On the 23rd of May, and before the brigantine had reached the coast of Africa, the master died, and the command was assumed by one Miguel José Gonçalves Vianna, who called himself the mate, but whose name did not appear in any official paper belonging to the vessel.

On the 27th of June, the Sao Joao Baptista was fallen in with off the coast of Benguela by Her Majesty's sloop Acorn, Commander John Adams, and after a short chase was captured; a slight inspection having evinced the illicit nature of the traffic in which she was engaged.

On the 29th of August, the prize arrived at Sierra Leone, and proceedings were instituted against her on the 31st; the illness of Her Majesty's Commissioners delayed the final adjudication until the 14th of September, when an unusually complete equipment for the Slave Trade having been clearly proved, sentence of confiscation was accordingly decreed.

5. The brigantine Rezoluçao, formerly the Tuscan vessel Diana, and said to have been for several years a contraband trader between Gibraltar and the Brazils, entered Bahia on the 3rd of January, 1842, under pretext of stress of weather. On the 28th of July following, she was metamorphosed by the aid of an Imperial passport bearing that date, into the national Brazilian brigantine Rezolução, stated therein to be of the burthen of 103 tons, to be owned by one Francisco Lourenço de Souza, of Bahia, and commanded by Bernardo Xavier de Castro, an individual who formerly appeared before the Mixed Court at Sierra Leone, as the master of the Brazilian barque Augusto, condemned in 1839.

On the same day she cleared out ostensibly for St. Catharina in the Brazils, having a crew, according to her muster-roll, of 7, but in fact of 22 persons. On leaving Bahia, however, her master, De Castro, at once steered for the coast of Africa, and on the 4th of September, when about to enter Whydah, the haunt of the noted Francisco Felix de Souza, to whom she was probably consigned, the Rezolução was fallen in with and captured by Her Majesty's brig Cygnet, Commander Edmund Wilson.

She arrived here on the 29th, and being found provided with every necessary article of equipment for the reception of a cargo of slaves, the proceedings taken against her in the British and Brazilian Court of Mixed Commission, terminated on the 8th of October in her confiscation.

The barque Ermelinda Segunda is alleged to have been originally a Portuguese vessel. On the 9th of April, 1842, however, she obtained at Santos, from the Baron de Monte Alegre, an Imperial passport describing her to be owned and commanded by Brazilian subjects, and granting her permission to make a voyage to the Isles of

France and Bourbon, calling at Paranagua and Monte Video. On the 10th of May she sailed from Santos under Brazilian colours, and commanded by Joaquim Maria Cordeiro, with a crew of 14 persons (the seamen at 20 dollars per month), and having on board about 12,000 gallons of fresh water, in pipes, upwards of 400 bushels of farinha and calavances, and a quantity of flooring planks, besides other articles of slaving equipment. Instead of proceeding to the Isle of Bourbon, the vessel, under pretence of the defective state of her masts, was carried by the master into the Rio Coanza, south of St. Paul's de Loanda, where she was found at anchor, waiting for a cargo of slaves, and was captured on the 12th of July by the boats of Her Majesty's ship Madagascar, Captain Foote. After seizure, the prize was taken to Cabinda, where 118 liberated slaves were embarked in her, by Captain Foote, for a passage to St. Helena, whither she was then dispatched, but, having been twice obliged to put into Princes' Island in distress, in consequence of her leaky condition, the officer in charge at length took the barque to Fernando Po, where she was surveyed, and, being found in an unfit state for going to sea again, the Negro passengers were landed, and the prize officer and witnesses procedeed to Sierra Leone in Her Majesty's steamer Soudan. They arrived on the 12th of December, the vessel's papers were filed, and proceedings commenced against the Ermelinda Segunda on the 14th, and on the 21st the evidence of her engagement in the Slave Trade having been satisfactorily established, sentence of confiscation was accordingly pronounced.

M. L. MELVILLE.
JAMES HOOK.

No. 27.-Her Majesty's Commissioners to the Earl of Aberdeen.

MY LORD,

(Received August 5.)

Sierra Leone, June 28, 1843. WE beg respectfully to report to your Lordship the peculiar circumstance in which we find ourselves placed, in consequence of the resolution adopted by Mr. Niteroi, the Brazilian Commissary Judge.

At this moment we have 2 Brazilian prizes before the Court, and in our intercourse with Mr. Niteroi he has declared to us that he will not, on any account, consent to the condemnation of a Brazilian vessel, under the Treaty between Great Britain and Brazil for illegal equipment for the Slave Trade, unless slaves were, or are, found on board.

It is not possible to meet with 2 more clear cases of illegal equipment than those of the Confidencia and Esperança, the 2 prizes referred to above. They have slave decks, slave irons, slave coppers, slave night-tubs, slave mess-tins, slave gratings, slave provisions; in short, a complete equipment for the Slave Trade. Yet, even with all

this overwhelming evidence of their guilt, Mr. Niteroi stoutly opposes their confiscation. It is true, that at present, the absence of the Brazilian Commissioner of Arbitration effectually prevents the chance of their being restored by lot. But having been assured, both officially and privately, by the Brazilian Commissary Judge, that he will not consent to the condemnation of any Brazilian vessel for being engaged in the Slave Trade, however complete her equipment may be for that traffic, we feel it our duty respectfully to call your Lordship's attention to this very serious resolve of our foreign colleague; a resolve, which if not effectually met by Her Majesty's Government, will entail an enormous expense on the captors, or the British nation.

In order to illustrate the case to your Lordship, permit us to suppose that in the course of one year 20 equipment prizes are presented to the British and Brazilian Court for adjudication, and that the British Judge found the whole to be good prizes. In the judgment of Mr. Niteroi, not one of them would be liable to confiscation. The consequence would be, that in every case the "lot," or "toss-up" system, would be resorted to, and, on a common average, 10 might be given to each party; that is, 10 would likely be condemned good prizes to the Crowns of Great Britain and Brazil; the other 10 and their cargoes would be restored with heavy damages to the Brazilian Slave Traders, who by their own Government are denominated pirates.

From this brief statement your Lordship will at once perceive, that this resolution, no doubt adopted advisedly by the Brazilian Judge, at once provides a kind of insurance or safety fund, at the expense of Great Britain, to meet the losses that may occur by resorting to the drawing of lots, because if the 10 vessels and their cargoes are restored, the real actual loss on them would not be great, and the heavy damages, always claimed on those occasions, would go far towards covering the loss on the other 10 condemned vessels.

We can scarcely believe that the framers of the Treaties with Portugal, and the Convention of 1826, between His late Majesty and the Emperor of Brazil, ever meant that the judges of the Courts of Mixed Commission should construe the Articles of those instruments in the way adopted by Mr. Niteroi. We conceive that when the judges differ in opinion on forins, the legality of seizure, the nationality of the prize, equipment for Slave Trading, &c. then they were to draw "lots" or "toss up" for the choice of an arbitrator, but surely they could never contemplate a judge setting aside the very life of the Slave Trade equipment. For the Brazilian Judge maintains, that though a vessel is fully equipped with every requisite to take on board a cargo of slaves, still she is not, in his opinion, engaged in the Slave Trade.

In opposition to this most erroneous conclusion, we shall act in accordance with, and adopt the opinion of the great Lord Stowell, who says, "It matters not, in my opinion, in what stage of the employment, whether in the inception, or the prosecution, or the consummation of it (in the Slave Trade), this Court is bound to pronounce a sentence of confiscation." (1 Dodson, p. 86.)

In the case of the Severn, tried before the Vice-Admiralty Court at Halifax, Dr. Croke, the learned judge, says, to prove engagement in the Slave Trade, "it is not necessary to have slaves actually on board." It was laid down in the Fortuna, "that it was sufficient if the unlawful traffic was either incipient, progressive, or complete. All we have to do is to establish the fact of trading." (Stewart's Reports, p. 285.)

Thus all we have to do is to prove that the vessel is engaged in "carrying on the Slave Trade;" and to establish this fact, a slaving equipment is quite sufficient; "it is not necessary to have slaves on board." The highest legal authorities have declared "that the equipment of a vessel for the Slave Trade "—" shall be considered as primá facie evidence of her actual employment in that traffic, unless rebutted by satisfactory evidence on the part of the master or owners."

66

The Ist Article of the Convention between His late Majesty and the Emperor of Brazil, expressly states, that after the 13th of March, 1830, "it shall not be lawful for the subjects of the Emperor of Brazil to be concerned in the carrying on of the African Slave Trade, under any pretext, or in any manner whatever; and the carrying on of such trade after that period, by any person subject to His Imperial Majesty, shall be deemed and treated as Piracy."

We have the honour also to state to your Lordship, that on September 2nd, 1839, Her Majesty's Commissioners came to the resolution of condemning the Emprehendedor, a Brazilian vessel, for being illegally equipped for the Slave Traffic. This, we believe, was the first case of a Brazilian vessel being condemned for equipment, and the Act was approved by Her Majesty's Government. Since that period, nearly 4 years ago, about 40 Brazilian vessels have been condemned on the same principle. Thus a custom of nearly 4 years' standing, will, we think authorize us in concluding that we have silent assent from the Government of Brazil to our proceedings.

Before concluding, we pray your Lordship's instructions for our government as to the resolution of Mr. Niteroi relative to his sweeping determination to refuse the condemnation of any Brazilian vessel, merely for being equipped for the Slave Trade. Unless we are honoured with your Lordship's authority to overrule this, we fear it will not be in your power to avert enormous expenses for damages.

We would respectfully venture to suggest to your Lordship the necessity of disallowing the Brazilian Judge the power of calling for

the "toss up," or drawing of lots, for the choice of Arbitrators, whenever the disagreement is for illegal equipment. We think that this would be an effectual bar, and at once restore the proceedings to their legitimate course. We have, &c.

The Earl of Aberdeen, K.T.

G. MACDONALD.
JAMES HOOK.

No. 29.-The Earl of Aberdeen to Her Majesty's Commissioners. GENTLEMEN, Foreign Office, September 11, 1843.

I HAVE received your despatch of the 28th June last, on the resolution declared by M. Niteroi, the Brazilian Judge, that he will not on any account consent to the condemnation of a Brazilian vessel for illegal equipment for the Slave Trade, or unless slaves have been, or were found, on board the detained vessel.

The view which you have taken of the spirit and meaning of the Convention of 1836, between Great Britain and Brazil, for the complete extinction of the traffic in slaves is borne out by the letter itself of the Convention, which declares that, "at the expiration of 3 years, to be reckoned from the exchange of the Ratifications of the present Treaty, it shall not be lawful for the subjects of the Emperor of Brazil to be concerned in the carrying on of the African Slave Trade, under any pretext, or in any manner whatever," and that "the earrying on of such trade after that period, by any person subject to His Imperial Majesty, shall be deemed and treated as piracy."

The view which you take of this stipulation, as embracing cases of equipment, has also been borne out by the direction given in 1839, by the Supreme Government of Brazil to the Brazilian Commissioner at Rio Janeiro, to entertain, as coming within the Convention in question, the cases of the Maria Carlotta and Recueerador, both recognized at the time to be cases of equipment.

It is borne out likewise by the conduct of the Court of Sierra Leone, in the same year, in the condemnation of the Emprehendedor, on the ground of her having been equipped for Slave Trade; a sentence which received the sanction and approval of Her Majesty's Government.

This view of the Convention has not been shaken by any subsequent practice of the Courts, either at Rio de Janeiro, or at Sierra Leone, in cases of this description. And, in accordance with it, instructions have been issued by Her Majesty's Government to Her Majesty's cruizers employed in suppressing the trade under the Brazilian flag, to search and seize vessels, as well on account of being equipped for the Slave Trade, as on the ground of having slaves on board.

Under these circumstances, I have to instruct you to resist the call for an arbitrator in cases where, upon investigation by the British [1843-44.]

L