THE FUGITIVE SLAVE CIRCULAR.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 2531, 4 May 1876, Page 3

THE FUGITIVE SLAVE CIRCULAR.

(Horn* New».) Tbo donates on tho Furtive Slave Oiroular have been confused and unprofitable. Mr Whitbread, on Tue*day, Feb. 22, brought forward resolutions proclaiming tho immediate liberty of any slave who, in any part of the world, should make his way on board ono of Hor Majesty's ships, and moved foran address to. the Queen petitioning tbe withdrawal of all circulars or instructions interfering with the above dootrine. Mr Hanbury then submitted us an amondmont that the report of the Commission appointed by Mr Disraeli last week should bo awaited. In the course of the debate whioh followed, it was shown that Lord Olarondon and Lord Palmerston had eaoh of them issued circulars similar to thut now complained of. The queetion, therefore, ceased to be a purely party ono. Ifc appeared that only one caso had occurred in whioh serious difficulty had boen caused by tho absence of sufficiently definite instructions at present, and this case was brought before the notioe of the Government by Lord Northbrook. Thespeeoh of the Attorney General was exceedingly untatiefac tory. It provod cither nothing or ifc proved a ?;reafc deal to muoh. Sir John Holker really eft it a moro or less doubtful matter whether an English ship, floating on the waters of another Power, had any independent rights of its own at all. The discussion was oontinued on Thursday, Feb, 24. by Mr Hersohell, who had possession of the House on Us rising on Tuesday, and who mado quite the best epeeoh of tbe whole debate. Mr Hersohell conclusively proved that tho extra- territorial oharaoter of a chip lying in a foreign port means that the local rulers havo no right to interfere with anything or any person on board tbe vessel. Mr Herschell also demonstrated that the surrender of a fugitive slave is not a question of law but of policy, and Sir William Haroourt, who spoke with muoh vigour, also showed that tho Ministerial ploa that the comity of , nations-— for that is really what tbe argument amounted to— bound one nation to enforce the slavery laws of another, was a fallaov. Mr Fawcett had givon notice of a motion, in tho event of Mr Whitbread's resolution being rejected, to suppress the circular till tbe Oommiasiqn should have reported, and Lord Eslington and Mr Forsyth, both of them Conservatives, asked Mr Disraoli to accept this. Mr Disraeli declined to do anything of the sort, and when the Houso divided party discipline secured a majority of forty-five, both on Mr Whitbread's and Mr Fawoott's qjotion This is the first blunder which Mr Disraeli has made this Session, and it is a bad one, for the idea wbioh will now go forth to tho country — vory unjustly, of oourse— is that the O-mservative party are less opposod to slavery tban tho Libt-ral. Thero wae no answer to i Mr Forsyth's argument— that if the Circular | was right, the Commission to inquire into slavery law was not wanted, and that because ' a Commission was wanted, thoreforo it was deferable that tho oiroular should not oome into effeot as yet.