6885. Did you not hear that she was condemned?—I heard that she was condemned.
6886. Upon what ground?—My knowledge upon the subject is merely hearsay; all that I know is, that an officer of the Wanderer was at Sierra Leone, and I mention it in order to show that Sir John Jeremie was not moved by interested motives in seizing her, he was anxious that this officer should seize her as a prize to the Wanderer.
6887. Has the Governor any interest in seizures?—He has a proportion of the proceeds.
6888. Mr. Forster.] And he would be entitled to a proportion of the proceeds of the Echo when condemned at Sierra Leone?—Yes.
6889. Mr. Milnes.] Did you ever fall in with any other Hamburgh vessel engaged in abetting the slave trade?—I fell in once with the Argus, at the Gallinas, when she was landing casks. I considered that a suspicious circumstance, although one not warranting seizure. I never met with any other.
6890. Have you ever heard that eight or any other number of Hamburgh vessels had proceeded from Hamburgh for the purpose of abetting the slave trade, or being engaged in it?—I think decidedly not.
6891. Mr. Forster.] If the Echo had been an English vessel, would you have seized her under the circumstances in which you found the Echo?—Undoubtedly, under the circumstances of the trade which she was carrying on.
6892. Mr. Milnes.] Do you mean after the first or after the second search?—The search told nothing. It was the fact of her carrying goods from one slave dealer to another, with a Spanish supercargo on board, that would have proved to me that she was aiding and abetting the slave trade.
6893. Would you have seized her upon the knowledge of that fact alone?—Undoubtedly, if she had been an English vessel.
6894. Chairman.] But being a foreign vessel, you did not think that ground sufficient to act upon?—Being a foreign vessel, I could not apply the English laws to her case. I could only apply the treaty to her case, and I held that according to the treaty only equipment would warrant a seizure, or slaves.