Chapter VI: Part 6

5290. Mr. _Aldam_.] Are the proceedings of the Vice-Admiralty Court there carried on in the same form as the proceedings of the Admiralty Court here?--Yes, very much the same.

5291. With any greater degree of secrecy?--No, but here the public papers publish them; we have no newspapers there to publish accounts of the proceedings.

5292. _Chairman._] Would there be an advantage if the proceedings of the Vice-Admiralty Court were always communicated to the Mixed Commission?--Yes; and I recommended at the time when vessels began to go so frequently to the Vice-Admiralty Court, in 1839, that we should be informed of the papers filed in that court.

5293. Would there be any difficulty or objection to that?--There is no establishment of clerks connected with the Vice-Admiralty Court to supply copies at all, and it is not the custom of the judge of the Vice-Admiralty Court to report his proceedings home.

5294. Mr. _Evans_.] Do you think that the Mixed Commission Court has sufficient power for the objects for which it is instituted?--I think that they have. They have been rather shy of exercising it sometimes, but I believe that they do possess much more power than they ever exercised.

5295. You have no improvement in the court to suggest?--No. There seemed to be a deficiency of authority in the marshal a short time ago; but that was supplied by a local Act, which gave him all the power which the marshal of the Vice-Admiralty Court possesses.

5296. _Chairman._] It is stated by Dr. Madden, in page 14, that the new interests which he supposes to be created in the minds of the British residents, especially in the minds of the liberated negroes, “have a very unfavourable influence upon them when employed in public situations, or called upon to act as petty juries in our courts.” He states, “if the case is one which involves the interest of a slave dealer, no matter what his nation, the disposition of a jury thus composed is invariably to give a verdict in favour of the slave trader, unless the chief justice should take extraordinary pains to make them do their duty honestly and impartially.” Do you know instances in which this has operated?--No; I believe it never operated in any case.

5297. What are the cases in which slave dealers come before juries in Sierra Leone?--Slave dealers have come before them, and been convicted and executed; I never knew an instance of a man who ought to have been convicted escaping.

5298. He mentions here an instance of a vessel, the Gollupchik, being captured and being sold, and becoming the property of certain London merchants, and being again sent out with a cargo of goods for the slave trade factories of Gallinas, under British colours, and commanded by a British subject. “The vessel,” he says, “was condemned by the Mixed Court of Justice at Sierra Leone, and the English captain was committed for trial at the ensuing assizes. The grand jury found a true bill against this man on the clearest evidence, but the petty jury, all of whom were persons of colour, returned an unanimous verdict of acquittal, which was received by the coloured persons in the court, and by some others of similar sentiments, with decided tokens of approbation.” Are you acquainted with that case?--Not at all; without knowing the case it would be impossible to say whether the jury were right or wrong; I have known cases where they have discharged persons accused of slave dealing, and where they were right. In the case referred to by Mr. Hartung of the Echo, the jury thought that the prisoner was not liable to conviction; but I never knew in my time any man who ought to have been convicted of slave dealing escape.

5299. Generally speaking, did you find the coloured juries do their duty in all cases?--Certainly; they do their duty very well.

5300. Mr. _W. Patten_.] Is it from any particular class that juries are selected?--The grand juries are selected from the most respectable inhabitants of Freetown, and the petty juries from shopkeepers and the reputable class of traders.

5301. Viscount _Courtenay_.] Who selects them?--The sheriff.

5302. _Chairman._]--Has the office of chief justice been frequently vacant?--It has been vacant several times since I was in the colony, and an acting chief justice has been appointed.

5303. Who has acted in the interval?--During one interval, Mr. Melville, who was Queen’s advocate at the time, and Mr. Carr, who was also Queen’s advocate, and who is now chief justice, officiated on another occasion.

5304. Were they gentlemen who had a legal education?--Both of those persons had; but there were two other instances in which the office was held by men who had no legal education; once by a merchant, and a second time by the collector of customs.

5305. Was that under the necessity of the case?--Yes.

5306. Mr. _Forster_.] How long did the collector of customs hold that office?--A very long time; he held it from the death of Chief Justice Rankin until the appointment of Mr. Carr as chief justice, which was probably a year and a half after.

5307. Mr. _W. Patten_.] Do you know what year it was in?--From August 1839 till, I think, the end of 1840, or the beginning of 1841.

5308. Mr. _Forster_.] It is a part of the duty of the chief justice to deliver the gaol at the Gambia, is it not?--Yes.

5309. Are you aware whether the acting chief justice visited the Gambia for that purpose during the 18 months in question?--Certainly; while I was there Mr. Hook visited it.

5310. Do you know how frequently, in each year, it is the duty of the chief justice to deliver the gaol of the Gambia?--There is no time appointed; but I consider it a great disadvantage both to the Gambia and Sierra Leone, having only one chief justice for the two places.

5311. You are not aware whether the Gambia has not been left for a period of 12 months without a gaol delivery?--No; I think it is possible that it might be the case between the early part of 1838 and 1839, or between the beginning of 1839 and the beginning of 1840. There is very great difficulty in getting any person in a colony like that to fill the situation of chief justice, I mean from among the residents in the colony.

5312. Are you aware of the cause of the office having been vacant for the period of 18 months?--No, not at all; I suppose that the Colonial Government could not find a proper person to send out. One barrister who was appointed was drowned before he reached Sierra Leone.

5313. You are not aware that the applications have generally been extremely numerous for that office whenever it has become vacant?--No.

5314. Mr. _Aldam_.] What is the system of criminal law in force in the colonies?--The law of England.

5315. Is it modified at all?--Very little; if it is modified, it is modified by local Acts passed by the Governor and Council.

5316. Mr. _Evans_.] Do you think it a good thing to appoint men of colour to such high offices as those of chief justice or Governor, in any colony where many English gentlemen reside?--Certainly, if they are fit for the situations; but at Sierra Leone there is no feeling whatever except amongst one or two individuals, on the subject of colour; indeed I believe that the most popular man at the present time, and almost during the whole time when I was there, was a man of colour, and who was afterwards Lieutenant-governor; that was Dr. Ferguson, a man, I believe, universally beloved there.

5317. Mr. _Forster_.] Do you think that the natives have the same confidence and respect for a person of that description, as for a white officer?--I think so; at Sierra Leone, certainly.

5318. Mr. _Aldam_.] Practically, do you find a great number of men of colour who are fit to fill high situations in the colony?--There are not so many men of colour as white men fit to fill the high situations; but some of the highest situations have been filled in my time by men of colour, and well filled.

5319. _Mr. W. Patten_.] Have you any other observation which you wish to make upon Dr. Madden’s Report?--At page 28, on “The result of the efforts at present in use for the suppression of the slave trade,” Dr. Madden mentions “The disappointment the captors experience at seeing all their arduous efforts for hindering the slave trade factories from receiving their supplies from the foreign vessels engaged in this trade completely nullified by the proceedings of our own merchants and commanders of merchant-vessels, who supply them with the identical goods and stores which they capture the foreign vessels for conveying to the coast.” Now I wish particularly, with reference to that statement, to say, that foreign vessels are never captured for having _goods_ of any description on board of them. There appears to have been some error entertained as to the grounds on which the vessel called the Dos Amigos, which has been mentioned before, was condemned. That vessel was condemned at Sierra Leone, and in the report which the Commissioners made to Government, they stated that the Dos Amigos had been allowed to lie in Cape Coast Roads fully equipped for the slave trade. It seems to have been supposed that our complaint was, that she was carrying _goods_ for the supply of the slave trade; but no vessel, either British or foreign, has ever been condemned at Sierra Leone on account of the description of goods that she was carrying.

5320. What is the object which you have in calling the attention of the Committee to that statement; is it to deny that statement?--There is a good deal of evidence in the papers before the Committee on the case of the Dos Amigos. The impression seems to have been, that the complaint of the mixed commission court at Sierra Leone against the Governor of Cape Coast Castle, was, that he allowed a vessel to trade at Cape Coast, which was afterwards captured there as a slave trader. Now the ground of complaint was quite distinct, namely, that he allowed a vessel with _equipments_ on board for the slave trade to be in a British harbour with impunity; it had nothing to do with the goods whatever.

5321. _Chairman._] You do not believe that it would be lawful to seize and condemn a foreign vessel for conveying to a slave trader goods and stores that are not included in the equipment article?--I do not.

5322. Therefore the expression is incorrect that our commanders of British cruizers must “experience disappointment at seeing all their arduous efforts for hindering the slave trade factories from receiving their supplies from the foreign vessels engaged in this trade completely nullified by the proceedings of our own merchants and commanders of merchant vessels who supply them with the identical goods and stores, which they capture the foreign vessels for conveying to the coast”?--It is impossible that they can feel disappointment about what never happened.

5323. Mr. _W. Patten_.] Is it your opinion that the law can be altered upon this subject for the better?--I think not; any alteration would, I think, be for the worse. In the next paragraph Dr. Madden states, that he considers it would be desirable that the men-of-war vessels on the coast should only be employed two years. I do not think that any naval officer would agree with him in that respect; it is not till they have been two years on the coast that they become acquainted with the arts of the slave dealers, and thoroughly efficient in the suppression of the slave trade.

5324. In short, it requires considerable experience to ascertain the best means of capturing the slavers?--Certainly; but on all questions relating to service on the coast I would recommend that a naval officer should be examined.

5325. _Chairman._] Dr. Madden suggests, “that instead of head-money, or the bounty of 5_l._ paid for the capture of each slave, the pay of men and officers should be doubled, and the promotion of the former advanced in proportion to the time of service required for it on any other station in a double ratio.” Are you of opinion that any inconvenience arises from the present system of head-money?--I do not think any inconvenience has been found to arise; it was supposed at one time, and stated rather positively in the House of Lords, that such an effect had been produced, but a refutation of the statement was given the same year, for instead of full vessels being taken, there was not one out of 20 that was taken with slaves on board.

5326. You think that the remuneration to the officers is put upon the best and fairest footing now?--I would not say that, because I think the officers are not remunerated sufficiently for empty vessels at present; the sum received for the capture of an empty vessel is so very small, and the sum received for the capture of a full vessel so much larger, that there is no comparison whatever between the two cases; and there is more good done by the capture of an empty vessel, and the service is just as arduous.

5327. Have you ever thought of any other system that could be adopted?--I have suggested an alteration of the bounties on this scale. It appeared that about three times as many vessels were captured under the equipment treaties, as were formerly taken, when only vessels full of slaves were allowed to be captured; and I thought that the remuneration for an empty vessel should be so calculated, that it should amount to about one-third of what the officer would receive if he took a full vessel with the average number of slaves on board. There would be no difficulty in making the calculation, and it would be only fair to the officers to give them that advantage.

5328. No such alteration has been made?--No.

5329. Mr. _W. Patten_.] You would not diminish the head-money to officers when they captured a vessel full of slaves?--No; it has been diminished very greatly the last 12 years, from 10_l._ to 5_l._ a head.

5330. What would be the effect of putting all vessels on the same footing, whether having slaves on board or being empty?--There would be no difficulty.

5331. _Chairman._] Would it not be fairer to make the remuneration independent of the casual circumstance of whether the vessel was full or empty?--Yes; it would be taking away the advantage which the officers now enjoy with full vessels, but I think it would be a fair thing.

5332. Mr. _Forster_.] Are officers entitled to the head-money on slaves taken on shore?--No; the difficulty in that case is, that when taken on shore they are British subjects, if they are taken in British territory, and the British law will not acknowledge that they could be slaves. The difficulty was found some time ago, when a naval officer went to Bulama and captured several hundred slaves who were detained there by the Portuguese; he proceeded in the Admiralty Court, but the judge said, These men are not slaves, they are taken on British territory. The British law will not allow that any person can be a slave on British soil; so that the captor was deprived of his head-money.

5333. A considerable number was taken at the Gallinas by Captain Denman?--Yes.

5334. Will Captain Denman be entitled to head-money upon those persons so captured?--He has never received any thing for them, but I hope he may; if there is any fund from which remuneration on the ordinary scale can be granted, it would be desirable that such cases should be dealt with in the same manner as they would be if brought under the terms of the Act.

5335. Mr. _Evans_.] If the remuneration was on the tonnage of the vessel, supposing it was on the same scale as it is now, would that be a just way of taking it?--Yes; a remuneration on the tonnage, whether full or empty, would be fair, but the scale should be very much raised; at present it is miserably low.

5336. I am supposing that it was raised to the average of the present remuneration for capturing full and empty vessels?--That would be an improvement.

5337. Mr. _W. Patten_.] Is there not more difficulty in capturing a vessel with slaves on board than in capturing an empty vessel?--There is much less difficulty in capturing a vessel with slaves on board.

5338. Are not more exertions used when a vessel has slaves on board?--They run away in both cases; but the vessel is impeded greatly whilst she has her cargo of slaves on board, and there is more chance of capture, and the chase is less likely to be long, than with an empty vessel.

5339. _Chairman._] The security of condemnation is greater?--Yes.

5340. You stated that there was a difficulty in remunerating the officers when slaves were taken on shore, on the ground of their being considered as British subjects; does that apply to Gallinas?--No; the question did not apply there, but to Bulama, because we claimed the sovereignty of that island. There is no remuneration, under any Act of Parliament, for slaves released under those circumstances which occurred at the Gallinas.

5341. Might there not be some question altogether, whether the release of slaves on shore was within the proper functions of a cruizer?--There might, under some circumstances; but in the case referred to it was a voluntary act on the part of the chief of the country releasing those slaves; they were detained there by persons whom the chief considered as his enemies, by whom he was kept in control, and he was relieved from their control by the Wanderer. There was a positive application made by the chief of the country.

5342. Then it was not, properly speaking, a duty imposed upon the commander engaged upon that station?--No, it would be only a duty under peculiar circumstances.

5343. Therefore such a practice would naturally not be contemplated by any Act of Parliament?--No.

5344. Mr. _Forster_.] Do you consider the chiefs of the Gallinas opposed to the slave trade?--No.

5345. How did they happen to apply for relief against the slave dealers?--An illegal act had been committed by those chiefs on the subjects of Sierra Leone, and when redress was demanded the excuse offered by the chiefs was, that they were held in subjection by the resident Spaniards there, and that they could not afford the relief which was required by British subjects, or even prevent British subjects being carried into slavery, in consequence of the control which was exercised over them by the Spanish and Portuguese slave traders.

5346. Do you yourself believe that excuse to be true?--I believe that it was stated; I have no means of judging of its truth.

5347. _Chairman._] It was a justification for the interference of Captain Denman?--Exactly. By the papers presented to Parliament it appeared that some women and children at Sierra Leone, as far as I recollect the case, were taken down to the Gallinas, and were known to be there, and Captain Denman was instructed by the Governor of Sierra Leone to go in and demand their liberation, and also to remonstrate with the chiefs for the offence which had been committed; and also to inquire how it was that British men-of-war boats going into the river were refused all supplies, were not allowed to water, and were even prevented having intercourse with American and other vessels lying in the river. The principal chief then complained of the treatment which he received from the Spaniards and Portuguese, and he requested to be released from their control, and Captain Denman complied with his request.

5348. Mr. _Aldam_.] Were there any British subjects found among the slaves captured at the Gallinas?--None that I am aware of, except those particular ones that Captain Denman demanded, and whom he recovered.

5349. _Chairman._] Do you believe that there are any instances of kidnapping out of the territory of Sierra Leone?--Very few.

At page 34 of Dr. Madden’s Report, there is this passage: “The charges made for the disposal of these effects,” that is, goods sold by public auction, “the captors state, and I believe with truth, are extremely heavy; and in many cases more than half the prize money that the captors had reason to expect, is swallowed up in the charges made by the various officers at Sierra Leone, employed in taking care, and ultimately disposing of, the effects of the captured vessel. On the following cases of slave-trade vessels sent in for adjudication to the Commission Courts at Sierra Leone, by Captain Tucker, of Her Majesty’s ship Wolverine, the charges here detailed were made.” Then follows the schedule; five out of the nine vessels mentioned in that schedule were sold, while I was in the court, and with respect to those five I obtained the heads of the charges yesterday from the Foreign Office. The Vigilante is the first; the charges were 99_l._ 1_s._ 4_d._, and in that case the sum paid to the collector of customs for duty was 18_l._ In the Pampeiro, the charges were 63_l._, the duty was 12_l._ In the Passos, the charges were 22_l._ 8_s._, and the proceeds very small; but in that case the vessel was destroyed at Prince’s Island, and there were also slaves on board, and the whole of those charges, for the vessel was only in port a few days, consisted of the feeding of the slaves, and the duty on the goods which were found on board, and the marshal’s expenses. The reason of the small amount of proceeds was, that there was no vessel, and only a few goods that were brought up in the man-of-war; only a few pieces of cloth, and such things. In the case of the Firmeza, the charges were 1,014_l._ 7_s._ 5_d._, but of that sum the duty paid to the customs was 775_l._, and the translations were 18_l._; so that about 800_l._ was paid by the marshal on those accounts out of 1,014_l._

5350. Mr. _W. Patten_.] The translations do not then appear to be of that onerous nature to the captor, which Dr. Madden, in the previous part of his statement, says that they are?--They are very heavy in some cases: I have known them as high as 60_l._ and 70_l._ In the Emprendador the expenses are 351_l._ 19_s._ 1_d._; of that sum 172_l._ was paid in duty, and 33_l._ in translations, making 205_l._ out of 351_l._ Then the other expenses are the five per cent. to the auctioneer, the marshal’s charges for taking charge of the vessel, and boats and labourers landing cargo, and also a premium of about six or six and-one-eighth per cent. difference between the English money and the currency.

5351. Viscount _Courtenay_.] Are those fees fixed by a scale settled by the court?--The fees were fixed by a regular scale, that has been drawn up on the model of the schedule of fees paid in the Vice-Admiralty Courts, which was approved of by Dr. Lushington and two other gentlemen connected with the Admiralty Court in England, and which schedule was sent out to all the Vice-Admiralty Courts of our colonies, as the rule by which they were to be guided. In many cases our charges were less; but in no case, I believe, were they more than directed in that schedule.

5352. _Chairman._] Since those heavy charges which are alluded to by Dr. Madden have been incurred, the duties, which are one principal source of expense, have been modified according to your recommendation?--They have.

5353. What would have been the result of the reduction in that case of the Firmeza, where the duties appear to have been 775_l._?--The reduction would have been very great indeed. Without knowing on what articles the duty was imposed, I cannot say; but the duty was changed from a fixed to an _ad valorem_ duty; and in the case of the tobacco and spirits of that vessel, the reduction would have been very great; probably it would have struck off 500_l._ at least of the 775_l._

5354. That evil, therefore, is met to a considerable degree?--The evil is met as much as can be expected; indeed, I do not think that there is any thing whatever now that the captors have to complain of.

5355. It cannot be expected that the goods should be sold for the benefit of the captor, free of duty, in a colony where other articles imported pay duty?--No, certainly not.

5356. Viscount _Courtenay_.] Is it in the power of the proctors to make additional charges upon those parties?--The arrangement between the proctor and the captor is left to themselves; the court attempted once to interfere with the charges of the proctors, but they were instructed that it was a matter which they had no control over.

5357. Is that settled by a certain rule of etiquette?--It is settled by practice; there is a certain charge that is made for every vessel now, whether she is troublesome or not; but it is a matter over which the court can have no control whatever.

5358. Are the proctors Europeans?--There have seldom been more than three or four at one time practising.

5359. _Chairman._] Are they men of education?--Yes; the Queen’s advocate is generally one, and the one who gets the most practice; and there are others who are practising attornies in the other courts, who act as proctors in the Mixed Commission Court.

5360. Are they universally Europeans, educated in England?--I believe every one has been educated in England, and is an European; there is one of them that was born in the West Indies, I believe, but educated in England.

5361. Mr. _Forster_.] Have the officers of the Mixed Commission the patronage of any of the appointments on the spot?--Of all.

5362. _Chairman._] Do they appoint the proctor?--The proctor petitions to be admitted; and latterly, for the last year or two that I was there, I made them undergo an examination, for I found that one or two were applying to be admitted as proctors of the court in order to escape serving on juries, and I therefore made them submit to an examination on the treaties, and on the decisions of the Mixed Courts, and it checked the practice.

5363. At what time were those charges made which are specified in Dr. Madden’s Report?--The five cases out of the nine that I have referred to occurred in 1839, the others subsequently to my leaving the colony.

5364. When were those modifications made which would affect the statement which Dr. Madden has made?--They came into effect after the five cases occurred on which there are those high charges; they came into effect in December, 1839.

5365. Previously to Dr. Madden’s visit to Sierra Leone?--Yes, some time previously.

5366. Have you any further observations to make upon Dr. Madden’s Report?--In page 35 is a passage to which I was referred at the last examination: “The intervention of the whole present establishment of marshals, collectors, surveyors, interpreters, harbour-masters, agents, storekeepers, canoe-hirers, and victuallers of captured ships’ crews, might be dispensed with without inconvenience to the public, and with some advantage to the individuals who are interested in the disposal of the effects.” A great many of those persons do not exist in connexion with our court at all.

5367. Can you state what is the real establishment connected with the adjudication of slave vessels?--There is one marshal; he is paid by fees, on the principle of the schedule that was drawn up in England for the regulation of the Vice-Admiralty Courts in the colonies, and which are very low, I think almost too low; the collector we have nothing to do with; he is the Queen’s officer: as regards the surveyors, we have two surveyors in cases of vessels which are prosecuted for equipment to examine the equipment of the vessel, and to report, and they get a fee for that examination; in cases of vessels taken full of slaves no surveyors are required; it is only in cases of vessels seized for equipment.

5368. That is an officer absolutely necessary for the ascertainment of the facts?--Yes, because we could not allow a man to give evidence in his own case upon such a point as that.

5369. What is the fee?--I think the fee is two guineas a day during his employment; and in order to obtain the services of a respectable man who will go through the disagreeable duty which is imposed upon him in examining a vessel equipped for the slave trade, overhauling her in every part, and whose testimony can be positively relied upon, I do not think that a smaller fee ought to be paid.

5370. Does the survey occupy more than one day?--If it occupies more than a day, he gets another two guineas, but I do not recollect any case of that kind.

5371. What is the interpreter?--There is one interpreter, who interprets between the witness and the registrar when the witness speaks in a foreign language, and I believe he gets 5_s._ on an examination; he is a poor man; it is very trifling.

5372. Is the harbour-master an officer of the court?--No. Agents we have none. There is no storekeeper; the marshal lands the goods, and under some peculiar circumstances, where they have to be held over for sale, they may be stored, but I think such a thing has hardly occurred in my time.

5373. Canoe-hirers, who are those?--There are canoes employed to land the cargo.

5374. That is a duty which must be discharged and paid for at the ordinary rate in the colony?--Yes.

5375. “Victuallers of captured ships’ crews,” who are those?--We have no such men; the marshal victuals the ship’s crew at the regular rate laid down, 3_s._ for the officers and 2_s._ for the men; there are generally only three persons in each case thus provided for.

5376. Is that any thing beyond the absolute expense necessary for the object?--You cannot in a colony where food is so dear lodge and feed an European in a respectable line of life for less than 3_s._ a day.

5377. Mr. _W. Patten_.] Would you recommend the uniting of any of those offices together?--The only three officers we have are the marshal, the surveyor, and the commissioner of appraisement and sale, who is not mentioned here, and their offices cannot be united.

5378. _Chairman._] Dr. Madden recommended that “the effects of the captured vessel, prior to adjudication should remain in them under the charge of the captors”?--They always do remain in the vessel; Dr. Madden mentions this as a change that ought to take place, but nobody ever thought of landing a vessel’s goods before condemnation, because if the vessel is restored she goes out with all the goods in her. He then says, “On condemnation they should be delivered over by the captors to the collector of the customs, and this part of his service be included in the remuneration of his general duties.” The court could have no control over the collector of the customs, and how he would perform the duty more cheaply than the marshal I do not know; those goods must be landed under the control of the court, and kept under the control of the court till they are sold.

5379. What are the charges on the sale which are alluded to?--The custom-house duties and the auction duty, and those already mentioned.

5380. The custom-house duties are the duties which you alluded to as having been subsequently reduced?--Yes.

5381. Which did press upon the goods in proportion to their quality?--Yes; Dr. Madden says in the last sentence, “I beg to be understood as not meaning to attribute, in the slightest degree, to these gentlemen the disadvantages of the system that is adopted for the disposal of the effects of the condemned vessel. This system has grown up to its present amount of abuse, I believe, without their sanction, and I should think, from what I have seen of these gentlemen, it exists without their approval.” It does not; if there had been any abuse I should have been responsible for it, of course, during the time that I was there; but I believe no abuse whatever existed which the court could control. In the case of translations, we had no translator till we applied to the Government, and indeed the necessity did not arise till lately, because when you could only capture vessels full of slaves, you did not require any translations; I believe there is no abuse whatever, and it certainly is not without the sanction of the court, if it exists.

5382. Viscount _Courtenay_.] Is there any storehouse belonging to the Vice-Admiralty Court, where goods, supposing them to be of a suspicious character, if landed, are kept?--There is a storehouse connected with the mixed commissions, where the coppers and shackles, and the iron fittings for the open hatchways, are lodged.

5383. Under whose charge is that?--It is in the residence of the registrar; the registrar is required to be a resident officer, on account not only of the books and papers which he has constantly under his charge, but on account of the equipments of condemned vessels, which are also kept by him.

5384. It would be, therefore, very irregular that any of those equipments should be kept in any place but under the custody of the registrar?--Certainly.

5385. Supposing this to have been stated, that a number of leg-irons and other things, which had been landed from a slave vessel condemned in the Vice-Admiralty Court, had been deposited in a public shed on the wharf, and that they had been neglected by the officer of the Vice-Admiralty Court, whose duty it was to have put them in a place of safety; if that was so, should you say that that was irregular and unusual?--It cannot happen in our court; if such a thing were to happen, the marshal would be immediately dismissed; but the thing never happens, because there is a regular system of duty; but the Vice-Admiralty Court has no office, it has no storekeeper, and no means of carrying on its duty efficiently.

5386. What would have been the regular course in such a case as that mentioned in this paper?--I do not know what course the Vice-Admiralty Court would pursue, but with us, equipment articles are landed and carried up to the registrar. There were several rooms, when I left, completely filled with these things, and occasionally, when the Government requires coppers for the use of the Liberated African Department, we hand them over to them, and they are supplied to vessels carrying over recruits to the West Indies; but in no case do the coppers from the condemned vessels go to anybody that we do not know will make a good use of them.

5387. Is the same person that is marshal of the Mixed Commission Court marshal of the Vice-Admiralty Court?--No; it is a rule that is laid down very strictly, not to allow any sort of connexion between the two courts, as it would only produce irregularity and confusion.

5388. _Chairman._] Have you any other observation to make upon Dr. Madden’s Report?--In the last sentence of his Report he says, that parties should not be allowed to become purchasers of slave ships, or the equipments of condemned slavers, unless they “enter into a bond that such ships or equipments shall not be employed in slave trade objects, on pain of incurring the penalty of fine to the amount of double the value of the property thus employed.” Now the Act of Parliament positively requires, that if any equipments are on board a vessel, a bond shall be given, and that no vessel shall be cleared out by the custom-house unless a bond is given.

5389. Is there any thing in the present state of the law which makes it illegal to sell a vessel bought at Sierra Leone immediately into the hands of a person who shall employ her in the slave trade?--Nothing whatever.

5390. Mr. _W. Patten_.] Is there not an Act of Parliament which does prevent any body knowingly dealing with a slave dealer?--Yes, there is; but the difficulty would be to prove the guilty knowledge of the fact, that the man to whom the vessel is sold intended to employ that vessel in the slave trade.

5391. Mr. _Forster_.] What Act of Parliament do you allude to when you say that there is an Act which forbids persons selling a vessel or goods to slave dealers?--The 5 Geo. 4, c. 113.

5392. Mr. _W. Patten_.] In that Act of Parliament, does the word “knowingly” apply to knowledge of the fact that the parties are slave dealers, or of the fact that the goods so sold are to be employed in the slave trade?--To the latter. The second clause of that Act declares that it shall not be lawful to ship, tranship, and so on, or to contract for the shipping or transhipping to be employed in accomplishing any of the objects or the contracts in relation to the objects, which objects and contracts have hereinbefore been declared unlawful; but by the 7th and 10th clauses penalties are imposed only upon a party upon its being shown that he “knowingly and wilfully” shipped and laded goods to be employed in the slave trade.

5393. It does not apply to his knowledge of the fact of the man being a dealer in slaves?--I am not aware that it does; a great deal may come under the general term of “aiding and abetting” the slave trade; but in all the penal clauses of that Act the words “knowingly and wilfully” are introduced.

5394. How do you account for the governor of a British colony commencing his proclamation with these words: “Whereas by the laws of Great Britain, and more particularly by the provisions of the Act of Parliament passed in the fifth year of the reign of his late Majesty George the Fourth, all British subjects are prohibited in the most express and positive terms, and under the most severe penalties, from aiding, abetting, or trading with, directly or indirectly, all or any vessels or vessel engaged, or about to be engaged, in the slave trade, or fitted with that view and purpose”?--The prohibitory clauses of the Act are very strong indeed; they would seem to comprehend every kind of dealing with slave traders; but it is the penal clauses which would prevent convictions.

5395. _Chairman._] If you could convict the party selling the vessel to the slave dealer with a guilty knowledge of the purpose to which the vessel was to be appropriated, you have in the Act of Parliament all that can be required?--Yes.

5396. Mr. _W. Patten_.] Does the same observation apply to goods?--To every part of the Act. I believe in every instance where prohibitions are given in the Act the penal clauses referring to the prohibition contain the words “knowingly and wilfully.”

5397. _Chairman._] Therefore those acts are all of them unlawful, but the difficulty is in proving the guilt?--Yes. You may possibly prove the guilty knowledge by letters found on board the vessel.

5398. If you could ascertain that any merchant at Sierra Leone sold vessels or goods to a party, knowing that such vessel was to be employed in the slave trade, he might be convicted under the Act of Parliament?--Yes; he would be prosecuted and convicted under the 5th of Geo. 4.

5399. Mr. _W. Patten_.] Should you imply that this was guilty knowledge, that the vessel should be sold to a notorious slave dealer on any part of the coast, who was perfectly known to have no legitimate traffic of his own?--That is a legal question which would be decided in the common law courts, whether a guilty knowledge might be implied from particular circumstances, though it could not be proved directly.

5400. Mr. _Forster_.] You have given an opinion upon the construction of the words “knowingly and wilfully” used in the Act of Parliament; upon what authority have you given that opinion?--The Act cannot be misunderstood; I think no person can read it without seeing the meaning of it, whether lawyer or not.

5401. To sell goods or vessels to Pedro Blanco, for example, would that, in your opinion, bring a party within the meaning of the Act?--No, not unless you could prove that he sold them knowing that they were to be applied to an unlawful purpose.

5402. _Chairman._] The difficulty, then, is not in understanding the purpose and object of the Act, but in proving the offence?--Yes; the difficulty is in proving the guilty knowledge, and that is the only difficulty.

5403. Sir _T. D. Acland_.] Was not the principal design of that Act to prevent persons from aiding in fitting up vessels for the direct and notorious purpose of engaging in the slave trade, and for no other purpose?--Yes, it was one object.

5404. Therefore, would not any person selling shackles, or any thing else that was notoriously employed in procuring slaves, or in exchange for slaves, be brought under the Act?--If you could prove that at the time he made them he contemplated that they would be employed in the slave trade, he would be brought within the purpose of the Act.

5405. If he sold shackles to vessels engaged in the slave trade?--I should think he would be brought within it then, because the guilty knowledge would be properly inferred in that case; but shackles may be made in England, and kept on board merchant vessels to be employed on the crew.

5406. Mr. _Forster_.] You do not think, then, that the intention of that Act was to prevent British subjects and British capital from being engaged in partnership, or having an interest in the slave trade itself, and nothing beyond that?--Yes, I think the intention of the Act was to prevent such engagements.

5407. Do you think that it goes beyond that?--I think that is all we require, that they should have no connexion with the traffic.

5408. How would you bring the party within that Act who sold goods, having no interest or partnership in the transaction to which they were subsequently applied?--In that case I think the Act would not reach him.

5409. What becomes, then, of the guilty knowledge of which you have spoken so much?--No guilty knowledge can be proved against the party in the case you suppose.

5410. _Chairman._] But it may exist?--Yes, it may exist; but unless you can prove it, the penalties of the Act would not reach him.

5411. Do you conceive that the act of selling a vessel or goods that may be hereafter employed, or that shall be, to the knowledge of the person selling them, employed in the slave trade, falls within the meaning of the Act, unless that person is to have a share in the profits of the transaction?--Yes, I believe it does include that; I think that it forbids aiding and assisting in every way, even as servants, or employed in boats.

5412. Mr. _Forster_.] Then you think that a British subject selling goods to Pedro Blanco, or any other slave dealer, with the impression on his mind, or, in fact, the conviction on his mind, that those goods would be employed in the slave trade, would come within the meaning of that Act?--Yes certainly; but the difficulty would be in the proof of the guilty knowledge. Such an act as that is certainly intended to come within the Act; not that I would recommend that those words, “knowingly and wilfully,” should be taken out entirely; I think it might be a dangerous thing to do so; but I am speaking of what, in my opinion, the meaning of the Act is, namely, that it is absolutely necessary in every case to prove the guilty knowledge, in order to bring the party accused within the penalties of the Act.

5413. In what way would you prove the mental impression upon the man’s mind?--There is the difficulty.

5414. Do you think that any British Act of Parliament would impose penalties for the mental impression upon a man’s mind?--I have stated that I am not prepared to say whether or not the words “knowingly and wilfully” might be advantageously omitted from the Act, but a guilty knowledge may be inferred from particular circumstances.

5415. Then you consider that that Act of Parliament is an Act against constructive slave trading?--No.

5416. _Chairman._] You consider it to be an Act against aiding and abetting the slave trade in as many ways as the Act of Parliament can reach it?--Yes; there is no Act that I ever read that is so general and comprehensive in its terms; but unfortunately it is limited, as it must be limited, in its application.

5417. Mr. _Forster_.] Can you quote the authority of any British lawyer for the opinions you have expressed with respect to the construction of that Act?--Yes, I have heard opinions expressed on the subject from the Bench at Sierra Leone repeatedly, and by educated lawyers.

5418. In the case of a British merchant selling goods to a person who was known to have no other means of gaining his livelihood, except by the slave trade, the party selling the goods would in your opinion be liable to the penalties of that Act?--It is the same thing in that case; you must prove guilty knowledge, direct or implied.

5419. In selling goods to a man who has no other means of gaining his livelihood than by applying those goods for the purposes of the slave trade, there can be no doubt of the guilty knowledge?--I should think not; but if I were a juror I should have to satisfy my own conscience that there was a guilty knowledge. I am no lawyer; this is only the opinion of a private person.

5420. Can you conceive a stronger proof of guilty knowledge than such a transaction as that would furnish?--I think I should decide that there was a guilty knowledge, taking the case supposed, that the seller knew there was no other way in which the purchaser would employ the goods sold to him than in the slave trade; if I were a juror I think I should find him guilty in that case under the Act of Parliament; I should consider the guilty knowledge to be proved.

5421. _Chairman._] You appear to be in favour of the proposal for taking bond from the person selling the vessel, that such vessel shall not be employed within a certain period in the slave trade?--That they should take bond that the vessel should not be immediately sold to a slave dealer; but the difficulty would be in following the vessel through successive transfers.

5422. Can you suggest any means of so framing that bond as to escape the difficulty which pervades the enforcing the provisions of the existing Act of Parliament, on account of the necessity of establishing guilty knowledge?--I think I could to a certain extent. The case once came before me at Sierra Leone; I was consulted by one of the officers of the Mixed Commission Court on the subject of the sale of a vessel of his; he knew perfectly well that if he had sold that vessel to a slave dealer, we should immediately dismiss him from his situation, and he came to consult me respecting the person who had offered to buy the vessel. He had inquired about him, and there was some sort of suspicion, and I told him that I could not allow him, as an officer of the court, to sell this vessel to that person, unless he took bond to a sufficient amount that the vessel should not be sold again to a slave dealer, so that if the vessel, whilst in the possession of the person to whom he sold her, should be captured, the bond should be considered as violated, and he should be liable to the penalty. But I do not think you can carry the restriction beyond the first purchaser: but if the vessel, whilst in the hands of the first purchaser, should be seized for slave dealing, the penalty of the bond might be enforced.

5423. But would you not find it difficult to make that effective, from the facility that exists for the transfer of the vessel to other parties?--Yes; I do not think the restriction could be carried beyond the first purchaser.

5424. Would reaching the first purchaser be any great additional difficulty in the way of employing the prize vessels in the slave trade?--It would in Sierra Leone be a difficulty to some small extent; because, where only one or two persons are engaged in purchasing vessels to be afterwards sold to slave dealers, it is not likely that there would be any intermediate person between the seller and the Spanish or Portuguese purchaser at Gallinas, or any slave station in the neighbourhood.

5425. Would it not be very easy to establish a system of third persons acting as a medium between the slave dealer and the purchaser, who should protect the purchaser at the prize sale from the penalties of such a bond?--It might be done; but the difficulty would in that case be, to get two men to endure the odium of such employment; the difficulty would be doubled.

5426. Could not a vessel be sold to a subordinate party at Sherboro’ or Gallinas, not the slave dealer, but the agent of the slave dealer, who might be compelled immediately to hand over the vessel to the slave dealer?--It might be done.

5427. Mr. _Forster_.] Would you propose, by bond or otherwise, to make it illegal that the purchaser of a prize vessel at Sierra Leone should sell that vessel, on her arrival in London, to the Spanish merchants Messrs. Zulueta & Co.?--No; I would not certainly render it illegal.

5428. Then that being your opinion, in what way can you imagine any restriction to be devised for the purpose of regulating the sales of the vessels after they may be purchased at Sierra Leone?--I have mentioned that the restriction could only last, in my opinion, whilst the vessel remained in the hands of the second purchaser; that is, the person who purchases her from the highest bidder at the auction; I do not think you could follow her beyond that.

5429. Then you would prevent the actual purchaser at Sierra Leone from selling the vessel to Messrs. Zulueta & Co. in London?--No, I would not.

5430. Then where is the value of the restriction you would impose?--The value is this, and it is not of great value, that if that vessel, whilst sailing under the name of Zulueta & Co. is captured and condemned as being engaged in the slave trade, you will come upon the person who sold that vessel to Zulueta & Co. for the amount of the bond.

5431. You think it would be just to make the first purchaser of the vessel responsible for the subsequent employment of that vessel, after he had sold her to Messrs. Zulueta & Co.?--Yes, as long as it remained in the hands of Zulueta & Co.; and I would mention further, that an advantage which I did not perceive before would result from it, that the man who sells the vessel in the case supposed to Zulueta, would not be very happy under such a sale, unless he got a security from Zulueta for the amount of the bond, and in such a case, whenever doubtful characters came forward as purchasers, the amount of the bond would be an addition to the price paid for the vessel.

5432. When a prize vessel is brought into the public market in London, why should this vessel be subject to regulations different from any other vessel in the London market?--Because the vessel being purchased at Sierra Leone, at one of our sales, would be likely to be a vessel fitted for the slave trade, and for nothing else.

5433. But is it not well known that there are many vessels in the London market equally well adapted for that purpose as many of those vessels?--I think not.

5434. Sir _T. D. Acland_.] Do you not think that if a bond were given under penalty of forfeiture, if in the course of a certain time, say one, two, or three years, that vessel were detected as being engaged in the slave trade, the party giving the bond would take very good care to keep her out of that mischief?--Yes, I think he would.

5435. Would he not take very good care that the vessel should not get into hands through which that risk could be brought upon himself?--He would be interested in doing so.

5436. _Chairman._] Other parties would secure themselves upon each successive transfer by successive bonds to the amount of their own liability?--The amount of the bond might be more than the value of the vessel considerably.

5437. Mr. _Forster_.] Then the result of that would be that there must be a series of bonds running through all the subsequent sales of the vessel?--Yes.

5438. Mr. _W. Patten_.] You have stated that in your opinion the breaking up of all the vessels would be far preferable?--Yes, the breaking up of all the vessels would be one of the best things that could possibly be done.