Frauds on Emigrants
FRAUDS ON EMIGRANTS. ______ No. XIV. So, the patron of the runners has at length come to their rescue. His communication has a semi-official look about it, but we are not so ungenerous as to affirm that it is framed for the purpose of deceiving the public. Still, it is necessary we should observe, to prevent any misunderstanding on the point, that our critic does not hold her Majesty's commission, nevertheless he thinks himself a man of mark, for he says, "I was one of the first, if not the very first, to recommend the granting of licences." This being so, what more natural than that he should defend the runners in the day of their adversity? How far his benevolent exertions on their behalf have been successful we shall presently see; meantime, we may just remark that he ought to be proud of the company he keeps! Our critic comes out somewhat like the gentleman with whom we had a bit of controversy a few weeks ago. He also is very attractive - his motto is " Free Trade." We suspect he has changed his political opinions very recently, if the signature he employs is meant to convey the principles he holds, for he was always understood to be attached to the Tory or monopoly party in this town, and distinguished for a rabid adherence to it. Perhaps this may account for the fact, if it be one, that he does not read the Chronicle. We regret for his own sake that he does not peruse that paper. It is altogether a matter of taste, but if he has conscientious scruples himself that is no valid reason why the numerous frequenters of his establishment should not have the opportunity of reading it if they feel so inclined. Most public-houses and cookshops in town patronise the Liverpool press without reference to the political bias of the writers. "Free Trade" begins by telling us that he has only seen the article of November 7th, which contained what he calls "a sort of summary," and immediately he goes to work to demolish this said "summary." Now, we can easily understand why that particular number of the series should have called down the wrath of the clients of Mr. "Free Trade." The pith of the question was there, in, shall we say, "a sort" of concise form, calculated to convince the most sceptical of the evils of the runner system, hence it is that "Free Trade" and his friends think it is quite time they should "look to their laurels; " but then, to be honest, our critic should have gone back and found out for himself whether we had or had not established and proved the allegations contained in this said "sort of summary." He did not think proper, it would seem, to do so, therefore we take the liberty of informing our critic that he knows literally nothing of the question about which he has the vanity to ask the public to believe he is thoroughly a master. We have advanced a statement that there are 222 runners in Liverpool, who are mostly men of no reputation. "Free Trade" says "this statement is not correct," but adds, " that there are bad men among them I at once admit." The question, then, between us is only as to the relative numbers of the good and the bad. We still assert that the "bad" largely preponderate, that the "good" are few and far between, and that even they are not necessary for the conducting of the business of emigration in Liverpool any more than they are wanted in London and Glasgow, where such officers are altogether unknown. We happen to know something about what we are writing, and unhesitatingly affirm that no such aids or helps are desired by those who conduct their business on sound principles. We can well afford to pass over the low vulgar scurrility in which "Free Trade" indulges towards gentlemen immeasurably his superiors in education, general attainments, and social position. Still he ought to know that personal abuse is not argument, nor is it the method by which legitimate criticism ought to be carried out. "Free Trade" has found a mare's nest; but for his information we have to say that neither Mr. Sullivan nor Mr. Murray ever wrote a line of "Frauds on Emigrants" beyond the letter which the former gentleman contributed, and which bore his signature. Mr. Sullivan's position and reputation forbid that he should enter the lists with one who shelters himself under an anonymous signature; but if "Free Trade" feels inclined to "come out" openly, we can promise him that Mr. Sullivan will meet him, and discuss the question in all its parts. Mr. Murray is three thousand miles off, but will be on the ground again very shortly; he has a great mission to execute, and has too high an estimate of its importance to attach the slightest value to the miserable attempt now made to damage him in his absence. The gist of "Free Trade's" observations is to show that his friends the runners are not, after all, such a degraded race as we have pictured then. We are great sticklers for facts, and like to prove our case by incontrovertible testimony, therefore, we purpose here to introduce to our critic the evidence of a very important witness, a gentleman who is all but one of themselves. He is not a runner. He is one of those brokers of whom we have so many on the list, who are, in point of fact, not brokers, because they do not load or despatch ships, but he is acquainted with all the "outs and ins" of the trade. We take it for granted that his opinion will not be repudiated. Well, let us see what he says about the runners in his elegantly expressed business circular, which he heads with the word "Caution," and goes on to inform his patrons that "thousands of emigrants having been lead astray, robbed of their substance, and in many cases had to return home penniless, through the imposition practised upon them by a numerous class of idlers, called land sharks, the proprietor of the above establishment deems it a duty he owes the unsuspecting emigrant, to warn him or her against such characters, who frequent steam boats, railway stations, and the docks, soliciting custom for themselves or employers. These men resort to every kind of falsehood and misrepresentation to draw you away from the person you have been recommended to, and make loud professions of friendship and assistance provided you will follow them. Beware of such men; I say beware! Ask them no questions, nor answer any of theirs; for, as Vere Foster's Guide justly remarks, 'Each one may cost you five or ten shillings, or more.' Pay no attention to any one who would induce you to turn away from the person you are in want of; inquire the way of a policeman or at some respectable shop; and if you engage any one, see he conducts you to the right place and no other. Make a bargain beforehand, and strictly abide by it." adding that these land sharks of whom he speaks "perhaps wear a yellow girdle or some badge of distinction to make them look quite official, and promise to ship you at least one pound cheaper than other persons," remarking that he "crowns all by representing himself as _______'s man, and if you want his master he will show you to the office, and cart down your luggage free of charge." To all of which, if the emigrant be wise, he will reply - Words! words!! words!!!" Here we have the evidence of one whose personal interest should be rather to protect than damage the reputation of his class. We cannot, therefore, doubt that he states a part at least of what he knows to be true. Further, we recommend to our critic a perusal of the opinion of another very impartial witness, we mean Mr. Alderman Samuel Holme, who, the other day, in delivering judgement in a case which came before him in which a runner, named Sayers, was concerned, says: "The conduct of Sayers was most disgraceful, and if the case rested on his evidence the bench would certainly dismiss it. He said Sayers had lent himself to the plunder of passengers - he used the word 'plunder' advisedly, as he knew no other word in the English language to convey his meaning. Had he an opportunity of speaking of the way in which poor emigrants were treated, he would be obliged to say many hard things of many parties, but, at the same time, he would be uttering truths, no matter how unpalatable. He was resolved, with the other magistrates, to protect poor emigrants, and in every case that came before the Bench the highest penalty would be inflicted." We hope "Free Trade" will carefully study these extracts; they are calculated to enlighten him a little. But "Free Trade" tells us that ninety of his friends out of the 222 have in their possession some 600 "letters from lieutenants of counties, clergymen, &c, recommending parties" - we suppose he means to say to the runners for protection. Here Mr. "Free Trade" makes a rather invidious distinction, for he does not tell us what credentials the remaining 132 runners hold. We don't know anything about the lieutenants, gentry, &c., to whom our critic refers, but as respects the clergy, we beg to refer him to the letter of the Rev. Archbishop recommends all Irish emigrants to eschew the services of the Liverpool runners. We may also remind "Free Trade" of a very important fact which we have also already put on record, that a Roman Catholic clergyman in this town not very long ago denounced from the altar the runners and the system, reading at the same time letters from his correspondents in Ireland to the effect that his countrymen were being systematically plundered in Liverpool. We are quite aware the runners have influence in Ireland. Let us see how it is obtained. The following is the substance of a letter received from a gentleman in that country, for whose veracity we pledge ourselves: - "The mancatchers, who are generally lodging-house keepers, come over here and make themselves acquainted with certain parties who act as a sort of agent for them; they persuade emigrants to write to tuch [such?] a man in Liverpool, giving them the address, and selling them they can get a passage 20 or 30s less than through a respectable agent in Ireland; and not on any account agree till they get to Liverpool. But the dupes find out when they go to Liverpool that they have been deceived. Another practice is - suppose a passenger books in Ireland - for these runners to write home in the name of some of the emigrants, complaining of the usage they got, and begging of their friends not to book till they come to Liverpool." We make this extract for the purpose of showing that these friends of "Free Trade" are in the habit of violating the Act of Parliament: for by the 3rd section of it a runner has no right to ply his vocation, except within five miles of the town where his licence hails from. Does our critic mean to tell us that men of reputation would be guilty of such practices as are described by our correspondent. But if "Free Trade" has changed his political faith, he has not forgotten the tactics of the party he has left. He is endeavouring to throw into the question the apple of discord, for he talks something about "proselytising." We have not interfered with the religious opinions of the friends of our critic. We don't apprehend they are very sound theologians; but that is their own business - they are citizens of a free country, and, with all their faults, entitled to hold any religious opinions they think proper. But "Free Trade" will, perhaps, be so good, in any future effusion, to stick to the question, and not travel so far out of the record. "Free Trade" proves, or rather tries to prove, a little too much, for he tells us that emigrants are lodged by his friends for 4d. per night, and that the runners wait at the boats and railway stations, no matter what the state of the weather, so that they may generously conduct and guide the poor bewildered emigrant to a haven of refuge and protection. "Free Trade" wishes his readers to believe that 4d per night is the pecuniary inducement which prompts his friends to this so-called care for the emigrant. Now, whatever may be his opinion on that point, we know that 4d per night does not remunerate the runner, and that his great attention to the emigrant is brought about because there is in prospect the commission on his passage fare, on his outfit, from the money changer - if the poor fellow has any left after the mancatcher has been satisfied - the publican, &c., &c. These constitute the motives which influence the runner in looking out so carefully for the emigrant. Among other things our critic treats us to a dissertation upon the results of a change in the system, telling us that a certain percentage would fall into the pockets of the American shipowner. If he were a sincere free trader he would not murmur about that; but as we have in these papers disposed of the question of monopoly, we decline to enter upon it here. If he will look back he will find our views fully expressed; but we may just say in passing, that if "Free Trade" has much time at his disposal, he could not do better than employ it in instructing his clients, if he can, in the A B C of political economy, for we do not believe they have a very profound knowledge of the principles of Adam Smith. But we must inform our critic - for he seems to be ignorant of the fact - that this is not a money question at all. Money may be his Alpha and Omega. We, and those who act with us, are not discussing it upon such miserable and unworthy considerations. "Free Trade" may sneer at the philanthropist; he is quite welcome to do so. He may know the meaning of the word, but we doubt if he realises it in practice, for we have never yet seen his name in connection with any philanthropic movement. As to "Free Trade's" opinion who should, and who should not have licences, it is worth nothing. He knows nothing of the business practically, and should not insult those who do, by venturing upon their instruction. His remarks about centralisation and monopoly may be dismissed, because they are put forth by one who evidently intrudes his opinions, such as they are, to suit the party whose tool he is for the moment. His friends are not remarkable for sobriety; they may patronise his establishment, and possibly recompense their patron in a more substantial form. "Free Trade" says - "The days of monopoly and restriction on trade, of all sorts, are fast fading away, and fair and open competition in this, as in other trades, is its life-blood." In this we quite agree with him; but the sentiment is singularly at variance with his views as expressed in a previous paragraph of his letter, that beginning with "The ships taking passengers, &c." But we wish him to distinguish between legitimate trade, whether free or under monopoly, and imposition. If he will refer to the early numbers of this series, he will find some, to him, instructive disclosures in respect to inland railway conveyance in the States of America, wherein it was shewn that certain parties in Liverpool were doing business upon a basis which enabled them to allow the runner 15 per cent. commission. What does our critic think of that? Our time is valuable, perhaps as much so as that of "Free Trade," still, if he feels disposed to enter upon the question, beginning at the beginning, we might condescend to go over the ground anew with him; but he must come to points, and not deal in generalities. On no other terms can we have more to say to him, except that we regret there is not in Liverpool a second "Mansion House," from whence, in public meeting assembled, the injured runner might, through a free press, have the opportunity of sending, over the length and breadth of the land, a history of his grievances and the infamous attempts now being made to deprive him of his privileges!!! One word as to the Government officers at this port. We have said nothing disrespectful of them. We have no desire to do so. We respect them in their private capacity, but, as we are discussing a public question, personal feeling must not be permitted to influence us. The Act of Parliament is doubtless defective; for that they are not responsible; but we do affirm it was their duty to apply to the proper quarter, call for an alteration, and throw the responsibility on those whose duty it is to frame a measure suitable to the requirements of the emigration trade. But it has been left to us to expose the defects and evils of the system. We shall continue to do so till a remedy is provided, no matter what our local authorities may determine upon. In case of need we shall be prepared to go to Parliament next session, an alternative we would prefer, in order that the question may be fully opened up, and the incapacity of the commissioners exhibited. To show the necessity, were further proof wanting, for such a step, we take leave to append copies of two authenticated affidavits just received from New York. The speak for themselves, and, we admit, will not be relished by "Free Trade" and his clients, but possibly their perusal by our Government officials may convince them that the estimate we form of the inferior staff is, after all, not very far wide of the truth: - CITY AND COUNTY OF NEW YORK, S.S. ________ _____, being duly sworn, does depose and says that she arrived from Liverpool this 2nd day of November, 1857, in the ship _______, from the said port. Deponent further says, that after paying for her transatlantic passage in Liverpool, she had no more than six shillings sterling in money, but was in no distress on that account, as her husband had written to her from Boston, in Massachusetts, that he would cause her to be taken care of on landing in New York. She was then told by a man named _______ whose name she found, on landing in New York, to be enumerated under No. - in the British parliamentary return of licensed passenger brokers in Liverpool, that she could not go on board of the ship without paying for her passage from New York to Boston, as she had a child with her; and no women with children could be landed in New York unless they had inland passage tickets. Deponent told said ______ that she had no money then, but would have enough, on landing in New York, to pay her way to Boston. Said ______ pretended to speak to the captain of the Australia, leaving the office for some time for that alleged purpose. When he came back he said the captain refused to take her, and upon he demanding to see the captain herself, she was told that it could not be done. She was prevented from making the attempt by intimidation on the part of said _____, who told her that she would be very roughly handled if she dared approach the ship without a New York and Boston passage contract. Deponent, not having any money to procure such a contract with said _______, persuaded a girl, by the name of _____ _____, to lend the necessary amount to deponent, as said _____ could get it back on landing in New York. Said _____ then lent deponent 16s. sterling, which, together with 5s. 10 1/2d, which deponent had made up the sum of œ1 1s. 10 1/2d, exacted by said ______ , and then paid by this deponent to him for a passage for herself and child, which then was less than four years old, from New York to Boston. The ticket he gave her was an order on _____, agent of the New York and Erie R.R. Co., in New York, and bore the number __. On arriving this day in New York this deponent was told by the Commissioners of Emigration, in the Emigrant Landing Depot of Castle Gardens, and believes, that the New York and Erie R.R. does not connect New York with Boston, but runs in opposite direction, connecting New York with Dunkirk, situate on Lake Erie. She was also informed, and believes that the proper way for emigrants to go to Boston is by steam-boat, either to Stonington, in Rhode Island, nor to Fall River, in Massachusetts, or to Norwich, in Connecticut, and from either of these places by railroad to Boston, and that the price actually charged for the emigrant passage from New York to Boston was 2 1/2 dollars for an adult, and 1 1/4 dollars for a child between 4 and 12 years of age, and that, therefore, her passage for herself and child was $3 75c., or 15s. 9d. sterling. Said _____ has therefore defrauded her in the amount of 6s. 1 1/2d., even if his representations were true, that she could not land without a passage contract, which they were not as she is informed by the Commissioners of Emigration in New York. Deponent further says that, on arriving in Castle Garden, she was told by the superintendent of this landing depot that he had received for her, from her husband in Boston, a passage ticket by the Norwich line to Boston, and one dollar to pay for provisions. This deponent is therefore provided for by her husband, as she expected to be, but is unable to refund the money borrowed from _____ _____, who, in consequence, is delayed in New York until this deponent can go to Boston and send on the money from that city. And further deponent says not. _______ ______ Sworn before me, this 2nd } RUDOLPH GARRIGUE, day of November, 1857, } Commissioner of Emigration. _________ CITY AND COUNTY OF NEW YORK, S.S. ______ _____, being duly sworn, does depose and say, that he arrived in port of New York in the ship ______ ______, from Liverpool, this 19th day of October, 1857. Deponent further says that he had a passage contract from the commission house of _____ & Co., in Hamburg, for a passage from Hamburg to New York, and by section 5th of said contract was directed to report himself to ____, of ____, Liverpool, who would give this deponent free board and lodging in Liverpool until the sailing of the ship. The same section also states that complaints for non-fulfilment of contract could be made to the Hamburg Consul in Liverpool, whose decisions would be binding upon the contractors. And deponent says that up to the time of embarkation in Liverpool there was no cause of making any such complaint. Deponent further says that said _____, of ______, Liverpool, induced this deponent to purchase, of a man named _____, an agent of _____ & Co., of Liverpool, a contract for passages for this deponent and his family from New York to Toronto, in Canada. Deponent, when said _____ offered him such a passage contract, refused to purchase it, when said _____ urged him to buy it, alleging, as a reason, that he (_____) knew said ____ & Co. to be a very honourable house, and that the possession of such a contract on landing in New York would materially facilitate his continuing his journey to Canada, and he would run no risk of being swindled in New York, where all emigrants who had no contract ticket were subjected to the grossest impositions in a place called Castle Garden, where they had to land. On these representations this deponent was induced to give up his aversion against buying any ticket previous to arriving in New York, and he bought a contract of said _____ for himself and family, making 2 1/2 full passengers from New York to Toronto, and paid therefor [therefore?] one American gold coin of the value of twenty dollars. The ticket thus bought and paid for is dated the _____ September, 1857, numbered __, addressed to _______ of _____ street, New York, and signed for _______ & Co., by said ______, whose initials are illegible, the bank in which the contract is filled in being printed in the German language. Deponent further says that after he had been thus booked in Liverpool, he embarked in said ship, ______ _______, which lay at anchor in the river, and after he had been on board of the ship for seventy-four hours a man came on board distributing cards among the passengers, on which a caution was printed against buying any contract for inland passages in America before arriving there, and recommending the Landing Depot at Castle Garden, in New York, as a government institution. This deponent as well as a number of other passengers received this caution when they were unable to profit by it any longer. Deponent further says that on arriving at the Emigrant Landing Depot, in New York, he observed that those who held no European contracts could provide themselves with railroad tickets in the very building in which they were landed, and that they were dispatched to the railroads from the very landing dock. On seeking information from the officers of the Commissioners of Emigration, at the depot, this deponent learned that the proper charge from New York to Toronto was $5 50 (five and one-half dollars) for every adult, and half of this amount for every child from 4 to 12 years of age, and that $13 75 (thirteen and three-quarter dollars) was the proper charge for his family, being 2 1/2 adults. This deponent has therefore been defrauded in the sum of $6 25 (six and one-quarter dollars) or œ1 6s 6d, by the very honourable house recommended to him so strongly by said ______, of ______, Liverpool. And this deponent has moreover to leave the Landing Depot to get his contract fulfilled by the addressee, whilst those passengers who have no European contracts can remain quietly in the depot until they are taken directly from the same to the point of departure of the railroads. And further deponent says not. Sworn before me, this 19th } RUDOLPH GARRIGUE, day of October, 1857, } Commissioner of Emigration. In our judgement Mr. "Free Trade" travels out of the legitimate domain of criticism, because he interferes with private interests; but as has thought proper to do this it gives us the opportunity of saying that we feel pleased there are even two houses in the trade who, he says, give only 5 per cent. commission. We are told that these two houses, nevertheless, do the largest business, and we have a strong suspicion if their opinion was known we should find that their business can be conducted without the paying commissions at all; but at the same time we regret to find other houses so respectable as those named encouraging the runners by paying 7 1/2 per cent. We are aware that 10, 12 1/2, and 15 per cent. have been paid to runners on passage money, but we did not expect to find the principle recognised in the quarters he names. Perhaps our critic will tell us what benefit results to the passenger by this operation. Mr. " Free Trade" treats us to another effusion in the Northern Times of the 25th inst. In it, like the former, he displays extraordinary ignorance of his subject. We are not surprised at that; but if he cannot advance argument he should endeavour to stick to the truth. He has departed from it in several instances in this, his second attempt, to defend imposition. He tells us that we are agreeable to a compromise, and that we said so last week. That is not true. What we did say was this, - "We have no objections to a compromise at the moment, conditionally, and till such time as proper accommodation can be provided for the emigrant." We repeat that sentiment, but whatever course his friends may adopt we shall not stop till this question has been adjudicated upon by the highest tribunal in the nation. "Free Trade" is a little indignant with the magistrate for applying the word "plunder" in connection with the case reported last week, and gives a definition of it to show that Mr. Alderman Holme was wrong. Now, we think it was exactly the right word in the right place. He says his definition of the term is that given by one of our "latest lexicographers." We have not looked into the authorities, and therefore cannot say whether the definition of our critic is anything like that of "Walker" or "Johnson;" but we think it more than probable it is from one who interrupts the word somewhat after the fashion of the former author. But however that may be, we feel quite convinced that Mr. Holme will be fully confirmed in the fitness of the word to the circumstances, when he peruses the affidavits we publish this day, notwithstanding the conclusion at which "Free Trade" has arrived in reference to the particular point at issue. If the impositions therein set forth be not "plunder," then the word should be set down in our dictionaries as meaning nothing. We have great pleasure in referring our readers to the remarks made by the Rev. V. M. White, at a meeting of the Emigrants' Friends Society and Bethel Union, on this subject; they will be found at length below. We hope the gentlemen associated with him in this institution participate in his views and sentiments, and that they will afford us their valuable aid in the direction pointed out by Mr. White. The harbour-masters' sub-committee invited certain brokers, and a deputation from the runners, to meet them on Wednesday. We believe an interview did take place, but the proceedings of the Dock Committee, on Thursday, give us no insight as to the decision at which the sub-committee had arrived. We hope they will consider well the entire question before committing themselves to any course of action whatever. "Hibernicus," whose letter appears in the Northern Times of yesterday, will have our intention, in his turn; meantime, we may just say, for his comfort and consolation, that the eggs in the "mare's nest" he has discovered are all addled, without a single exception.Close