this country, and it was, perhaps, not to be wondered at that the French should look at it in very much the same light. He knew how important it was that a question of that sort should not be unduly kept in suspense, and he was glad his noble Friend had given him that opportunity of stating that the negotiations were at an end, and that, of course, the appointment of the Committee in the other House had been abandoned.
  House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter before Five o'clock.