63 
ON SLAVE TRADE (EAST COAST OF AFRICA). 
ained ?—I should have thought not ; supposing 
there were a delay, I do not know that there 
^uld be any great inconvenience in that. I do 
^9^ see the inconvenience ; if it is left in charge 
the Sultan’s officer, he would be responsible, 
the Sultan would punish him in the event 
^is allowing any malpractice. 
^,^3. Are there any ports on that coast in 
-^ich it would be convenient to treat captured 
aves in that way ?—I should have thought 
j^ere were several ports where they could be 
®|t without much difficulty ; the dhows them- 
^^ves do not require an important port, they are 
“'“like ships of war. 
.1 ^'4. Are you under the impression that 
Sultan of Zanzibar and his officers would 
® ^villing to be responsible for the ships and 
^.^goes ?—The recommendation of the Com- 
^ttee was, that an arrangement should be 
en- 
- ^ LiAttL 0.11 01 AOlit^V/lllVyiAU LllVl K/\u V 
^ted into with the Sultan to do that, and we had 
doubt whatever that the late Sultan would 
^Ve done it; whether the present Sultan would 
^^er into such an arrangement, I do not know. 
^75. The coast over which these operations 
1 extend, would be a length of 4,000 miles, 
^^sides the Red Sea?—I have been told that; 
® far as regards the export trade, the captures 
are principally made between Kilwa and Brava, 
and when they are captured beyond that, they 
are captured close to Socotra. 
876. It has been stated in evidence before the 
Committee, that it would be necessary to inter 
cept slave dhows on the coast on which they 
landed the slaves, as well as the coast from which 
the slaves were exported ; in that case it would 
be something like 4,000 miles over which the 
operations would be extended i—You might say 
that, but you would not require to blockade 
every portion of that coast of 4,000 miles. 
877. It would have to be left to the naval 
officer in command of the station to determine 
whether having regard to the strength of the 
monsoon and the power of Her Majesty’s ships, 
it would be advisable to take the dhows into any 
particular port ?—Yes, many have been captured 
in the neighbourhood of Zanzibar, and they have 
been destroyed at once ; where a vessel can 
readily be taken into a port we think that it 
should be done. There are circumstances in 
which it is impossible almost to do that, and then 
naturally the vessel would have to be destroyed ; 
it would be of course on the responsibility of the 
commanding officer. 
Mr. H. a 
Rotfiety. 
24 July 
1871. 
Sir William Coghlan, called in ; and Examined. 
(chairman.] What position have you held 
„ ^ich enables you to give the Committee any in- 
^^'^ation with reference to the slave trade ?—I 
about nine years Political Resident and Com- 
ç^^^ant at Aden, and during that time I was 
g^H^yed as agent of the Viceroy of India to 
^ Ge the question between the two sons of Syed 
the Sultan of Zanzibar, and the Sultan of 
'f^scat. 
o ^79. You negotiated that treaty which led to 
® payment of that subsidy ?—Yes. 
. 80. The Indian Government attached con^ 
importance to the prevention of hostili- 
that part of the world ?—Yes ; they were 
^ding their ships against each other. 
g| Was your attention drawn to the liberated 
who were sent to Aden ?—I have myself 
®6veral occasions liberated slaves. 
82. Under what authority was that ?—I was 
Coq appointed the Judge of the Admiralty 
^^^83. What was done with the slaves liberated 
^j^^den ?—If they had been in any large number 
would have been a difficulty ; I found no 
lç^*^Glty because the numbers were few. I re- 
fj^^d the men, and let them take their chance as 
^ labourers, and the women I apportioned 
the respectable families ; that would 
work on a large scale. 
84. Was thfirp auv rli 
Was there any difficulty in finding em- 
for the men?—None whatever. In 
hqy I sent a number of children to Bom- 
several girls to one of the mission schools 
considerable expense incurred 
British Government connected with them? 
aqy ; I do not remember to have incurred 
Have you made a report to the Foreign 
to the Indian Government upon the 
trade?—Yes; I made a very 
0 j j ï'eport upon the subject a long time ago ; 
it was as far back as the 1st of November 
1860. 
887. Have you had no further information 
upon the subject since that time ?—No ; I found 
that my figures were discredited, and I did not 
say anything more about it. 
888. That report has never been published ? — 
Not to my knowledge. 
889. Subsequent to 1860 you say you have 
received no fresh information on the subject of 
slave trade ?—No, I have had nothing to do with 
the slave trade since. In 1863 I was at Aden, 
and some representations were made to me by the 
merchants at that place, but I have made no report 
since 1860. 
890. You have no doubt as to the correctness 
of what you state in your report?—No; it was 
prepared under great advantages. I had very 
able assistance in preparing it. I had also the 
assistance of General Rigby, who was at that 
time the consul at Zanzibar, and I had personal 
access to both the Sultans. I was at Muscat, 
where I saw Sultan Thowaynee, and discussed 
the slave question with him. 
891. Mr. P, Wytidham.'] You negotiated the 
settlement of the difficulty between Muscat and 
Zanzibar ?—Yes. 
892. What is your view of the subsidy; do 
you regard it as an award to the Sovereign of 
Muscat individually?—No; I regard it as a 
dynastic arrangement. 
893. Do you think we could with propriety 
withdraw from our position with respect to that 
subsidy ?—I think not. I think the only oppor 
tunity we ever had of withdrawing from it was 
missed. That was when the young man Sultan 
Salim killed his father ; that would have been a 
fair opportunity to have freed Zanzibar from the 
subsidy, because the Sultan represented that it 
was a hard case that he should pay it to his 
nephew, a parricide, who had murdered his (the 
Sultan’s) brother. 
G 4 894. Supposing 
Sir 
fV. Coghlan.