Trial of Pedro de Zulueta, jun., on a Charge of Slave Trading, under 5 Geo. IV, cap. 113, on Friday the 27th, Saturday the 28th, and Monday the 30th of October, 1843, at the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, London: A Full Report from the Short-hand Notes of W. B. Gurney, Esq.Zulueta, Pedro de
History
Trial of Pedro de Zulueta, jun., on a Charge of Slave Trading, under 5 Geo. IV, cap. 113, on Friday the 27th, Saturday the 28th, and Monday the 30th of October, 1843, at the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, London: A Full Report from the Short-hand Notes of W. B. Gurney, Esq.
Zulueta, Pedro de
Slave trade -- Africa; Slave traders -- Africa; Trial transcripts -- England -- London; Zulueta, Pedro de -- Trials, litigation, etc.
But what the Committee thought of the evidence, after hearing at length
the very individuals who appeared against me at the Old Bailey, and
after hearing my own evidence, which formed the chief weapon against me
in that Court, will be found in their own Report, printed in the
following pages. Every reader may judge for himself, whether, in point
of fact, it is not an anticipated condemnation of such proceedings as
have been inflicted upon me--a verdict of not guilty, not only upon the
transactions of the Augusta, but upon the whole of Zulueta & Co.’s
agency for the houses mentioned, in my evidence, if the representation
given by me of the transaction be substantially correct. In page 203 the
following words will be found:--“In the first place, it is fair to state
that we have no evidence, or reason to believe, that any British
merchant, concerned in the trade with the West Coast of Africa, either
owns or equips any vessel engaged in the slave trade, or has any share
in the risk or profits of any slave trade venture”--a declaration this,
the correctness of which every one conversant with the characteristic
features of British commerce must acknowledge. Have any facts been
elicited subsequent to this Report, and previously to the prosecution
being instituted--any new evidence, which was not before the Committee
of the House of Commons? This is a question which happily every reader
of the following pages may settle for himself. Let him, as he peruses
the evidence, at each stage of it ask himself the question--Was this
before the Committee of the House of Commons? That it was, must be the
answer upon every point. Not one statement was elicited from a single
witness which had not been before the Committee. There was indeed an
unworthy attempt to create a false impression about some casks and
shackles having been left on board, even after the most unsparing of the
witnesses for the prosecution had acquitted the vessel of even the
shadow of a suspicion of containing the least implement available for a
slaving equipment. How the attempt was foiled by their own witness
afterwards will be seen; and I will not say a word more about an attempt
upon which the very existence of a fellow-creature perhaps might hang,
leaving it to be visited with the feeling of abhorrence which it must
excite in every reader. Apart from this, there was before the Committee
much more against me than there was before the Court, as may be seen by
a comparison of the evidence as given before the one with that given
before the other; because the nature of legal proceedings keeps the
witness, even if otherwise disposed, within the limits of matter of
fact--limits, which before the Court they did attempt to transgress, as
may be seen very prominently in the case of the chief of them, but from
which before the Committee it was in their power to wander, and they did
accordingly so wander at every moment. Is it not fair to infer, that it
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account