Part 58

Then he is asked, “Is not there a document officially published daily in London and at Liverpool, stating the daily entries at the Custom-house of all goods shipped, with the description of the goods, and the name of the port and of the shipper?--Yes, there is.” “Is not this printed from time to time in the public papers?”--There were on the Committee people connected with Liverpool, and knew every thing about the trade, or they could not have put these questions.--“It is in general circulation; there is hardly any merchant in Liverpool or in London who is not possessed of one. The Liverpool entries are reprinted in London, Liverpool being such an important place of business. The bill printed in London contains also Liverpool, Hull, and Bristol.” Then he is asked, “So that every such transaction is perfectly notorious to every one?--Notorious to every one who chooses to read the public papers. There is another thing which escaped me, till I came into the room this morning. As I have been in the business from my childhood, I know every thing that is going on in it.” Then he speaks of the Arrogante, but as that has not been made the subject of evidence, I do not trouble you with it. Then he was asked, “whether the Augusta was equipped for the slave trade the second time; the answer was ‘She was not.’ I wish to state, that before any goods were put on board of her”--he states, that an order was given, which we have evidence was obeyed--“it was our express wish and order that every thing in her that was fit for that trade should be taken down and the vessel put in the same condition as any other merchant vessel; and we should not have loaded any thing in her if that had not been done. It is stated in the evidence that the Augusta was consigned to three notorious slave dealers; now we had never in our lives heard of the name of any one of the parties to whom she was consigned.”

Now, Gentlemen, what becomes then of the evidence you had from either of the honourable officers called before you to prove that they, who almost lived upon the coast of Africa, knew that these parties were notorious slave dealers? and yet you are called upon to infer that Mr. Zulueta, who had never been there in his life, knew it himself, notwithstanding this account which he gave when not charged with felony. If he gave it now you might suspect it, but it was a voluntary statement; he need not have gone voluntarily to tell a series of falsehoods, he might have left it uncontradicted; but he is asked with reference to the persons to whom these vessels were consigned, Alvarez, Rolo, and Nimenes, and he says, “neither he, nor any of his house, ever heard of the names before.” If it were otherwise it could be proved, and it is not proved. His evidence is used against him, and it is surely but fair to use it as far as it goes for him. You have this young man freely coming forward and stating that, as to these parties to whom the goods were consigned, “I knew very little about it, and as to these people I never heard of any one of them.” Then, what becomes of the effect of the evidence of Captain Denman and others, which no doubt they have given truly, as to the nature of the slave trade? This gentleman never having been there and knowing nothing about it, how can you fix this dreadful charge of guilt upon him upon evidence which leaves him entirely untouched upon this important part of the case, and untouched by this part of the evidence given by himself?

There is a good deal more said in the course of the evidence which I do not feel it right to read. I know you must be wearied as I am myself by the exertions it has been my duty to make, and therefore I do not go over the rest of the evidence. The effect of the whole is, that as to these goods having been shipped, and this vessel consigned to the coast of Africa under the circumstances you have heard mentioned, the part that was taken in it by Mr. Zulueta, the prisoner, was but a small part, but as far as it went it was perfectly legal. The question remaining is, whether he participated in the transaction with the object, that is in order to accomplish the object, of the slave trade. That is the question to be submitted to you. The whole evidence shortly stated is, that Captain Denman and others familiar with the spot knew that the slave trade was carried on there to a very great extent, but the evidence does not show that this unfortunate gentleman, the prisoner, knew any thing of the place or the persons by whom it was carried on, that is a matter of speculation, and the only mode in which the case could be completed so as to induce you to find a verdict of guilty is, by bringing before you the evidence he himself gave upon the subject.

Gentlemen, take that evidence as it is; I am sure you will consider it fairly--consider it altogether; consider that if it had been false in its material parts, it could have been contradicted, and if it be true, as you have every reason to believe it is, what does it prove? It proves that these gentlemen, in trading with Spain and Portugal, and Africa and the Brazils, must trade with persons more or less engaged in the slave trade, and it proves his own solemn declaration, that in this transaction, as in every other in which the house was ever engaged, neither he, nor as far as he knows, his father or grandfather, ever had any participation, direct or indirect, to the most minute particular in this nefarious trade. He does not confine himself to a mere denial; he states facts, and points to other facts as far as concerns his father and the early history of the house; he details the taking of slaves under a bankrupt estate, and liberating them at a time when there were not the same opinions upon the subject which happily exist; he points to those facts as in confirmation of his solemn declaration, that as far as his own knowledge goes, that neither himself, nor to his belief his father, nor his family, nor any member of the house were directly or indirectly concerned in the trade, but endeavoured earnestly, and heartily endeavoured, to discountenance it.

Gentlemen, such is the case before you, and I have only to say in conclusion, not only do these facts appear in evidence before you, but I shall call before you a body of witnesses to the character of this gentleman; I shall call before you some of the most honourable and eminent men in the City of London in all branches of commerce, who have known this gentleman in trade, and in every way; and they will all tell you, Gentlemen, that to their experience and knowledge, according to the language in which they may express themselves, what was told you by one witness in the box before you, that this young man was a good son, a good brother, a good father, and a good and honourable member of society, incapable of wilfully evading or violating the law. Such is the character he has hitherto sustained, such is the character I shall sustain before you, and when I have called those witnesses to establish that character, rare indeed for a man so young, I shall then with confidence, under the Judge’s directions, leave this case in your hands, knowing well that when all that is dear in life, and all that which is more dear than life, his honour, is resting upon your verdict; _it will not be upon vague suspicions, not upon doubts, but upon what does not exist here, clear and direct and positive proof of guilt, that you will convict him of that offence, of which he is incapable from his heart’s core_.

I shall sit down confidently awaiting your verdict of Not Guilty, which will restore this young man to that high and honourable station, and to that happiness which he has hitherto worthily enjoyed.

EVIDENCE FOR THE PRISONER.

Mr. _James Cook_, sworn. Examined by Mr. _Bodkin_.

Do you reside in London?--Yes.

Are you a colonial-broker?--I am a colonial-broker under the firm of Truman and Cooke.

How long have you known the prisoner at the bar?--From ten to fifteen years.

What character has he borne during the time you have known him?--A very high character: I consider Mr. Zulueta to be one of the most honourable men in the City of London. It falls to my lot to be acquainted with a very large circle of the mercantile community. I am in close connexion with most of the large houses--Messrs. Baring, Messrs. Rothschilds, and houses of that stamp--and if I were put in a position to make any exception as to honour and integrity among the houses I have named, including Mr. Zulueta, the young man at the bar, I should put my finger upon him as the exception, as the most honourable and most straightforward man I ever knew.

Is that the mode in which you have heard him spoken of among mercantile men?--I believe I may say, without exception, it is generally understood to be so.

[_Adjourned._

THIRD DAY. MONDAY, 30TH OCTOBER, 1843.

The names of the Jury were called over.--All present.

The Defendant took his place within the Bar.

Alderman Sir _John Pirie_, Bart., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Bodkin_.

I believe you are extensively connected with trade and shipping in the City of London?--Yes.

Do you know the house of Zulueta & Co.?--Perfectly.

And the defendant, who we understand is one of the firm?--I believe so.

How long have you been acquainted with him?--I should think about twelve years.

What character during that time has he borne among those who have known him for veracity and honour as a British merchant?--I have always considered him as one of the most respectable merchants in the City of London; a gentleman very unlikely to give encouragement to this nefarious trade.

_Anselmo de Arroyave_, Esq., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

I believe you live in Tavistock Square?--Yes.

Are you a merchant of this City?--Yes.

Extensively engaged in business?--Yes.

Do you know the gentleman who stands behind you, Mr. Pedro de Zulueta?--Yes.

How long have you been acquainted with his firm?--With his firm I have been acquainted about thirty-two years--the firm in Spain.

How long have you known the gentleman who stands at the bar?--I should think about twelve years.

What character has the house, and himself a member of it, borne for the honourable nature of their transactions, their integrity, and their compliance with the laws of this country?--I always heard that they were men of the most correct principle in all dealings; his father and grandfather always bore the best character.

Mr. Justice _Maule_. I understand the gentleman to give him a very high character; I cannot hear the expressions.

Mr. _Clarkson_. Is there a house, in your judgment, in the City of London, which bears a higher character for principle and honour than the house of Zulueta?--It stands second to none.

_Thomas Hallifax_, Esq. sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

Are you a banker of the firm of Glyn, Mills, & Co.?--I am.

How long have you known the gentleman who stands before you?--The firm have been known to our house, I believe, eighteen or nineteen years; I cannot say the precise time I became acquainted with Mr. Zulueta, but I should say from ten to fifteen years.

Have you had an opportunity of knowing during that time the reputation he bore in the City of London for the honour and integrity of his dealings and conduct?--I believe him to bear the highest possible character; I believe him to be a man of the highest honour, and the most amiable disposition. I have known him as connected with his eminent firm in the City, and also in private, and I have great pleasure in giving to the best of my knowledge the high character he has borne from his amiability and irreproachable conduct.

_Samson Ricardo_, Esq., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

Are you a merchant of the City of London?--I am a member of the Stock Exchange.

Are you acquainted with Mr. Pedro de Zulueta?--Very well.

You know the house and the whole of the members?--Yes, perfectly.

Have you had transactions with them?--Yes.

What has been the character and reputation of the gentleman in the dock for honour and integrity in his personal conduct and his mercantile dealings?--The highest possible, and most straightforward: he is quite incapable of engaging in any transactions of a questionable nature.

The Honourable Baron _Lionel de Rothschild_, sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

Are you acquainted with the gentleman who stands in the dock?--Yes.

How long have you known him?--I have known him the best part of twenty years.

What character has he borne for honour and humanity as a man of business?--Most highly honourable as respects personal character, and as respects his firm the best and most straightforward.

Is he a man of humane disposition?--I should think perfectly so, incapable of being connected in any way with the offence charged.

_Manuel Gregorio de Isasi_, sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

Are you a merchant of this City?--Yes.

Where do you carry on your business?--In Water Lane.

Are you concerned in shipping at all?--No.

What is the business in which you are engaged?--A wine-merchant.

Are you acquainted with Mr. Pedro de Zulueta?--From his childhood.

Did you go to school with him?--Yes.

You knew him before he came to this country?--Yes, quite well, at Cadiz.

You are yourself from Cadiz?--Yes.

Have you had an opportunity of forming an opinion of the character he bears and deserves for integrity and honour, and his feelings of humanity in his personal character?--The highest, and his family at Cadiz. I should say that in every relation of life it is so.

_José Maria Barrero_, sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

You are at the head of the consulate of this country from Spain?--I am.

Are you acquainted with Mr. Pedro de Zulueta?--Yes.

Have you known him long and well?--About twenty years.

That is very much the greater part of his life I suppose?--Yes.

What has been his conduct and character in the City of London?--The highest possible.

Are you acquainted with him in his relations in private life, as well as his conduct as a merchant?--Yes.

Have you had an opportunity of knowing whether his character and conduct in private life have been altogether unexceptionable?--Yes.

_Charles Tottie_, Esq., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

Are you a merchant in this country?--Yes.

Are you also at the head of the consulate of Spain?--I am consul for Sweden and Norway.

Do you know Mr. Zulueta and his firm?--Yes.

What have you to say to his Lordship and the Jury respecting his character for integrity and humanity?--I have known Mr. Pedro de Zulueta for upwards of fourteen or sixteen years, and I always considered him of the highest character, and a truly Christian man. His cousins and my sons went to school together.

What has been his character for humanity and veracity?--Oh, very high.

Dr. _Neil Arnott_, sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

Your name is Neil Arnot?--Yes.

You are a physician?--Yes.

Do you know the gentleman who stands by your side?--I have known him from his youth as physician to the family.

Have you had an opportunity of forming a judgment with relation to the character he has borne for honour and integrity as an individual and as a merchant?--From the many opportunities I have had of conversing with him, and knowing him in the character of a physician to his family, I have had an opportunity; also, as physician to most of the Spanish ambassadors; and I have known him as a countryman of theirs.

What character has he borne?--His father spared nothing on his education; it was the best this country could afford.

Is he a man of veracity and humanity?--In all the relations of life, kindred, friendship, and acquaintance, I consider him as standing very high.

Has he always borne the character of a humane, upright, Christian man?--As much as possible.

_Charles Dodd_, Esq., sworn.

I believe you are a solicitor?--I am.

Where do you live?--In Billiter Street, my house of business.

Are you acquainted with Pedro de Zulueta the prisoner?--I am.

I believe you have known him from his youth?--I have known him for twelve or fourteen years most intimately. I have the highest possible opinion of his honour and his integrity, and his moral and religious character. I have considered it a great blessing that my sons formed a strict intimacy with him, believing him as incapable of committing an offence against the law as it is possible for a man to be.

_Christobal de Murrieta_, sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

Are you of the firm of Aguirre Solarte and Murrieta, merchants of London?--Yes.

Do you know the gentleman who stands in the dock?--Yes.

How long have you known him?--About eighteen years.

What is the reputation which he has borne for honour, veracity, uprightness of conduct, and humanity, during the whole of the time you have known him?--The highest in both ways.

You mean the highest in all ways?--Yes.

Mr. _Charles Dodd_, Jun., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

You are the son of the gentleman who has been just examined?--I am.

Have you formerly been at school with the prisoner at the bar?--No, I have not been at school with him; I have known him since the year 1831.

What opinion have you formed as to his character for honour, veracity, and integrity of conduct?--I do not believe a more honourable man exists. I have felt the greatest pleasure in his acquaintance since when I first left school; and when I was forming those acquaintances which would conduct me through life, there is no man whose society I regretted losing more than Pedro de Zulueta’s when he left Camberwell.

_Hugh Sandeman_, Esq., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

Are you a stock-broker in this City?--Yes.

Do you know Mr. Zulueta?--Yes, perfectly well, for sixteen years.

What opinion have you formed of him during that time?--Of the very highest description, and in all my intercourse with houses in the Royal Exchange, I have never found but the same opinion was expressed by all of him as a private individual, and as a member.

Has his moral and religious character been perfectly unexceptionable--Perfectly so.

_William Gibbs_, Esq., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

Are you of the firm of Anthony Gibbs & Son of this City?--I am.

Do you know the house of Zulueta & Co.?--Perfectly well.

And every one of its members?--Perfectly well.

Have you had an opportunity of ascertaining the reputation which Mr. Pedro Zulueta has enjoyed in the City; whether it is an unexceptionable character, morally as well as religiously speaking?--I consider him as entitled to the highest honourable character. I have always heard him so described.

Have his transactions been to your knowledge of that character?--Perfectly; all marked with integrity and honourable conduct.

_Timothy Bevington_, Esq., solemnly affirmed. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

Are you a member of the Society of Friends?--I am.

The Society has expended much money and labour to put down the traffic to which reference has been made in the course of this trial?--Yes.

Do you know Mr. Pedro Zulueta?--Yes.

How long have you known him?--The last ten years.

What character has he borne during that time?--Excellent.

Do you know the house of which he is a member?--Very well; they have been my next door neighbours for many years.

Regard being had to the nature of the charge against him, what can you say as to his general character for uprightness and honour?--I have been perfectly satisfied in all the transactions I have had with him.

Have you always heard him spoken of as a man of humane and honourable conduct and feelings?--Perfectly so.

_William Tindal_, Esq., solemnly affirmed. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

You are a member of the Society of Friends?--I am of that persuasion.

Are you a ship-owner of the City of London?--I am.

Do you know Mr. Pedro de Zulueta?--I know him well.

How long have you known him?--I have known the elder Mr. Zulueta for fifty years; the younger one ever since he came over.

During that time have you had opportunities of ascertaining the general character and reputation he has borne in all the relations of life?--Yes.

What can you say to his Lordship and the Jury in those respects?--He has been a very exemplary character, both as a merchant and in moral character in every way.

Do you know a house in the City of London which stands higher than that house?--There is not one; and also they have the same reputation in Cadiz.

For humanity and integrity?--Yes, for humanity and integrity, and in every way as merchants.

_Samuel Jones Loyd_, Esq., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Clarkson_.

You are a banker in the City of London?--I am.

Do you know the house of Zulueta & Co., of which this gentleman is a partner?--I have no personal knowledge of the gentleman, but I know the house by character.

What character did the house bear in the City of London for general honour?--They have a very high reputation in every respect as mercantile men.

_Frederick Huth_, Esq., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Bodkin_.

Are you a merchant in the City of London?--I am.

I believe you are one of the Directors of the Bank of England?--My son is.

How long have you known the house of Zulueta & Co.?--For the period of forty years. I have known them forty years.

Are you acquainted with the member of the firm who is unfortunately where he is now?--Perfectly so.

How long have you known him?--For twelve years.

As to individual character, how can you speak of him during the time you have known him with regard to integrity and humanity?--I cannot better describe him than that I know of no man in the City of London or any where else, a merchant, of whom I should give a higher character.

Have you ever heard a suggestion against his character as an individual, or against his regularity as a merchant?--Nothing whatever.

_Abraham Mocatta_, Esq., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Bodkin_.

Are you one of the firm of Mocatta and Goldsmid?--I am.

You are bullion dealers in the City of London I believe?--Bullion merchants.

How long have you known Mr. Pedro de Zulueta?--I have known him about sixteen years.

Have you also known the firm of which he is a member?--Yes, I have known them for that time or longer.

Have you any knowledge of their transactions in the City, the reputation they bear?--I have always understood them to bear the highest character that I have known as gentlemen of character. I have known the gentleman as a neighbour of mine for several years. He was in the habit of visiting our family, and we have the highest opinion of him; he was considered particularly humane and considerate of the wants of others.

_Edwin Gower_, Esq., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Bodkin_.

Are you of the firm of Gower & Co.?--I am.

Merchants in this City?--Yes.

How long have you known Mr. Zulueta.--I have known him ever since he has been connected with the City of London, he and his senior.

And his family I suppose before him?--Yes.

What reputation has he enjoyed during the time you have known him, and his family, and the house as a mercantile firm?--I should say, as our connexions and theirs are very similar, we have almost daily more or less intercourse with him, and I never heard the most distant rumour against his character; I believe it to be quite unimpeachable: and the house, as a house of business, stands as high as any house in the City of London.

_George Rougemont_, Esq., sworn. Examined by Mr. _Bodkin_.

Are you a merchant in the City?--I am.