ox SLAVE TRADE (EAST COAST OF AFRICA).
61
823-4. With respect to the subsidy paid to the
^Qiaum of Muscat, have you any reason to suppose
that the Imaum of Muscat would consent to
discontinuance of the payment to him of that
"jOOO Z. ?—[ can give no information upon that
point.
82o. Is the income of the Sultan of Zanzibar
®o large that that subsidy of 8,000 which he
P^ys to the Imaum of Muscat, forms only a small
P^’oportion of it?—The information we had be-Ofe
us with respect to the income of the Sultan
Zanzibar was, I think, of a very loose characwe
estimated the whole of his income, I
oink, at about 80,000 1.
826. Did that include the receipts from slaves?
, 827. Sir R. Anstrutlier.^ As to the children,
^^ve you any means of ascertaining what proportion
of the captured slaves are adults and
^kat proportion are children ?—No, not now ;
ormerly the returns used to state the numbers
0i the men, women, and children,” now they
^Oly state the numbers of ‘‘ males ” and “ ie-^ales.”
828. Since when was the column of children”
discontinued ?—It used to be given in the Return
the West Coast of Africa, but in the Rejdrps
from the East Coast it has not generally
doen continued.
. 829. Would it not be desirable, in your opito
reinstate that column in the Return ?—I
dink it would. The officers on the East Coast
for the most part, not legal gentlemen, and
d® Returns, therefore, are not quite so perfect as
hey might otherwise lie.
830. To what officers do you refer ?—To the
Superintendent at Aden, and the Consul at Zanzidr,
who are not legal officers.
831. They have not been called on to specify
ddw many children are captured?—No.
832. Mr. Shaw jLefevre.~\ The Admiralty in-^ii’uctions
issued in 1870 v/ere drawn up in con-^dquence
of reports made by you?—Yes.
833. Those reports being made upon repre-^dtations
by the Sultan of Zanzibar to our
'Government, I think ?—Certainly ; and also upon
^^presentations from the Consul at Zanzibar, Dr.
and Mr. Churchill.
834. They had reference to the destruction of
hows eno’aued in commerce, but which had
es on board ?—Partly to that, and
, engaged
diRestic slav
Partly to vessels that had been destroyed, which
'^ore undoubtedly legitimate traders.
^835. Without any domestic slaves onboard ?—
'Without any domestic slaves on board.
1 ^36. Take the first case ; it had come to your
^owledge that a considerable number of dhows
^oi’e captured which had comparatively few do-®stic
slaves on board ?—Yes.
837. And you come to the opinion that such
^Ptures were quite illegal ?—Yes.
ui 838^ And the Government were so advised by
law officers also?—Yes.
839. In consequence of that, it became necesto
issue fresh regulations forbidding that
PfacticeS-Yes.
^40. The Vice Consular Court has held such
^dPtures to be illegal ?—Yes. We had no idea
^t the officer commanding could have so misapprehended
his instructions. The instructions
entiled, instructions for the suppression of the
trade, and not of slavery.
0.116.
841. The instructions issued by the Admiralty
were really for the purpose of carrying out the
law ?—Yes.
842. And preventing this illegal course beingfollowed
by our cruisers ?—That was the object.
843. As to the destruction of vessels previous
to condemnation, have several cases come to your
knowledge where that had operated very harshly
on native vessels ?—Many. There is one that
occurs to me at the present moment; the “ Petrel”
on her way south to the Cape of Good Hope, met
with a valuable dhow, having 42 passengers and
crew altogether on board, and a valuable cargo.
She detained the dhow on the ground that there
were six domestic slaves on board. The whole of
the cargo was transferred to the “ Petrel,” the
dhow was burnt, and the passengers were sent
back to Zanzibar, together with those six alleged
domestic slaves which were the ground of destroying
her; and having arrived at the Cape of
Good Hope, the officer obtained her condemnation
there. That was one instance ; I have 13
or 14 others.
844. Instances of illegal capture of the same
kind ?—Yes.
845. And causing great complaints on the part
of the traders in Zanzibar?—Yes; and great
terror.
846. And stopping the legitimate trade ?—Yes.
847. I presume it is to the increase of legitimate
trade that we may look, more than anything
else, for the suppression of the slave trade ?
—I should have thought entirely.
848. There is a considerable legitimate trade
growing up, is there not?—Yes; the accounts
are that the East Coast of Africa might produce
an enormous trade.
849. With reference to bounties for the destruction
of vessels previous to condemnation, have
you formed any opinion upon that point ?—My
very strong opinion is, that where a dhow is
destroyed at sea, the bounty of 1 /. 10 5. a ton
ought not to be granted. Previous to my appointment
to the office which I now hold, it had been
the habit for a very great number of years to
grant this bounty. I called the attention of the
Treasury to the subject, and pointed out that
under the terms of the several Act«, I did not
think that the bounties were, strictly speaking,
payable ; the Treasury, however, thought that
after so long a usage they could hardly refuse
the bounty, and in that opinion I concur. At
the same time, I think it very desirable that
an Act should be passed that the bounty of
1/. 10 5. a ton should not be granted, except
where the vessel has been brought into port and
there destroyed, or under other exceptional circumstances.
850. You think the practice of giving bounties
for vessels destroyed on the alleged ground of
unseav.orthiness before condemnatiqn, has led to
a very loose practice of destroying vessels in
order to prevent the question of their true
character being raised ?—I may as well state to
the Committee the history of this 11. 10 5. bounty.
Formerly when the slave trade was carried on on
the AYest Coast of Africa, the vessels engaged in
it were very fast sailers and very valuable ; they
were brought into port, and were there sold, and
the slave traders competed with one another for
the purchase, sometimes giving very extravagant
H 3 prices
Mr. H. C.
Rothery.
24 July
¡871.
