6930. Would the individual property of the captain himself be included in the condemnation?--I believe the doctrine always has been, that the whole property on board the ship is vitiated by her being engaged in the slave trade. But these questions are all questions as to the construction of the Act of Parliament of the 5th of George the 4th, which I do not feel competent to interpret in this manner, although I see my way clearly enough to act upon it. 6931. Mr. _Forster_.] Do you consider that the mere conveyance as a common carrier of goods from the Havannah to the coast of Africa, is an act of slave dealing?--Not the common carrying of goods: but if she is carrying goods from Pedro Blanco to Mr. Canôt, I do not call that a common act of carrying. It is the act of carrying goods for a specific purpose between two persons engaged in a criminal trade. 6932. Mr. _Milnes_.] Could not Pedro Blanco and Mr. Canôt have mercantile communications which should be of an indisputably legal character?--They might, but they indisputably have no such commerce except in the smallest degree possible. There was some little palm-oil trade carried on by Mr. Canôt. I believe Mr. Canôt’s evidence was not taken upon the question, but Mr. Canot made no secret of the purposes to which that cargo would have been applied by him. 6933. Mr. _Forster_.] Supposing arsenic to be conveyed from London to Manchester, and there made an illegal use of, would you consider the carrier responsible in that case?--No, but I think that supposed case applies to the carriage of goods from England to the Havannah, and not from the Havannah to a slave factory in Africa. If you suppose the case of the person at the place to which the arsenic was sent, and the person who sends it, both being employed in poisoning people, I should think in that case the carrier would be culpable, supposing him to be aware of the fact. 6934. Do you consider it illegal for an English vessel to convey a cargo of merchandise from the Havannah to a person engaged in the slave trade on the coast of Africa?--Supposing they are sent by a person engaged in the slave trade. 6935. Do you consider it illegal for an English vessel to convey a cargo of goods to a notorious slave dealer at the Havannah?--No, I do not. 6936. On what ground do you draw the distinction between the two cases?--I think the one is more directly aiding and abetting the slave trade than the other; the other is in a much more remote degree. I have before stated that I thought it was morally wrong. 6937. Mr. _Milnes_.] Do you recollect whether the fitting up of the vessel was such that it could have taken back a cargo of slaves, supposing Mr. Canôt had still been concerned in the slave trade?--She would only have had to get a few casks and a few planks, and she might have taken back 700 or 800 slaves with the greatest ease Any vessel can be fitted up as a slaver.