Sitting of 5 October 1841

MINUTES.
Petitions Presented. By Mr. Thomas Duncombe, from William Ashurst and others, for a Tax on Property.— From Meetings held in the West Riding of York, Leeds, and Sheffield, for the abolition of the Silent System of Prison Discipline; from London, for Inquiry into the Anatomy Act; from Leeds, Pershore, and individuals, for Universal Suffrage &c.; and from Mr. Templer, for the equalisation of the Stamp Duties.— By Dr. Bowring, from Dublin, and an individual for the abolition of Slavery.— By Mr. Ferrand, from an individual, against the Repeal of the Corn-laws.— By Mr. Hawes, from Dunstable, and Northampton; by Mr. Cobden, from Eccles, and other places, and by Mr. W. Ellis, from Leicester, for the Repeal of the Com-laws. — By Mr. W. Patton, from Magistrates of Lancashire, relating to County Rates.— By Mr. Hindley, from Warrington, for vote by Ballot By Mr. M. J. O'Connell, to abolish Declarations on Oath against Popery.— By Mr. Lyall, from the county of Charlotte, New Brnnswick, against alteration in the Timber Duties, — By Mr. Cobden, from H. Holland, for inquiry into the influence of the price of food, on disease and mortality.— By Mr. Cresswell, from Liverpool, for inquiry into the most eligible station for West India Mail Packets.— By Mr. Wakley, from William Morris, for Inquiry into his Dynamic Engines; and from Mr. Webb, for Inquiry into the Prevention of Railway Accidents By Mr. P. M. Stewart, from Paisley; by Mr. Yorke, from York; and Mr. Cobden, from Woodley, for inquiry into Public Distress. — By Mr. Sheil, from Thomas Steele, for Abolition of Coronation Oath, relating to Roman Catholics.

THE CASE OF MR. M'LEOD.
Sir C. Napierwished to know from the Secretary

1129
of the Admiralty, whether orders had been sent out to receive Mr. M'Leod on board one of her Majesty's ships, in case of his acquittal. He understood, that considerable excitement prevailed in America upon this subject, and he thought, that steps ought to be taken to protect Mr. M'Leod.
Sir R. Peelsaid, he was sure, that the gallant Admiral must feel, that it would not be proper for her Majesty's Government, at this moment, to be called on to give information as to what steps would be taken in case of a certain contingency in which Mr. M'Leod might be involved. On consideration, he was sure, it would occur to the gallant Admiral, that it would not be right to press for an answer.
Subject at an end.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Reports of the 30th of August and 1st of October, read.
Lord Granville Somersetmoved, that the Standing Orders be read. Orders read seriatim. The noble Lord then proposed the adoption of several alterations in the Standing Orders relative to the regulation of the Private Business.
Agreed to.
Standing Orders, as amended, adopted.

PETITIONS TO HER MAJESTY.
Mr. Brohertonwished to know from the right hon. Baronet what was about to be done with respect to the petitions to her Majesty (praying Parliament not to be prorogued), and which had been forwarded to the Secretary of State? There was no official letter acknowledging the receipt of these petitions.
Sir R. Peelknew, that it was the intention of his right hon. Friend to go down, tomorrow, to Windsor, for the purpose of presenting all the petitions, that had been received, to her Majesty.
Adjourned.

MINUTES-
Bills. Read a third time:—Exchequer Bilk Funding; Exchequer Bills Appropriation; Poor-law Commission; Population Payments.—Received the Royal Assent:—Administration of Justice (No. 2).; Expiring Laws; Navy Pay; Lunatics; Foreign Bishops'; Frog-more Lodge; Royal Gardens; Riddell's Estate; Marl-borough's Estate; Clayton's Name.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of Ripon, from New Brunswick, against an abolition of the Timber Duties By the Earl of Kinnaird, from Brechin, and other places, and by the Earl of Radnor, from Devizes, and a number of other places, for the Repeal of the Corn-laws.

FUNDING OF EXCHEQUER BILLS— DRAINAGE OF TOWNS.
Lord Ellen-boroughmoved the third reading of the Funding Exchequer Bills Bill.
The Marquess of Normunbywished to take that opportunity of calling the attention of the noble Duke opposite, to a portion of the public business to which he attached considerable importance. He alluded to the measures which he had brought forward on the first day of the
1104
Session, for the drainage of towns, the improvement of building regulations, and the improvement of certain boroughs. He had introduced them in consequence of a report of the other House, and from his own information, and observations of the evils which they were to remedy. The subject had been thoroughly investigated by a committee of their Lordships, and the bill had been sent down to the other House, where he believed the principle was not opposed, but the termination of the Session prevented its being proceeded with. Their Lordships had again sent down the bill this Session, but a similar reason prevented its being proceeded with in the other House. He had expressed to the right hon. Gentleman who succeeded him in the Home Office, his sense of the importance of these measures, and the question he now wished to put, was, whether Government had determined to adopt them as far as the principle went. If the noble Duke gave him such an assurance, he would much rather leave them in the hands of the Government, but if he received no such assurance, he took that opportunity of giving notice, that unless his health prevented him from being present at the commencement of next Session, he should, on the first day of the assembling of Parliament, bring forward his bill again, and trust to the noble Lord, the Member for Dorsetshire, as an independent Member, who took an interest in the subject, for getting it through the other House.
Lord Ellenboroughhad communicated with his right hon. Friend, the Secretary for the Home Department, on the subject, and expressed the anxiety felt by the majority of their Lordships on the subject. His right hon. Friend represented that the bill must necessarily undergo investigation by a committee of the House of Commons, that there was a new opposition to some of the details, and that it was practically impossible to proceed with it in the course of the present Session. With respect to the noble Marquess's question, he could only say, that the Government had as yet no opportunity of looking into the bill, and were not prepared to say, whether, as a Government, they would take it up. It should, however, receive their most attentive consideration during the recess, and they would state what they were prepared to do at the commencement of next Session,
The Duke of Wellingtonsaid, that he had given his individual support to those bills in their progress through that House, and would do so again when they came before him, but he could not answer for the course which his Colleagues in the other House might feel it necessary to adopt with respect to them.
The Marquess of Normanbysaid, the answers he had received were perfectly satisfactory; and he would only add, that if the Government did not adopt the bills, he would again bring them forward early in the next Session, satisfied with the efficient support of the noble Duke.
Bill read a third time and passed.

THE CORN-LAWS — EXPLANATION.
The Earl of Radnorsaid, that he had to present to their Lordships several petitions, praying that the House might address her Majesty not to prorogue Parliament until some measure should be adopted with respect to the Corn-laws. Though there were only a few petitions, they were in principle similar to those which had already been sent before the two Houses, and which had received the signatures of not less than 300,000 persons. There could be no doubt that the subject was one which had excited the most intense interest throughout the country, in which the wish was very general, that the Parliament should not separate until something had been done on this important question. He feared, however, that the Session would close without anything being done in the matter, and he was confirmed in that fear by what had fallen from the noble Duke last night, when he said, that he did not intend to bring forward any measure on the subject of the Corn-laws— so he, at least, had understood the noble Duke; and another noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Buckingham) had, since his accession to office, made a similar statement in his address to a meeting of farmers in Buckinghamshire. But he looked with more attention to the statement made last night by the noble Duke (Duke of Wellington), whom he understood to say, that he had no intention of bringing forward any measure relating to the Corn-laws. [The Duke of Wellington: The noble Lord misunderstood my remark.] He was glad to find that the noble Duke disclaimed the notion that it was not his intention to bring forward any measure on this subject. Undoubtedly, if the question of the Corn-law
1106
were to be considered, with reference to many other important subjects, such as the revenue, finance, and commerce, it would require time to enter into such consideration; and if the noble Duke meant to allude to those subjects, his demand for further time would be very reasonable, but he did not understand the noble Duke to refer to the Corn-law alone. The noble Duke could not require further time for the consideration of the Corn-law question by itself; for as many of their Lordships would recollect, the noble Duke himself had brought in the present Corn-law Act, when at the head of the Government in 1828, and had carried it through. The noble Duke could not, therefore, say, that he wanted time to consider the subject further. The noble Duke must be even more familiar with the subject now than he had been at that time. The noble Duke had stated, on a former evening, that the distress which existed in the country could not arise from the want of a sufficient supply of corn, and the noble Duke dwelt on the fact, that there had just been imported 1,700,000 quarters of foreign corn; and he might have added, that since then the harvest has been got in; but the noble Duke must be aware that great distress, and great want of a sufficient supply of food, might exist in a country in which there might, nevertheless, be a large supply of corn. Did the noble Duke recollect the famine which existed in parts of Ireland a few years ago? At that time the distress was so general, and the want of the common necessaries of life so great, that large subscriptions were raised in this country, and large supplies of food sent to those districts where the wants of the people were greatest. It did happen on that occasion, as the noble Duke might recollect, that a vessel sailing into the harbour of Cork, and laden with supplies of provisions for the distressed inhabitants in- part of it, was met by another vessel bringing to England a cargo of wheat, and and of biscuits, made from wheat. This would show that there might be large supplies of corn in the country, and there still might prevail great distress, and that was the case with England at the present moment. What would be the use of a large supply of corn in the granaries of the country if the people could not purchase it? This was a fearful state in which to leave the country at the prorogation of Parliament, without the introduction of any measure for the relief of the distress

1107
which prevailed. This was the state of things against which Parliament had received the petitions of 300,000 of the people. He had by him a letter on this subject from an individual in Manchester, who, by his own great exertions, had raised himself from the condition of an operative to a station of comparative independence, and who had, by his industry and perseverance, acquired a good education. That gentleman professed his political opinions, for he was what was called a Radical In one of the letters received from him— only that day— there was this passage,—
" The new Parliament will not do anything for the people, and they (.the people) will be taught this fatal lesson, that everything which they may obtain they will owe to violence, or to the fear of violence, and that nothing will be granted to argument or common sense. If Parliament should now separate, as he feared it would, without anything being Hone for the people, and that disturbances should follow, and then that some measure should be brought forward in the next Session, would not that teach the people another lesson— that everything was to be obtained by violence, and that nothing would be conceded to argument? It would 4be a repetition of the lesson taught by the Catholic Emancipation Bill."
In another letter, which he had received from the same individual, he said, that now the Tories had got into office, they would endeavour to persuade the people that there was no distress but yet, while they had admitted and deplored the distress, they produced documents, the object of which was to show that there was no distress at all. Why attempt to deny that, the existence of which they deplored? With respect to that part of the question, he would call the attention of their Lordships to a letter which he had seen in a paper of that morning, written by a member of the College of Surgeons in London residing in Manchester. The writer showed that typhus fever prevailed in proportion to the existence of distress and want of sufficient food amongst the people, and he illustrated his argument by slating; the extent to which typhus fever prevailed in two periods of five years. During the first five years, which were years of manufacturing prosperity, the number of admissions to the Fever Hospital in Manchester was 2,459, and the deaths were about 12½ per cent., while in the next five years the admissions were nearly double, and the deaths 18 per cent. Let him ask whether Parlia-
1108
ment ought to separate without entering into some inquiry as to that distress of which such multitudes were complaining? Was it not matter worthy of consideration, when medical men were publishing books calling on the clergy to assist in endeavouring to find some remedy for the distress which so deeply affected the corporal and intellectual welfare of the people? Under such circumstances, it was deplorable to find the Government turning, as it were, a deaf ear to the prayers of the people, and proroguing Parliament without going into any inquiry. He would repeat, that Government were undertaking a fearful responsibility in this respect. In another part of a letter from the gentleman to whom he had referred, he said, that the Government should recollect that the greatest number of the Chartist leaders were now out of prison, and were endeavouring to persuade the people that a repeal of the Corn-laws would do them no good. [" The Duke of Richmond," Hear.] The noble Duke seemed to be of the same opinion with the Chartist leaders in this respect. Would he agree with the other doctrines of those leaders? Would he agree that all land should be brought into immediate cultivation, and should become the property of the state, the present possessors having no exclusive right to it? The writer went on to describe the alarm created in Manchester by the proceedings of the Chartists, and he added, that if Government would only do justice to the people, it would soon put an end to all those absurdities, and destroy the influence of those who lived by promulgating them. The letter from which he quoted was from a plain man, but one who well understood the subject on which he wrote. He hoped that noble Lords opposite would lay these things to heart, and that even yet the people might expect something to be done for them before the prorogation.
The Duke of Wellingtonsaid, that the person, who, from his situation, was called upon to tender, his advice to her Majesty, should consider well before he gave that advice, and he had always done so; but he would tell the noble Earl what he would not do. He would not allow himself to be intimidated by the noble Earl, or by his friends or correspondents— Radical he thought he called them— from giving that advice which his sense of duty prompted to his Sovereign, let the consequences of

1109
giving that advice be to him what they might. It appeared to him that there was not a more wise or salutary regulation amongst their Lordships' standing orders than that which provided that reference should not be made to former debates; but when noble Lords thought proper to disregard that order, and to refer to observations made in former debates, they ought to take care and be correct as to what passed, and not to attribute words to noble Lords which they never had uttered, or put a meaning on words actually spoken which the speakers could never have intended to convey. The noble Earl had said, that he stated in last night's debate that he would not bring forward the consideration of the Corn-laws. Now, if the noble Earl had attended closely to what passed, and had remembered it accurately, he would have known, and of course would have said, that it was not he, but the noble Viscount lately at the head of the Government, who had referred to the subject, when the noble Viscount said, that if he would give notice of a motion for an alteration of the Corn-laws he would soon secure a full attendance in both Houses of Parliament. His answer to that was, "I will not announce any intention which I do not entertain in order to secure a full attendance of Members." He was sure the noble Viscount would admit the correctness of that statement, and that what he referred to was the attendance of Members in the present Session of Parliament. He was sure the noble Viscount could not mean that the notice was to be given to secure a full attendance in six months' time, or any distant period. [Lord Melbourne— "Hear, hear,] He did admit, that such a notice now would bring a full attendance in both Houses, but what he meant to convey and had slated, was, that he was not prepared at the present time to bring forward any motion for a revision of the Corn-laws. What he had said, was, that it was a measure which must be considered in all its bearings as to commerce and finance, and other important matters, with which it was connected by the late Government in direct communications from the Throne, as well as from Ministers in their places in both Houses. It was perfectly true that he had brought in the bill for establishing' the Corn-law as it now existed, and he could not now recollect whether it had met the approbation of the noble Earl,
1110
but he certainly had no recollection that it had been opposed by him; but he had, at different limes, since discussed the question, and had endeavoured to refresh his memory on the subject, by the perusal of important documents connected with the principle on which it was founded. He did possess some knowledge of the subject, but he must say that it stood in a different light now from what it did when he brought it forward twelve or thirteen years ago, and those who would consider it must look at it with deep attention, and not submit any scheme on the subject to that or the other House of Parliament which was not maturely weighed and considered, not only with reference to other questions with which it was connected by different motions made and discussed in the other House of Parliament, but also in reference to treaties between this country and other powers, and also the treaties of other powers with each other, and combined with these the general relations by which it was connected with the whole system of this country. On these grounds he fully agreed that it was a matter which should not be taken up in a hurry, but must be deliberately examined in all its bearings. The noble Earl had mixed up with this discussion some remarks on a conversation which took place a few nights before; and here again, the noble Earl took an erroneous view of what occurred. The question for the moment related to the distress which was said to exist in several parts of the country. He did not deny that distress, but the sitting or not silting of Parliament could not remedy it. He said that the people were suffering from want of employment, but such want had often existed from time to time, and he did not see how it could be remedied by Parliament. What he said on the evening referred to, was, that the distress did not arise from any want of provisions in the country. The noble Earl himself had stated that there had been lately imported into this country 1,700,000 quarters of foreign corn, and he was aware that before that importation there was in store a supply of corn amounting to 1,200,000 quarters, making in all nearly 3,000,000 quarters, besides the produce of the harvest, which was now got in. From these facts he concluded that there could be no distress arising from want of a sufficient supply of corn. There was, he regretted to say, distress existing from want of work and deficiency in wages, and

1111
other causes, into which he would not then enter; but he repeated that he did not know, and had not heard from any quarter, how Parliament could remedy such evils. They were the results of a variety of causes, which Parliament could not remove if it sat continuously from now till February next. He begged pardon for taking u so much of their Lordships' time whe there was no question before them, but after what had fallen from the noble Earl he had felt it his duty to enter into those explanations of what actually took place on the occasions to which the noble Earl referred.
Lord Kinnairdsaid, there was a question before the House, which was, that the petition presented by his noble Friend (the Earl of Radnor) do lie on the Table. He was glad that the noble Duke had entered into these explanations, because they would remove an erroneous impression which had gone abroad. For his own part, he did understand the noble Duke's declaration of his intention not to introduce any measure on the subject of the Corn-laws to refer to that question generally, and not with reference merely to the present Session of Parliament. He owned, that how-ever necessary an inquiry might be into the state of the country, and the distress which prevailed in consequence of the Corn-laws, he had no hope that any such inquiry would be gone into now, or that when gone into at any time, any practical result would come from it under the present Government. They had been brought into power by the monopolists, who would soon turn them out again if they saw any indication of an intention to make any substantial change in the Corn-laws. No such change could, therefore, be expected from the present Government. This was his own impression, and he believed it was that of the country generally, and it was greatly strengthened by the declaration said to have been made by the noble Duke (Richmond) on the cross-benches, who had said, in the terms he had already quoted, that the agriculturists or monopolists who had brought in the present Government, could send them out again if they found it necessary. The Government asked for time for the consideration of the great questions connected with the subject of the Corn-laws. He believed that they required it on other grounds, for he thought that the materials of the Cabinet were of so heterogenous a nature that
1112
much time must elapse before they could be found to concur upon any one measure. Time, he thought, might also be required to get rid of some three or four Members of the present Cabinet, in order to bring it to the proper mind on certain questions. He had certainly thought that, after the speech of the noble Earl, (of Ripon), and the speech which had been extracted from the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, they were prepared to state to Parliament the principles on which the Government had been formed, but he was mistaken in this feeling. He, however, would like his noble Friend who had preceded him, warn the Government of the danger of any longer delay in this matter. Like his noble Friend, he also was in communication with Radicals; and from them he learned much of the great distress which prevailed, and had received communications pointing out the danger of further postponing the consideration of some means by which that distress might be relieved. In refusing such inquiry, the Government was taking on itself an awful responsibility. The noble Duke had said that he was willing to take his share of that responsibility; but let him tell the noble Duke that it was no slight share, when it involved a refusal to consider the condition of the country, thus adding insult to the sufferings of its starving people. He wished to ask the noble Duke to what length the recess would be carried, or at what time the Houses would again be called together?
The Duke of Wellingtonsaid, that the noble Lord must, on a slight consideration, be aware that the question he had asked was one which he ought not to put, and which could not be answered. He would wish to ask, in his turn, what the noble Lord meant by the word "monopolists?"
The Duke of Richmondsaid, that the noble Earl must have been after the stag-hounds when the noble Earl had heard of the speech to which the noble Earl referred. On that occasion he had stated his 'readiness to give his support to the Government of the right hon. Baronet now at its head, when an observation was made by some Gentleman present, that though Sir R. Peel and his friends were opposed to the Corn-law question as brought in by the Whigs, yet they might, when in power, turn round upon the agriculturists, as they had done on the question of Ca-

1113
tholic Emancipation, and force down their throats that very measure which they had formerly denounced. His reply to that was, that if Sir R. Peel, when in office, supported the 8s. fixed duty, he would tell him and those who supported him, that the agriculturists who had helped him into power, would have no hesitation in turning him out. In this, however, he had made use of no threat; he had merely replied to the argument of a Friend. He did not mean to assert that the Corn-laws were never on any occasion to be touched by the Legislature, but in whatever alteration might be made care should be taken that due protection should be given to agriculture, without which it could not exist. But he would say with reference to the suggested consideration of the question at this particular time, that it would be not only inconvenient, but also unproductive of any practical result.
Lord Clifford of Chudleigh, was happy to hear from the noble Duke, that there was no fixed lime to which Parliament was to be prorogued, and therefore, that the people might entertain some hope that their distressed condition would be taken into consideration much earlier than was generally supposed. He had no fear for want of food in the country, but what he dreaded was increase of discontent, for which he saw no remedy, except a temporary coming forward on the part of the aristocracy, especially that part that had shown themselves he richest at the last elections. This country was burdened with a debt of 800,000,000 l., and while it was so it would be impossible for them to frame a Corn-law such as they might and ought to frame if the debt did not exist. The very fact of the delay so strenuously insisted upon by the present Government showed that the risk of Government was one of considerable difficulty. This country had a right to expect their Lordships to come forward with that assistance which would be necessary for the sustenance of the poor during the time which her Majesty's present Government delayed their measures. While he was on his legs he begged to give notice, that early next Session be would move for the appointment of a committee to inquire whether it was not in the power of the governor of Madras to protect her Majesty's subjects according to the law as settled in 1833. That inquiry was rendered necessary, because, the noble
1114
Lord, the President of the Board of Control appeared to be as unable to understand that law, as the noble Lord was unable to understand his speeches.

YARMOUTH— EXPLANATION.
The Marquess of Normanbydid not know whether it was necessary to trouble their Lordships with a rather extraordinary letter he had received from a Mr. Lacon, who had charged him with having taken steps to suppress the production of certain papers with reference to proceedings that had taken place in the borough of Great Yarmouth. The letter was written in a complete misapprehension of the facts, for their Lordships were aware, that he had not the power to suppress any portion of the documents referred to, as the correspondence was not produced, because the noble Earl who had put the question to him, had not moved for it.
Petition laid on the Table.

SLAVERY AND THE SLAVE TRADE.
Lord Broughamsaid, he rose to call the attention of their Lordships to a question of great importance, and on which, as there happily existed no difference of opinion in that or the other House of Parliament, and as there, indeed, was in every part of the kingdom a singular unanimity on the subject, it would be the less necessary for him to trespass at any considerable length on their Lordship's attention. The subjects he was about to introduce to their notice were the Slave-trade and slavery, and he believed that in either House of Parliament, or in any part of the kingdom, there did not exist any description of persons who felt other than the strongest desire to see the traffic in slaves abolished everywhere and the state of slavery itself universally, and with all practicable expedition, instantly extinguished. The ground on which he felt it his duty to trouble their Lordships on the present occasion was, that great misapprehension had, he understood, prevailed in the country touching the law applicable to this subject. He had presented to their Lordships, some ten or twelve days back, a petition containing a variety of allegations, and he, at that time, wished it to be distinctly understood, that the truth of the allegations, must rest upon the responsibility of the respectable petitioners who had brought the matter before the House. But if the facts were, as alleged in that petition, it would appear that there had been not only a large capital embarked in slavery

1115
in foreign settlements, but embarked in a manner to support the Slave-trade itself. He should begin with those things alleged in the petition to have been done by British subjects, and which were clearly contrary to the law. The law was this, that every British subject, in any part of the world, whether in a country where the Slave-trade is lawful, or in one where it is illegal— every British subject, even in a part of the world where the Slave-trade is not only allowed, but (if there be such a country) where it is protected and even encouraged by the law— every British subject who partakes of such trade is guilty of a felony, and liable to be transported for life or for fourteen years. If the offence is committed on the high seas, or within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty, he is a pirate and liable to be transported for life and if the act be committed elsewhere than within the Admiralty jurisdiction, for fourteen years. For several years the offence was piracy, and a capital felony if committed within the Admiralty jurisdiction. That law had been altered, but if an act of slave-trading were committed by a British subject in a colony where the Slave-trade was allowed, and he would suppose even favoured, he was liable, if taken and brought to this country, to be tried for the offence as if it had been committed in this country, and on conviction, to be transported for life or for fourteen years, according as it was committed within or without Admiralty jurisdiction. He had never said that it depended upon the law of the foreign country where the act had been committed, whether a British subject committing an act of slave-trading was guilty of felony or not, although from letters he had received, some such misrepresentation must have gone abroad, he had, on the contrary, said, that the law of the foreign country had nothing to do with the acts of a British subject in this matter, and that if a foreign subject committed a slave-trading act in one of our own colonies or settlements, he would be guilty of piracy and of felony, according to the jurisdiction within which he did the act. All this was quite clear and free free from doubt. The only question was, whether any given acts amounted to slave-trading or not. Several acts were stated in the petition as slave-trading which appeared to him not to constitute the offence. With respect to others he gave no confident opinion, they appeared to be of a doubtful description; while some acts appeared quite clearly to amount to slave-trading, and to
1116
come within the law. If a person fitted out a vessel to traffic with slave factories and settlements, and sold goods to those factories, out and out, though they were such as might be used for the Slave-trade, as well as the innocent commerce of the coast and though in point of fact they were used in slave-trading, he was of opinion that this did not amount to slave-trading; whether it was a commendable use of capital or not, was a different question. If the goods sent out were of such a description that it could not be doubtful that they were to be used in the Slave-trade alone, such as a cargo of fetters or other implements that could only be employed in such a trade, he had stated that he deemed this much more doubtful, yet, he was not prepared to say that it was an act of slave-trading which would render the exporter of such articles liable to be tried for felony. But if goods were sent, whether of one kind or the other, whether of an ambiguous description, or plainly fitted for the Slave-trade alone, and the price of the goods was to depend (as the petitioners stated to be the fact) upon the Slave-trade, in which such goods were to be employed, he had stated that his opinion was that this was an act of slave-trading, being in truth a partnership with slave-traders, and the persons exporting such goods would be guilty of a felony within the meaning of the Abolition Law. There was another description of acts, which were much more important, because they were much more extensively done — namely the act of holding property in a foreign settlement, which was to be cultivated or worked, (cultivated if a plantation, and worked if a mine) by slave-labour. The consequence of holding such property was the purchase and sale of slaves, with the view of cultivating such plantations or working such mines. On that kind of transaction a question arose— did or did not the Slave-trade Abolition law apply to it? An opinion had gone abroad that this was a dealing and a trading with slaves to which the Abolition Acts did not apply, an opinion which was entertained by many highly respectable individuals, and had been acted upon to a great extent; they had engaged in a variety of such concerns, and had invested in them capital to a large amount; but on looking to the provisions of the law he thought he had hardly a right to go so far as to say that their Lordships would entertain a grave doubt as to the illegality of the proceeding. The dealing upon which the question arose was

1117
not the mere holding of the property— that was lawful. The Emancipation Act of 1833 differed from the Abolition Acts; it did not prohibit British subjects from holding land in foreign settlements, as the Abolition Acts prohibited his engaging in foreign Slave-trade. After the act of 1833 it was legal for a British subject to be a holder of slaves, and to have property in slaves in a foreign settlement; but the question was, had it been legal since the abolition law (the abolition of the slave-trade) for a British subject to purchase slaves, to buy slaves, and to sell or traffic in slaves in a foreign country? He had been represented to have said that he had no doubt that such an act was lawful, and had not been struck at by the abolition law, whereas he had carefully abstained from giving any opinion; he could not have given such opinion, for if he had been obliged to give an opinion at all upon the question, ha should have said that the act was not legal, and that the abolition law did strike at it. He would state his reasons. The provisions of the act which he had the the great satisfaction of carrying through Parliament in 1811, and without any dissentient voice, the act which first made Slave-trading a crime, was materially changed in one particular by the General Abolition Act of 1824. In that act, the slave-trade had been declared piracy, and punished as a capital felony, if within the Admiralty jurisdiction; if without such jurisdiction the offender was liable to transportation for fourteen years, as in his (Lord Brougham's) Act of 1811. In affixing the latter and lesser punishment the act of 1824 gave a new definition of the offence. The first section declared all such trading unlawful. The tenth section declared it a felony, in the following terms—
" Except in such special cases as are herein, after provided for, if any person shall deal, or trade in, or purchase, sell, barter, or transfer, or contract for the Healing, or trading in, or for the purchase, sale, barter, or transferring of any slave, or slaves, or persons intended to be dealt with as slaves he shall be guilty of felony."
Certain special cases were excepted, and the 13th section thus provided for these special cases following the language of the tenth—
" Nothing hereinbefore contained shall be taken or deemed to prevent any person from dealing, or trading in, or from purchasing, selling, bartering, or transferring, or from contracting to deal or trade in, purchase, sale,
1118
barter, or transfer, any slave or slaves lawfully being within any island or colony belonging to or in the possession of, his Majesty, in case such dealing, &c, be with the true intent and meaning of employing such slave or slaves in the colony which he or they may be in at such time."
And the 14th section provides for the removal by land or sea of slaves from one part of any such colony, but always a colony in the possession of his Majesty to another part of such colony, and if the other part of such colony should happen to he another island (as in some cases there are several islands in one Government), then the person intending to remove a slave from one such island to another was required to procure a licence from the governor, to be granted on satisfactory proof that the slave was intended to be removed from one estate to another estate in the possession of the same owner of the slave. Then, how, under this law, could a British subject in Brazil or Cuba, buy a slave or sell a slave under the 13th section, or remove a slave from one part of Cuba or Brazil to another, under the 14th section, neither Cuba nor Brazil being a colony or settlement in the possession, or under the dominion of the British Crown, which was the only special excepted case? Upon this ground he was wholly unaware upon what view of the law the parties had been advised to proceed who had embarked in such speculations, and become owners of slaves by purchase, or by the intervention of agents, had purchased, sold, or transferred slaves in Cuba or Brazil, or moved them from place to place, and who must have been advised that they could safely embark in such speculations. Again by the 10th section it was a felony knowingly and wilfully to lend or advance money, or to send goods, to be employed in any object "hereinbefore declared to be unlawful;" that is, "the dealing or trading in, purchasing, selling, bartering, or transferring slaves, or persons intended to be dealt with as slaves." All of which is, by the first section, declared unlawful, and by the tenth, felonious. Yet some such view must have been taken by a number of most respectable persons, who, he understood, had embarked considerable) capital in the cultivation of these foreign colonies, and who must have been advised that they could legally engage in such speculations. What, then, remained to be done? He trusted his noble Friend opposite, at the head of the Board of Trade,' (Lord Ripon), would immediately apply

1119
his mind to this subject, and if any doubt existed upon it that he would come to Parliament, as soon as it met next Session, to have the doubt removed by a declaratory act; but if the result of his noble Friend's inquiry led him to conclude that there was no doubt, and that the dealings in question were unlawful, the most satisfactory course, he thought, and the fairest, to the parties themselves would be to notify by Proclamation what the state of the law was, and thus to give a general intimation to all persons who had unwarily got themselves into this predicament, that the sooner they got out of it the better; at the same time prohibiting other persons from entering into such speculations, by stating the inevitable consequences they would lead to. This warning was especially necessary with respect to holding slaves, because men dealt in these without their attention being called to the use made of their money, and, in most cases, without any knowledge of the concern or the mode of conducting it. The Proclamation that gave them this knowledge would give them a notice or warning, to which they seemed entitled, The course which the Legislature took in dealing with the Slave-trade in former years, well deserved the consideration of Government and of Parliament in treating the subject now. In 1806 the first bill abolishing the Slave-trade was introduced by Sir Arthur Pigot, and became the 46 Geo. 3rd., which prohibited British subjects engaging in the foreign Slave-trade, and the lending or advancing of money for any purposes connected with that trade. Next year Lord Grey brought in the first general Abolition Bill,
which subjected British subjects who should be found guilty of Slave-trading any where, and all persons so trading in any part of the dominions of the Crown to various pecuniary penalties. Next came the 51 Geo. 3rd., the Felony Act, brought in by him (Lord Brougham) which declared the Slave-trade to be felony; and afterwards came the act of 1824, brought in by Mr. Canning, making the description of this offence still more stringent. Nothing but the late period of the Session would prevent him (Lord Brougham) from moving an Address to her Majesty on the subject, similar to the one he had moved in 1810, and which led to the Felony Bill next year. If there was no objection, he would at once move an Address, if noble Lords saw any objection to such a course at that late period of the Session, he would abstain from adopting it; but he trusted that his noble Friend, the
1120
President of the Board of Trade, would call the attention of the Law-officers of the Crown to the points to which he had adverted, with a view of putting a stop to such practices. With respect to the reports of Dr. Madden on the settlements of the western coast of Africa, he understood that there were some objections to their production as such. He should like to know the reason for withholding them, as he understood they contained much valuable matter. But whether these reports were produced or not, he trusted that the Government would not fail of acting on the information contained in them. He must now beg the attention of their Lordships to the same question in the East. A noble Friend of his the other night agreed with him in doubting whether slavery existed by law in Malacca. There was the opinion of one local government in 1828 against it, and of another governor, that such a state of things was sanctioned by law. He had looked into the matter, and all doubt on his mind was at an end as regarded the course best to be now taken; for, at a meeting of the owners of slaves in Malacca, in 1829, they came to a resolution, pledging themselves to liberate all their slaves in 1841. He trusted that the Government would take the proper steps to see that this resolution was carried into effect, and that whatever was the state of law in the settlement before the liberation of the slaves should take place. He would now call the attention of his noble Friend to the dreadful state of slavery in some parts of India. He had had, by means of one of the persons employed on the law commission in India, access to a valuable report made to Lord Auckland. [Lord Ellen-borough: It has been laid before the House of Commons and ordered to be printed.] He was not aware of that fact, having been abroad at the time; but he would read an extract from the report of the commissioners, which strikingly pointed out one of the consequences of slavery in India, and of the slave-trading to which it gave rise. The practice to which he alluded had only recently been brought to light, and was described in a report to the commissioners by Major Sleeman. The description was under the head Megpunnaism, which this gentleman describes as a part of a notorious practice for the purpose of getting slaves. It is stated in the report:—
"This system of murdering indigent parents for their children has been flourishing since the siege of Bhurtpore, in 1826; and the cause of

1121
their confining their depredations to this class of people seems to have been the great demand they found for these children in all parts of the country, and the facility with which they inveigled their parents into their society. They were in the habit of disposing of the female children thus obtained for very large sums, to respectable natives, or to the prostitutes of the different cities they visited, and they found this system more lucrative than that of murdering travellers in good circumstances, and less likely to be brought to the notice of the local authorities, as inquiries were seldom made after the victims by their surviving relations. These gangs (the Report adds), contrary to the customs of those whose proceedings are now so well known to us, invariably take their families with them on their expeditions: and the female members of the gang are employed as inveiglers to win the confidence of the emigrant families they fall in with on the road. They introduce these families to the gang, and they are prevailed upon to accompany them to some place suitable to their designs upon them, where the parents are murdered by the men, while the women take care of the children. After throwing their bodies into the river, or otherwise disposing of them, the men return to their women in the camp; and when the children inquire after their parents, they are told that they have sold them to certain members of the gang, and departed. If they appear to doubt the truth of these assertions, they are deterred from further inquiries by a threat of instant death. They are allowed to associate freely with the families of the murderers, and in a few days their grief subsides, and they become reconciled to their fate. The female children are either adopted by members of the gang, or sent in charge of the women to be disposed of. They find a ready sale for them among the Brinjarahs, many of whom are connected with these gangs in their murderous trade, and all of them are well known in Upper India to traffic in children. These Brinjarahs resell the children to the prostitutes of the different cities, who soon become acquainted with the fate of their parents, and are much pleased to learn it, as it relieves them of all apprehension that they will ever come to reclaim them."
He then gives the examination of some of the wretches connected with these gangs of murderers. One of these outcasts says,
"We call our trade, viz., murdering travellers for their children, megpunna."
Another Jemadar or leader of a gang, was asked,
"Q. You have stated in your various depositions that you invariably preserve the children and sell them. Are you not afraid that these children will disclose the manner in which you got them, and thereby get you into trouble?— A. We invariably murder our vic-
1122
tims at night, first taking the precaution to put the children to sleep, and in the morning we tell them that we have purchased them from their parents who have gone off and left them. Q. You seem to have been in the habit of selling children in all parts of the country; how have you avoided being apprehended?— A. The children are seldom aware of the fate of their parents; and in general we sell them to people very well acquainted with the nature of our proceedings."
Khenia, otherwise called Nursing Dass, another leader of a gang, says,
"After the capture of Bhurtpore, Nanoo Sing Brinjarah, and four other Byragees, residents of Kurroulee, came to me with four travellers and their four children, and invited me to participate in their murder, which I consented to, and with the assistance of my gang we strangled the whole of them, preserving the lives of the children, whom we sold at Jeipore for 120 rupees, half of which was divided among the members of my gang. After this affair, I resolved on selecting for my victims the poorest class of travellers, and murdering them for their children, for whom there was so great a demand in all the great cities; since which I have committed the following murders, the particulars of which I will detail as I may remember."
But the Report goes he further in this wretch's evidence; but, by his account, it appears, that four murders had been perpetrated for the purpose of selling the children into slavery for the miserable pittance of 120 rupees or 12 l. Another of these murderers, Javen Dass, said,
" I left my home with a gang of forty Thugs, and proceeded to Husseeagunge, where Heera Dass and Rookmunee went to the city of Muttra for the purpose of buying some clothes, and succeeded in winning the confidence of four travellers, two men and two women, with their three children, whom they brought with them to our encampment; after passing two days with us, Teella Dass, Mudhoo Dass, Byragees, and Dewa Hookma, Teelake, Gungarem, Brinjarahs, Balluck Dass, Chutter Dass, Neput Dass, and Hunooman Dass, prevailed on this family to accompany them to the banks of the Jumna, and murdered the four elderly travellers in a garden near the village of Gokool; after throwing their bodies into the Jumna, they took their three children to the tanda, or encampment, of Dewah Brinjarah, near the village of Kheir, and sold the two female children for forty rupees, and the male for five rupees."
Therefore, these murders were committed for little more than four pounds. The last deposition to which he should refer, was that of a woman, who declared,
"We now went off to Thuneiseir, where we

1123
encamped in a grove on the bank of a tank, and here several parties of travellers were inveigled by the wives of the leaders of our gangs to come and take up their lodgings with us. 1. A Chumar, with three daughters; one thirty years of age, and the others young. 2. The widow of a carpenter, and her son, ten years of age. 3. A Brahmin and his wife, with one beautiful daughter fourteen years old, another five, and a son six years of age. 4. A Brahmin and his wife, with one daughter about fourteen, another twelve, and a son three years of age. These travellers lodged for two or three days among the teats of the Naeks and Brinjarahs, after which we all went one morning to a village in the territory of the Toorooee rajah? I forget his name. Here very heavy rain fell at night, and deluged the country, and we got no rest. The next morning we went to a village on the bank of the canal, still in the same rajah's country. The next day we went to a village on the bank of the Jumna; and two hours after night, Kaner Dass proposed that we should go down to the sacred stream of the Jumna, say our prayers and remain there. They all went down accordingly, leaving me, Roopla, and his second wife (Rookmunee) at the village. They murdered the seven men and women, and threw their bodies into the river; but who killed them, or how they were killed, I know not. The Chumar and his eldest daughter, the two Brahmins and their wives, and the carpenter's wife were all murdered. They brought the nine children back to us a watch and a half before daylight. They were all crying a good deal after their parents; and we quieted them the best way we could, with sweetmeats and playthings. We came to Beebeepore, and encamped in the grove. A daughter and son of the Brahmin's were extremely beautiful, and these we left with Dyhan Sing for sale. We came on to a village a coss distant from Beebeepore. Here a trooper came up to Beebeepore, saying that he had heard of several people being murdered, and suspected us of the crime. The head men of the village of Beebeepore, and some of the Brinjarahs came to our tramp with the trooper, and assured him that he must be mistaken, as they knew us all to be very honest, inoffensive people; and taking him to Beebeepore, they treated him with great consideration, and he went away apparently satisfied. But, fearing that our deeds had become known, Pemla and Newla's wives and Peuila's mother took off the seven other children to Phyan Sing, and left them all in his charge. Pemla went to Kurnaul, and Goorbuksh and his gang went to Beebeepore, while my husband and his party remained where we were. A woman who keeps prostitutes came from Kurnaul, and purchased and took away oil the children. All were sold through Dhyan Sing. One boy was purchased by an elephant driver, who took him off upon his elephant; and another was purchased by a Mussulman.
1124
All the rest were taken off in covered carriages, by the prostitute, to Kurnaul. I should know all their faces again were to see them.
Human language sank under the vain attempt at giving utterance to the mingled feelings of pity and of horror which arise in every breast on surveying such atrocities as these— he defied any power of imagination to paint scenes more hideous, more unbearable, than the plain language of the monsters themselves portrayed their own frightful deeds. Africa itself steeped for centuries in blood, by another branch of the execrable traffic, and still laid waste by the Spaniards and Portuguese, with the connivance of more humane nations, presented no spectacle more appalling, no example more horrible, of the titter disregard of human life, the habitual proneness to take it away, with which the traffic in human beings strikes and blights the heart, in every region which it is suffered to curse. But while giving way to abhorrence at the crimes of these wretches, u-e should reserve part of our indignation for that system of which they are the natural and appointed fruit; and their Lordships might be assured that so long as it was possible to hold human beings in slavery, the dealing in slaves could not be put down, and atrocities such as those which he had deemed it his painful duty to lay before the House, would never cease to exist. He had no doubt whatever, but that the advice given by a noble Friend of his, formerly Secretary to the Colonial Department (Lord Glenelg), a few months before he had left office, with regard to accelerating the emancipation of the slaves in Ceylon— he had no doubt but that the advice contained in his very important despatch of the month of November, 1838, had been taken into mature and early consideration by his noble Friend at the head of the India Department-No one knew more of Indian affairs than Lord Glenelg; no one's authority, and most deservedly, stood higher; and he fondly hoped that some means would be taken for insuring the total abolition of slavery, which was the only real and effectual remedy against the recurrence of such enormous evils.
The Earl of Riponwas not aware of the existence of the documents to which his noble and learned Friend had alluded, and therefore, his only object in rising to address their Lordships was, with reference to matters of which he had more personal

1125
cognizance. His noble Friend asked whether there was any objection to lay on the Table of the House the report of Dr. Madden, as to the state of slavery and the slave trade on the western coast of Africa. It was not without regret that he felt called upon to object to the production of these documents. His noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies and himself, after considerable deliberation, came lo the conclusion that it would not be proper to lay them before Parliament, as they were documents of a highly confidential nature, and referred, not only lo the state of our settlements on the coast of Africa, but involved matters connected with our relations with other powers, and also contained statements of a very important and delicate nature, involving the names and the conduct of private persons. Therefore, under these circumstances, it would not be proper at present to produce these reports. He felt convinced that their publication would tend to defeat rather than to advance the great object which his noble and learned Friend had so much at heart, and which the Government had in view in making such strict inquiries into the subjects of slavery and the slave trade. The attention of his noble Friend at the head of the Colonies had been directed to the legal part of the subject adverted to by his noble and learned Friend, and when the Government was in possession of legal advice, it would be its duty to see how far it was practicable to apply the law, if it was applicable to the cases alluded to, or if it was not, to call on Parliament to amend the law, and to bring these cases within it, which certainly came within the spirit if not the letter of the present law. Under these circumstances, he trusted that his noble and learned Friend would be satisfied with the declaration of the intentions of the Government, and would not call upon the House to take any other steps at present.
Lord Ellenboroughobserved that the report from which the noble and learned Lord had quoted was laid before Parliament on the 26th of last April, and was printed about six weeks ago. He thought it would have been a more considerate course to direct their Lordships attention, so that they might form their opinions on this subject rather to the whole tendency of the report, containing as it did upwards of 900 pages, than to a few detached ex-
1126
tracts. He had yesterday placed on the Table of the House a minute on this subject by his noble Friend the Earl of Auckland, descriptive of the course to be taken, and he was sure that his noble and learned Friend entertained as great respect as himself for the soundness of the opinion and judgment of Lord Auckland on such a subject. With respect to the cases of horrible crimes ad veiled to by his noble and learned Friend, he would only say, that if they went to the more civilized countries of the world, they would meet with many cases of atrocity like those described in the report in question. He believed that Scotland was generally admitted to be the most moral part of the United Kingdom, yet, only a few years ago, it was discovered in the capital of that country that persons were murdered for the sake of obtaining the value of their dead bodies. If his noble and learned Friend looked more narrowly into the subject to which he had adverted, he would find that the atrocities which he had described were more mixed up with the system of Thuggee than his noble Friend seemed to think. Noble Lords were aware that the Thugs made it a matter of pleasure to commit murder, and that many of them even thought that they were doing good to their victims by sending them to another world. The exertions of the Government had been directed to the suppression of Thuggee, but he feared the attempts had not been altogether successful. With this feeling, then, the Thugs murdered the parents, and probably preserved the children from some indefinite feeling of pity. As for preserving them for the purpose of selling them as slaves, the value of children in this respect was little or nothing. If the crimes were perpetrated for the purpose of getting money by the sale of slaves, these parties would gel infinitely more by preserving the parents and selling them as slaves. He trusted that his noble and learned Friend would turn his attention to the whole subject, and more especially to the minute of Lord Auckland. In the year 1833, Parliament had directed the government of India to make inquiries as to the state of slavery in India, in consequence of which the law commissioners in India had thoroughly investigated the subject, and had furnished their reports. He thought that Parliament had wisely directed that the initiation in legislation on this subject

1127
should be left with the Governor-general and council. These documents were at the present time under the consideration of the Governor-general of India, who, from his local knowledge and facilities of, obtaining information, was much better: able to prepare a law on the subject than; the Parliament at home. The Governor-general had been requested more than once to hasten the proceedings for this purpose; and he could assure his noble; and learned Friend that there was every disposition at home to accede to any measure on the subject likely to be attended with success.
Lord Broughamsaid, it was distinctly stated in the report that the object the persons had in view in the commission of these atrocities was, that they might obtain possession of the children for the purpose of selling them. There was no doubt, however, that the practice was mixed up with Thuggee of one kind or another, but it was described as a new kind of Thuggee introduced by the temptation of the slave market. He could not help feeling that his noble Friend had been very unlucky in his reference to the proceedings that had occurred a few years ago in Scotland. If he (Lord Brougham) wished to select a fact which would be illustrative of the atrocities of this species of slavery, he could not have found an instance more strikingly appropriate and illustrative of his case than that to which his noble Friend had directed the attention of the House. It happened that some years before the discovery of these disgraceful proceedings, three or four friends and himself were discussing the subject of the enormous price of dead bodies for the purpose of anatomical dissection. He recollected that his friend, Mr. John Smith, the late Member for Midhurst, was one of the party present, from a circumstance which he would presently state. It was said, in the course of the conversation in question, that from 25 l. to 30 l. was given for a body for anatomical purposes. He then predicted, that if something was not immediately done to procure a supply at a moderate rate, you would have murders committed on the poorer classes for the sake of selling their dead bodies. Afterwards when the atrocities alluded to had attracted public attention, Mr. Smith reminded him of his prediction. It was precisely the same thing with the slave market," where the profit led to the perpetration of the crimes, the similar crimes
1128
described in the report. Therefore, instead of this serving as an argument against him, it was quite the opposite way and it showed that the same course should be taken now in the Indian case which had been pursued in the English. A bill, had been brought into Parliament, and passed into a law in consequence of those murders, to facilitate the procuring dead bodies for anatomical purposes, and he would venture to say, that since that time no enormities of the same kind had happened in any part of the kingdom. He was not aware that the report in question had been laid before Parliament so far back as April: he was out of the country at the time, and did not hear of any having been made until a week or ten days ago. He had, however, read every part of it with care. He would only add, that he should feel great satisfaction in examining the minute of his noble Friend, Lord Auckland, to which the noble Lord referred. Under the circumstances he should not press for the production of the report of Dr. Madden.
Motion withdrawn.
Adjourned.