5484. Then you think a London merchant who is intrusted with the sale of a vessel on the part of his correspondent in Africa, and whose duty it is to take that vessel to the best market, would be justified in refusing an offer for the vessel from Messrs. Zulueta & Company?—I think it would be his duty to do so, because the chances would be ten to one that she very soon afterwards would be employed in the slave trade.
5485. Then what justification, in your opinion, would that agent in London be able to make to his correspondent for refusing to sell the vessel to the highest bidder?—If the correspondent was an honest man, I think he would be perfectly well satisfied with the representation of his agent that the acceptance of such an offer would necessarily involve the introduction of the vessel immediately afterwards into the slave trade.
5486. But supposing the agent to act in that manner, would that prevent Messrs. Zulueta & Company buying the same vessel in a circuitous manner in this market?—No, it might not.
5487. Chairman.] Have you any thing further to say with regard to the connexion of Zulueta with the slave trade?—I would refer to his connexion with the Gollupchik, which was lately captured. In that case, it appeared that the vessel went out direct to the Gallinas from London.
5488. But you would not object to a British vessel trading lawfully with a slave trade factory?—No.
5489. What is there then in this transaction which gives it a guilty character?—Mr. Zulueta’s former connexion with the Gallinas slave traders shows, that his course of trade with the Gallinas was one liable to exception.
5490. But what is there to prove that he dealt with the slave traders in other than lawful goods?—They would be lawful goods, certainly.
5491. Do you consider it to be unlawful or improper to deal in lawful goods with a man who is engaged in the slave trade?—I do not consider it unlawful, but I do consider it improper; I say not unlawful, because you cannot prove guilty knowledge, but highly improper to sell goods to persons who, the seller must be aware, will employ them in the slave trade afterwards.
5492. Do you hold it to be against the purport of the Act to deal in lawful goods with persons engaged in the slave trade?—It is not against the purport of the Act for a merchant to deal with any one, unless he is aware that that person is engaged in the slave trade, and that the goods that he sells will be employed for slave trade purposes.
5493. Then that which is against the purport of the Act in your opinion, is to deal in goods, which goods will be used for unlawful purposes?—Yes.