The Government have pleaded guilty to the legal and moral
blunders attributed to their first Fugitive-Slave Circular, by formally recanting them in the new one now put out. They instruct naval commanders that any fugitive slave received on the high seas is to be retained until he is "landed in some country or transferred to some other ship where his liberty will be recog- nised and respected." Even a slave received on board in the territorial waters of a Slave State, is not to be given up to his captors. " You will not entertain any demand for his surrender, or enter into any examination as to his status ;" but after the danger to his life,—which in such cases can alone, according to the Circular, warrant his being received on board,—is passed, "you ought not to permit him to continue on board," so that if he escapes, it must be by his 'own exer- tions. However, the new Circular, while it avoids the mon- strous legal and moral blunders of its predecessor, is very grudging in its spirit. Why should slaves be dealt with other- wise than as political fugitives ? If, even in territorial waters, a distinguished political fugitive took refuge on board of one of Her Majesty's vessels, would be not be received, and . his surrender refused, even at the risk of the vessel being ordered out of those territorial waters? Why should slaves be otherwise dealt with, except in cases where they are too numerous to help, without going to war with the country which legalises their slavery?
Previous page
