one. It was one on which the country had passed
a very No doubt the real issue in debate was this,—and we do not strong and unanimous opinion. It was one on which certain think it was put with sufficient largeness by the speakers on supporters of the Administration had confessed their dissatis- either side of the House—whether it is desirable for a State faction with the attitude of the Government,—on which Mr. which has got far beyond the stage of slavery to use its influence Forsyth, M.P. for Marylebone, spoke and voted against his over more barbarous States only in the way of persuasion and party, while Lord Ellington,—not, we presume, by any means the only Conservative who so acted,—abstained from voting, and from the graver abuses of the system for those who suffer most lectured his leaders on their false position. It was an issue, too, by them? What the Government appear to maintain, and what on which the Liberals were not only unanimous, but eager, and we suppose even Lord Clarendon held in the latter years of on which they well knew that they had the people behind his official career, is that while it should be the policy of a them. In spite of all these circumstances, the Government great and free nation like ours to do all in its power to put gained a majority of 45 for the dilatory proposal which, as they an end to slavery, this can only be properly done by per- well knew, was not only unwelcome to the country, but to a very large part of their own followers. It hardly seems that States,—that it is mischievous and dangerous to irritate discipline could go much further. In spite of the defections them by setting their laws at defiance within their own which were certain to occur on such an issue, the estimated party majority of the Government was not diminished by more other hand, the Liberal party urges that both sets of than five or six votes. Mr. Disraeli must feel elated by thus learning that the weakest link in his chain will stand easily do all we can to strike at slavery through the Govern- and triumphantly even such a strain as this.
factory, we suppose, in a party sense, to Mr. Disraeli,— the system of Slavery who chiefly suffer from its abuses and because the upshot of the argumentation was all against him,—as he himself must have felt when he began talk- always, and rightly, as far as we can see been our line of ing of " dastardly " schemes and " hypocritical " triumphs.
Nothing is more certain than that the Commission which has been appointed can throw no light on the question which is a question of policy, not of law, whether or those few refugees from despotism who most keenly felt its not our Naval commanders in the territorial waters of outrages, and most boldly faced the danger of denouncing Slave Powers ought or ought not to have their discretion limited, as to retaining fugitives from slavery, by general in- tion to that sort of refugee, that we can do something structions which proceed on general considerations, and take to mitigate the evil of despotism, by holding him out no account at all of the particular case of hardship, or injury, hope of an asylum where he would, in the last resort, or wrong which leads the fugitive to claim the protection of the be safe, as well as by throwing our influence on the British flag. That a good deal was said tending to prove that the side of reform, whenever we had an opportunity of doing questions at issue, as regards international law or custom, are by so. And clearly, as it seems to us, the same principle appliesto no means absolutely settled ones, we admit. That still more was the treatment of Slavery. What we can do by fair negotiation said proving that Lord Clarendon, at one part of his official life and persuasion with the Governments of Slave States, we ought at least, had made a very pertinent precedent for the line taken to do, and perhaps that includes the most important part of in the second Circular, is also true. But no one had anything to say, or could have had anything to say, or could suggest that to keep up the hope of freedom in the minds of the better the Commission would have anything to say, which could by any possibility render it wrong for England to let her corn- menders treat individual fugitives from the oppression of Slavery laws, by the same rules by which they treat individual fugitives from the oppression of any other laws with which of discretion in relation to political refugees, and there can be no reason, either of law or policy, why it should not be exer- English policy is at variance. Nobody, we believe, ventured to cised in relation to slave refugees. To argue that unless maintain that the jurisdiction of a foreign Government could we sedulously respect foreign law when it is bad, we rightly be enforced by that Government, even within its own waters, on the deck of a public ship of her Majesty's. The most law as to make it better, is precisely like arguing that any one ventured to say was that it might be the duty of our Naval unless we assist a suspicious police in apprehending a Authorities, and in some cases, would be their duty, to give person whom we know to be innocent; we shall never effect to the law of the State from which they were receiving persuade them to desist from their bad habit of freely hospitality, and to take no account of the fact that our law was conceived in a wholly different spirit. No one ventured As a matter of fact, people really in earnest to modify to deny that our Naval Authorities might, if they pleased and if a bad system do it both ways ;—they work away at altering our Government pleased, without infringing any international the system, and they give all the relief they can to the most custom, decline to give effect to such provisions of an injured victims of the system ; and the one mode of action alien law, and that it would be a consideration very much to the purpose of such a refusal, that the fugitive applying • ',for protection had been dealt with very grievously indeed of Commons to alter either international or municipal law by ‘.1 under the unjust law to which he was subject. So much, we any mere resolution of its own, is very true, but quite irrelevant. think, we may venture to say, was not, and could not, be denied The question at issue on the second Slave Circular was a by any one. The Attorney-General, indeed, in his very dan- gerous apology for the law of the first Circular, maintained that question of policy, not one of law. And the House of if the British ship-of-war were to be regarded as part of British Commons, by a majority of forty-five, have decided it in the territory, it would follow that we had no right to refuse asylum wrong way, and in a way which will cause great and perhaps to any foreign criminal or murderer in it, unless there were an extradition treaty between the "United Kingdom and the State MR. WHITBREAD'S MOTION. to which the criminal belonged. But that very imposing and very unsound assertion was completely answered by Mr.
present in rather larger numbers than the party of a not very more follows that the ship is not legally under British law, than united Opposition, and in practice the majority of the Govern- it follows that because a man may shut his door in the face of ment has proved to be something like seventy, perhaps even an intruder, his own actions when at home are not subject to more than that number. But this issue was a peculiar the jurisdiction of the English Bench.
No doubt the real issue in debate was this,—and we do not strong and unanimous opinion. It was one on which certain think it was put with sufficient largeness by the speakers on supporters of the Administration had confessed their dissatis- either side of the House—whether it is desirable for a State faction with the attitude of the Government,—on which Mr. which has got far beyond the stage of slavery to use its influence Forsyth, M.P. for Marylebone, spoke and voted against his over more barbarous States only in the way of persuasion and party, while Lord Ellington,—not, we presume, by any means negotiation, or also in the way of keeping open a door of escape the only Conservative who so acted,—abstained from voting, and from the graver abuses of the system for those who suffer most lectured his leaders on their false position. It was an issue, too, by them? What the Government appear to maintain, and what we suppose even Lord Clarendon held in the latter years of on which they well knew that they had the people behind his official career, is that while it should be the policy of a them. In spite of all these circumstances, the Government great and free nation like ours to do all in its power to put gained a majority of 45 for the dilatory proposal which, as they an end to slavery, this can only be properly done by per- well knew, was not only unwelcome to the country, but to suasion, and by acting through the Governments of Slave a very large part of their own followers. It hardly seems that States,—that it is mischievous and dangerous to irritate them by setting their laws at defiance within their own which were certain to occur on such an issue, the estimated territory, even in exceptional and urgent cases. On the party majority of the Government was not diminished by more other hand, the Liberal party urges that both sets of restricting influences are good, that while we should learning that the weakest link in his chain will stand easily do all we can to strike at slavery through the Govern- ments of Slave States, we may also, and very legitimately, And the victory is the more remarkable,—the more satis- keep open a door of escape for those more noble victims of the system of Slavery who chiefly suffer from its abuses and because the upshot of the argumentation was all against encounter most of the dangers due to those abuses. This has him,—as he himself must have felt when he began talk- always, and rightly, as far as we can see been our line of policy in relation to political despotism. been influence has always been exerted in the direction of constitutional reforms, but at the same time, we have never been willing to give up which is a question of policy, not of law, whether or those few refugees from despotism who most keenly felt its outrages, and most boldly faced the danger of denouncing Slave Powers ought or ought not to have their discretion them. Englishmen have always maintained, in rela- limited, as to retaining fugitives from slavery, by general in- tion to that sort of refugee, that we can do something to mitigate the evil of despotism, by holding him out no account at all of the particular case of hardship, or injury, hope of an asylum where he would, in the last resort, or wrong which leads the fugitive to claim the protection of the be safe, as well as by throwing our influence on the British flag. That a good deal was said tending to prove that the side of reform, whenever we had an opportunity of doing questions at issue, as regards international law or custom, are by so. And clearly, as it seems to us, the same principle appliesto no means absolutely settled ones, we admit. That still more was the treatment of Slavery. What we can do by fair negotiation said proving that Lord Clarendon, at one part of his official life and persuasion with the Governments of Slave States, we ought at least, had made a very pertinent precedent for the line taken to do, and perhaps that includes the most important part of in the second Circular, is also true. But no one had anything to the influence we can exert over them. But we ought also say, or could have had anything to say, or could suggest that to keep up the hope of freedom in the minds of the better class of slaves, by teaching them that in case of danger and abuse they have a safe asylum with us. As far as we know, our Naval Commanders have always exercised this sort fugitives from the oppression of any other laws with which of discretion in relation to political refugees, and there can be no reason, either of law or policy, why it should not be exer- English policy is at variance. Nobody, we believe, ventured to cised in relation to slave refugees. To argue that unless maintain that the jurisdiction of a foreign Government could we sedulously respect foreign law when it is bad, we rightly be enforced by that Government, even within its own shall not use our full influence so to modify foreign accusing innocent persons of crimes they have not committed.
helps the other, instead of diminishing its effect. The • Government's language about the powerlessness of the House permanent dissatisfaction in the minds of all the more popular constituencies.
Previous page
