FROM OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS ***





  Transcriber’s Note
  Italic text displayed as: _italic_




  THE

  HORRORS

  OF

  _NEGRO SLAVERY_,

  _&c._


  SECOND EDITION.


  _Price One Shilling._




S. GOSNELL, _Printer, Little Queen Street_.




  THE

  HORRORS

  OF THE

  _NEGRO SLAVERY_

  EXISTING IN OUR

  West Indian Islands,

  _IRREFRAGABLY DEMONSTRATED_

  FROM

  OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS

  RECENTLY PRESENTED TO

  THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.


  SECOND EDITION.


  LONDON:

  PRINTED FOR J. HATCHARD, PICCADILLY; MESS. RICHARDSONS,
  CORNHILL; R. BICKERSTAFF, ESSEX STREET, STRAND;
  AND HAZARD, BATH.
  1805.




  THE
  _HORRORS_
  OF
  NEGRO SLAVERY,
  _&c._


In the last Session of Parliament a variety of papers respecting
the Slave Trade was laid on the table of the House of Commons, and
among them, the following extract of a letter from Lord SEAFORTH,
the Governor of Barbadoes, to Lord HOBART, dated at Barbadoes, the
18th March 1802, viz. “Your Lordship will observe in the last days
proceedings of the Assembly, that _the majority of the House had
taken considerable offence at a message of mine, recommending an act
to be passed to make the murder of a Slave felony. At present the
fine for the crime is only fifteen pounds currency, or_ ELEVEN POUNDS
FOUR SHILLINGS STERLING.”

It was difficult to conceive a stronger proof of the deplorably
unprotected condition of the _Negro Slaves_ in Barbadoes, the oldest
and most civilized of our slave colonies, than is furnished by the
above official document. In a community where even the _life_ of _a
Negro slave_ is estimated at the cheap rate of _eleven pounds four
shillings sterling_, and where a proposition to raise its legal
value to a price which may be less revolting to European feelings
is resented as an affront by a grave legislative assembly; it would
argue an utter ignorance of the nature of man, and of the principles
by which his conduct is usually guided, to expect that the general
treatment of Negro slaves should be humane and lenient. But we are
not at present reduced to the necessity of inferring, by the aid of
disputable analogies, the practical nature of the existing slavery,
from the state of the laws respecting it. What might, last year,
have been considered by some as matter of presumption merely, of
presumption, however, sufficiently strong to remove all doubt from
unprejudiced minds, is now matter of fact. We have now the practice
of slavery so graphically described, in some further documents of
unquestionable authority, as to supersede the necessity of reasoning,
and to silence the most determined stickler for West Indian humanity.

On the 25th of February 1805, a number of additional papers
respecting the Slave Trade was presented to the House of Commons by
His Majesty. To these papers it is the purpose of this pamphlet to
call the attention of the public, as exhibiting a picture of Negro
bondage, with which every individual in the kingdom ought to be made
fully acquainted, who has a heart to feel for the miseries of his
fellow-creatures, or a voice to raise against that detestable traffic
which is the main prop of colonial despotism.

The first thing which occurs in these papers particularly deserving
of notice is a continuation of the correspondence between Lord
SEAFORTH and the Secretary of State. The following is a transcript of
it, with the addition of a few notes intended to illustrate the text:

  “_Extract of a Letter from Lord Seaforth to the Earl Camden, dated
  Barbadoes, 13th November 1804._

  “I also enclose four papers, numbered from number 1 to 4,
  containing, from different quarters, _reports on the horrid
  murders_ I mentioned in some former letters; _they are selected
  from a great number, among which there is not one in contradiction
  of the horrible facts_, though several of the letters are very
  concise and defective: the truth is, that nothing has given me
  more trouble to get to the bottom of than these businesses, _so
  horridly absurd are the prejudices of the people_[1]; however, a
  great part of my object is answered, by the alarm my interference
  has excited, and the attention it has called to the business; bills
  are already proposed to make murder felony in both the Council and
  the Assembly; but _I fear they will be thrown out for the present
  in the Assembly_; the Council are unanimous on the side of humanity.


  “(_President Ince’s Statement._)

  “On the 10th day of April 1804, on my return to Enmore in the
  evening, I found Mr. Justice Walton and Mr. Harding, former manager
  of Prettejohn’s estate, and now the manager of the Society’s
  estate, attached to the support of Codrington, College. Mr.
  Walton told me that Mr. Harding had brought before him a man of
  the name of Henry Halls, a private soldier in the St. Michael’s
  or Royal regiment, who had, in presence of Mr. Harding, in a most
  wanton, malicious manner, murdered a Negro woman, that he did not
  know personally, but had since heard she was the property of Mr.
  Clarke, the owner of the estate called Simmons’s; that she was a
  valuable slave, and _had five or six children_. Mr. Walton said,
  that _Halls seemed to be very indifferent about the crime_, and
  that he had called upon me to know what was to be done with him,
  as Mr. Walton said, _in his situation as a Magistrate, the law of
  the island admitted him no jurisdiction or authority over him, and
  he did not consider he had a right to commit him to prison without
  my order_[2]. Mr. Harding then gave the following testimony: That
  he was returning from town, and just above the Line of Pilgrim he
  overtook several market Negroes, and this man, Halls, on the road;
  he did not know this man at the time, but he had his musket and
  bayonet fixed over his shoulder, and his regimentals, as returning
  from the alarm which had arisen that morning, and discharged at
  noon; that when he overtook this man it was not six o’clock in the
  evening; as he drew near him, he heard him muttering some words,
  and saw him run after some Negroes with his bayonet charged; that
  the woman was on the other side of the road still going up; and
  as he came up, this man, Halls, stopped until the woman came by,
  and immediately crossed the road, as _Halls made after the woman,
  and plunged the bayonet into her body, when the poor creature
  dropped, and without a groan expired_. He immediately went to him,
  and spoke harshly to him, and said, he ought to be hanged, for
  he never saw a more wicked, unprovoked murder, and that he would
  certainly carry him before a magistrate, and that he should be sent
  to gaol: and he said, ‘FOR WHAT? KILLING A NEGRO[3]?’ On which he
  got assistance, and brought him to Mr. Walton the Magistrate, and
  that he, Mr. Harding, had accompanied Mr. Walton to me, to relate
  the fact. I told Mr. Walton that I regretted, with real concern,
  the deficiency in our law; but that there was a penalty due to the
  King[4] in such cases; and that, as Mr. Harding had sufficiently
  substantiated the fact, I would order him to be committed till he
  paid the forfeiture, or a suit should be commenced against him:
  accordingly he was sent to prison, where he now remains, and under
  arrest from Mr. Clarke’s representatives, to be recovered according
  to law, and the King’s fine, and will possibly be there for life,
  as I hear he is not worth a shilling, nor no expectancy ever to pay
  it. Perhaps, my Lord, it was a stretch of power in me to order
  commitment before a recovery of the fine; but the evidence of Mr.
  Harding, a man of unblemished character, the circumstances of the
  case so horrid, so wickedly deliberate and unprovoked, conspired
  to induce me to secure his person until the only remedy of some
  punishment could be applied[5]. Lamentable indeed is it, that our
  Assembly (for I cannot allow Legislature to form the word) should
  look upon such things with cold indifference, and not provide that
  just remedy which the law of God and man in every other civilized
  community but _this_, has in effect, and even upon larger extent of
  population and slavery; in Jamaica not the smallest inconvenience
  has ever arisen. Surely! surely! they will be more disposed to hear
  reason, and to establish justice!!

  “To the second query from your Lordship; I believe the fact
  relates to the case which was instituted by action in the Court of
  Exchequer, before your Excellency left the Government, as I signed
  the writ when Chief Baron, at the suit of Colbeck against Crone;
  and I understand judgment has been admitted without being given to
  Jury, against Crone in favour of Colbeck; but whether the King’s
  fine is included in that recovery I really do not know, and your
  Excellency may be better informed from the present Chief Baron or
  the Attorney General. The circumstances of that case I do not know
  exactly; from common report, they must have been richly deserving
  of the _jus per coll._

  “To the third query.—I never heard any official account of the
  case. I understand from inquiry, that the fact, as to the murder,
  is true; that the party’s name is Thomas Nowell, a butcher by
  trade, in the parish of St. Andrew; and that being in the direct
  vicinity of the Reverend Mr. Payne, and the Honourable Colonel
  Jordan, your Excellency may obtain a more particular account of
  this infamous wretch, who, I am told, ought to have been removed
  from society long ago.”


  “_Advocate General’s Letter to Lord Seaforth; dated October 25th,
  1804._

  “MY LORD,            _October 25th, 1804._

  “I have many apologies to make to your Lordship for not sending an
  earlier answer to the several questions respecting the Negroes who
  have of late been most wantonly and inhumanly murdered. The delay
  has been owing to the difficulty I have met with in procuring any
  thing like satisfactory information as to the last of the cases;
  and therefore I shall hope for your Lordship’s excuse.

  “With respect to the first; a man of the name of Halls, belonging
  to the Royal regiment, was returning home from his exercising duty,
  on one of his militia days; several Negroes were upon the road
  before him going on very quietly, and amongst them a woman big
  with child. Halls was in liquor, and was constantly bawling out to
  the Negroes and abusing them, and telling them if they did not get
  out of his way he would make them. On his beginning to run after
  them, they all got out of his reach, except this unfortunate woman;
  Halls ran up to her, and, _without the least provocation on her
  part, very coolly and deliberately stabbed her several times in the
  breast with his bayonet. The woman, I believe, was not killed upon
  the spot, but died soon afterwards._ Mr. Harding, the overseer of
  the Society’s plantation, was on his way home, and saw the whole
  transaction; he immediately secured Halls, and had him taken to
  gaol, where he now is.

  “As to the second; Mr. Colbeck, who lived as overseer on Cabbage-tree
  plantation in St. Lucy’s parish, had bought a new Negro boy out
  of the yard[6], and carried him home; taking a liking to the boy,
  he brought him into the house, and made him wait at table. Mr.
  Crone (the overseer of Colonel Rowe’s estate, and which is near to
  Cabbage-tree) visited Colbeck, had noticed the boy, and knew him
  well. A fire happening one night in the neighbourhood, Colbeck went
  to give assistance, and the boy followed him. On Colbeck’s return
  home he missed the boy; and as he did not make his appearance the
  next day, Colbeck sent round to the neighbours, _and particularly
  to Crone_, informing them that the boy was missing, and desiring
  them to send him home if they should meet with him. Two or three
  days elapsed, and the poor creature was first discovered in a
  gully, near to Colonel Rowe’s estate; and a number of Negroes were
  soon assembled about the place. The boy, naturally terrified with
  the threats, the noise, and the appearance of so many people, hid
  himself under a rock in the gully. By this time Crone and some
  other white persons had come up, _a fire was ordered to be put to
  the place where the boy was, and he was actually burnt out. From
  this hole the boy ran to a piece of water, which was near, and
  some of the Negroes went in after him. The boy, it is said, took
  up a stone and threw it at one of them. Crone, who it seems had
  brought a gun with him, levelled it at the boy, and shot him; and
  other guns, as I have understood, were also fired. The poor wretch
  was then dragged out of the water, and, without even sending to
  his master, a hole was immediately dug, and he was put into it by
  Crone’s order. I have been told that the boy was not quite dead
  when he was buried._ Colbeck, the owner, soon afterwards came up,
  and had the boy taken out of the ground; and there cannot be the
  least doubt that Crone must have known him to be Colbeck’s new
  Negro who had been missing. A man of the name of Hollingsworth, it
  was said, also fired at the boy, and Colbeck brought his action
  in the Exchequer, under the act of the island, against Crone and
  Hollingsworth. The cause was ready to be tried, and the Court had
  met for the purpose, when Crone and Hollingsworth thought proper
  to pay double the value of the boy, and 25_l._ for the use of the
  island, with all the costs, rather than suffer the business to go
  on; and this I am truly sorry to say was the _only_ punishment
  which could be inflicted for so barbarous and atrocious a crime.
  The Attorney General and myself were retained as counsel for
  Colbeck, and received instructions to the above purport. The
  case did not appear so strong against Hollingsworth; but I verily
  believe that, as against Crone, it would have been substantiated by
  the fullest evidence. It is due to Colonel Rowe to observe, that he
  was in England when the horrid transaction took place.

  “As to the third: A man of the name of Nowell, who lives in
  St. Andrew’s parish, as I understand, had been in the habit of
  behaving most brutally towards his wife, and one day went so far
  as to lock her up in a room, and confine her in chains. A Negro
  woman belonging to this man, _touched with compassion for her
  unfortunate mistress_, undertook privately to release her; Nowell
  found it out, and, as I first heard the story, _had the Negro’s
  tongue immediately cut out nearly by the roots, of which she
  instantly died_. I have since been told, that _Nowell had the poor
  creature’s tongue put through a hole in a door, and cut a part of
  it off himself; but that she is still alive_. This case has been
  told different ways; and I have not, _after many inquiries_, been
  able to satisfy myself as to the real truth[7]. Thus much I have
  no doubt is certain, that the wretch, Nowell, has most barbarously
  and cruelly used this Negro, merely because she acted a kind and
  compassionate part towards her mistress.

  “Permit me now, my Lord, as a Barbadian, to return you my warmest
  thanks for the zeal you have shewn in this business; and I trust
  the day is not far distant, when, through your Lordship’s
  exertions, I shall see that act in our statute-book repealed, which
  remains a disgrace to my country.

  “I have the honour to be, &c.
  “M. COULTHURST.

  “_The Right Honourable Lord Seaforth,
  &c. &c. &c._”


  “_Extract from the Reverend Mr. Pilgrim’s Letter to Lord Seaforth;
  dated St. James’s Parsonage, September 25th, 1804._

“The man who killed the woman near Pilgrim, is, I apprehend, named
Halls or Halts, one of Sir John Burney’s tenants, and belonging to
Saint Michael’s regiment of militia.

“The manager who shot the man in the water is named Crone, living
on Mr. H. Rowe’s plantation in Saint Lucy’s parish. The man was an
African, a slave to a Mr. Colbeck, the manager to a neighbouring
plantation, and had accidentally strayed from his master: Crone
seeing him, pursued him with several Negroes; the poor creature
pelted his pursuers with stones, and at length took refuge in a pond,
where he was inhumanly shot by the dastardly manager, and taken out
of the pond; I repeat, my Lord, what I have heard, though I could
hope, for the sake of humanity, my information has been false, _and
buried him while yet alive_.

“Nowell, a butcher, living in Saint Joseph’s parish, is the wretch
_who murdered the slave for letting his wife out of confinement. The
circumstances of this horrid barbarity are almost too shocking to be
related. On discovering the poor creature had been instrumental to
his wife’s escape, he obliged her to put her tongue through a hole
in the board, to which he fastened it on the opposite side with a
fork, and leaving her in that situation for some time, he afterwards
drew out her tongue by the roots._

“This, my Lord, is what I have heard relative to the cases on
which your Lordship desires information; and as I have heard the
circumstances I have mentioned from different persons, told in nearly
the same manner, I am led to suspect that the statement will be found
to be but too correct.” Papers, &c. p. 7-10.


  “_Extract of a Letter from the Right Honourable Lord Seaforth to
  Earl Camden; dated Pilgrim, 7th January 1805._

“I enclose the Attorney General’s letter to me on the subject of the
Negroes _so most wantonly murdered_. I am sorry to say, _several
other instances of the same barbarity have occurred with which I have
not troubled your Lordship, as I only wished to make you acquainted
with the subject in general_.”


  “_Copy of a Letter from Mr. Beckles to Lord Seaforth; dated 19th
  November 1804._

        “_Bay Plantation_,
  “MY LORD,           _19th November 1804_.

  “I have delayed to answer your Excellency’s note of the 19th of
  September, enclosing queries as to some cases of cruel murders
  committed upon Slaves, with the hope of being able to establish the
  facts, so as to communicate them to your Excellency without any
  doubt of their authenticity; but, notwithstanding _every inquiry,
  I can make no discovery of the murder which had been currently
  reported to have been committed by one Nowell, of the parish of St.
  Andrew_[8]. The fact is by many supposed to be true, at the same
  time that it is denied by others; and all that I can ascertain is,
  that _Nowell is in general a cruel man to his Slaves_.

  “The militia-man is —— Halls, of St. Michael’s regiment. Returning
  from his duty upon an alarm, after stopping at a dram-shop, where
  he had drank so as to be rather intoxicated; hearing some Negroes
  singing before him, who were returning from their daily labour,
  he called out to them that he would kill them; upon which a Mr.
  Harding, who was going the same way, told him to take care what he
  was about; he immediately pursued the Negroes, who not supposing
  that he really intended to do them any injury, but imagining that
  what he had said was in joke, did not endeavour to escape, but as
  he came up to them, they separated to make room for him to pass;
  the nearest to him being a woman _far advanced in pregnancy, he ran
  his bayonet into her, without the smallest provocation, and killed
  her on the spot_: Mr. Harding and another gentleman, who were
  eye-witnesses, seized him, and carried him before the President,
  who sent him to prison.

  “In the other case, which happened in the parish of St. Lucy, two
  white men were concerned, Crone and Hollingsworth. A Mr. Colebeck,
  the manager of a plantation in the neighbourhood, had some months
  before purchased an African lad, who was much attached to his
  person, and slept in a passage contiguous to his chamber. On
  Sunday night there was an alarm of fire in the plantation, which
  induced Mr. Colebeck to go out hastily, and the next morning he
  missed the lad, who he supposed had intended to follow him in the
  night, and had mistaken his way. He sent to his neighbours, and to
  Mr. Crone among the rest, to inform them that his African lad had
  accidentally strayed from him; that he could not speak a word of
  English, and that possibly he might be found breaking canes, or
  taking something else for his support; in which case he requested
  that they would not injure him, but return him, and he would pay
  any damage he might have committed. A day or two after Mr. Colebeck
  was informed that Crone and Hollingsworth had killed a Negro in
  a neighbouring gully and buried him there. He went to Crone to
  inquire into the truth of the report, and intended to have the
  grave opened to see whether it was his African lad. _Crone told
  him a Negro had been killed and buried there_; but assured him
  it was not his, for he knew him very well, and he need not be at
  the trouble of opening the grave. _Upon this, Colebeck went away
  satisfied_; but receiving further information, which left no doubt
  upon his mind that it was his Negro, he returned and opened the
  grave, and found it to be so. I was Mr. Colebeck’s leading counsel,
  and the facts stated in my brief were as follows: that Crone and
  Hollingsworth being informed that there was a Negro lurking in
  the gully, went armed with muskets, and took several Negro men
  with them. The poor African, seeing a parcel of men come to attack
  him, was frightened; he took up a stone to defend himself, and
  retreated into a cleft rock, where they could not easily come at
  him; they then went for some trash, put it into the crevice of the
  rock behind him, and set it on fire; _after it had burnt so as to
  scorch the poor fellow_, he ran into a pool of water near by; they
  sent a Negro to bring him out, and he threw the stone at the Negro;
  upon which _the two white men fired several times at him with the
  guns loaded with shot, and the Negroes pelted him with stones. He
  was at length dragged out of the pool in a dying condition, for
  he had not only received several bruises from the stones, but his
  breast was so pierced with the shot that it was like a cullender.
  The white Savages ordered the Negroes to dig a grave, and whilst
  they were digging it, the poor creature made signs of begging for
  water, which was not given to him; but as soon as the grave was
  dug, he was thrown into it, and covered over, and there seems to be
  some doubt whether he was then quite dead._ Crone and Hollingsworth
  deny this; but Colebeck assured me, that he could prove it by more
  than one witness; and I have reason to believe it to be true,
  because on the day of trial Crone and Hollingsworth did not suffer
  the cause to come to a hearing, but paid the penalties and the
  costs of suit, which it is not supposed they would have done had
  they been innocent.

  “I have the honour to be, &c.
  “JOHN BECKLES[9].

  “_The Right Honourable Lord Seaforth,
  &c. &c. &c._”

One circumstance of the above narrative may not strike the minds of
some readers with its due force, although to me it appears to be
the most affecting part of the whole case. They may have been led
to conceive, that whatever atrocity there was in the proceedings of
CRONE and his companion, yet in COLBECK there was some approximation
to European feeling. But how stands the fact with respect to COLBECK?
On being coolly told that a Negro _had_ been killed and buried,—told
so by the murderer himself, his neighbour and frequent visitor;—is he
shocked by the tale? Does he express any horror or indignation on the
occasion? No! he goes away _satisfied with the assurance, that the
murdered Negro is not his own_. Let the reader give its due weight
to this one circumstance, and he will be convinced that a state of
society exists in the West Indies, of which an inhabitant of this
happy island can form no adequate conception. Had it been his horse
instead of his Negro Slave, Colbeck would have been affected in much
the same way as he is said to have been.

From this impressive circumstance may also be inferred the value of
West Indian testimony, when given in favour of West Indian humanity.
Mr. COLBECK, for example, would naturally enough be spoken of as
a man of humanity by his West Indian brethren, and they would
probably be sincere in giving him that praise. But who is this man
of humanity? It is one who, hearing that a fellow-creature has been
cruelly and wantonly murdered, goes away SATISFIED, because he
himself has sustained no pecuniary loss by the murder! In truth, the
moral perceptions and feelings which prevail in that quarter of the
globe, are wholly different from those which are found on this side
of the Atlantic. An exception may, indeed, be made in favour of a few
men of enlightened minds; but the remark is just as applied to the
bulk of the community—_the people_, whose _prejudices_ are stated by
Lord SEAFORTH to be so horribly _absurd_, as to resist all measures
for remedying this shocking state of society.

We shall doubtless hear it argued on the present as on former
occasions, when similar barbarities have been incontestably proved,
that “individual instances of cruelty, like those which have now been
produced, are no proofs of general inhumanity. Instances, of, at
least, equal atrocity, might be collected from the annals of the Old
Bailey. But how very unjust would it be to regard these as exhibiting
a fair view of the English character?”

There is, however, a remarkable defect in the analogy which is here
attempted to be established; a defect which seems fatal to the
argument. In this happy country, when we hear that crimes have been
perpetrated, we hear also that they have been punished: we have at
least the satisfaction of knowing, that no practicable means are left
unattempted for securing the criminals, and bringing them to justice.
But is this the case in Barbadoes? We hear of great crimes indeed;
but we hear at the same time of their _impunity_. The criminals are
not under the necessity of endeavouring to elude detection, or of
screening themselves from prosecution by concealment: they even talk
of their crimes with a shocking indifference. The laws themselves
conspire to defeat the ends of justice. We find, not the _lawless_
part of the community, but the legislative assembly of the island,
sanctioning the perpetration of the foulest murders, by their refusal
to recognise murder as a felonious act. We find even officers of the
Crown neglecting the obvious duty of instituting a legal inquest
into these murders. To what is this neglect to be attributed? To
the contagious influence of those _prejudices_, and of that savage
indifference to Negro life, which evidently pervade the _people_ at
large? Or is it to be accounted for on the ground that the law has
actually deprived His Majesty’s Attorney General, and His Majesty’s
Coroner, of the constitutional power of instituting such an inquest?
In either case our colonial system will stand justly chargeable, not
only with outraging every feeling of humanity, but with violating
every acknowledged principle of justice.

But the West Indians and their friends will probably have recourse to
another argument. “Granting,” they may say, “in its fullest extent,
the truth of all that you have stated with respect to Barbadoes,
it is yet very unfair to extend the charge of inhumanity, which is
justly brought against that island, to the West Indies in general.
The Legislatures of all the other islands have passed laws which
make the murder of a Slave felony; they have also provided such
salutary regulations ‘for the support,’ and ‘for the encouragement,
protection, and better government of Slaves,’ as serve to place them
in a situation of even enviable security and comfort.”

It will be readily admitted, that the Legislatures of most, if not
all the islands, with the exception of Barbadoes, have passed laws
which make the murder of a Slave a felonious act. It must also be
admitted, that many regulations have been framed and placed on the
insular statute-books, which, if faithfully enforced according
to their _apparent_ intent, could not fail to produce beneficial
results. But have the clauses which contain these regulations been
carried into effect? Are they any thing more than a blind, intended
to conceal from the eyes of the British public the enormity of our
West Indian system? Was it ever even in the contemplation of the
lawgivers themselves that these laws should be executed? The papers
to which so large a reference has already been made happily contain a
distinct answer to these questions: that answer it will now be proper
to state.

On the 4th of October 1804, it appears that Earl Camden addressed
letters to the Governors of the different West Indian islands,
requiring from them information on a variety of points. A copy of
the heads of information transmitted to one of the islands, Dominica,
will furnish the reader with a sufficiently clear idea of the nature
of these requirements. It is as follows:

“An account of all the Negro Slaves imported every year since 1788,
and of the number re-exported in each year.

“The most authentic and particular account which can be obtained, of
the number of Negro Slaves, dividing them into classes of male and
female; children from 1 to 12; youths from 12 to 20, full-grown men
and women from 20 to 60; and the aged; and stating, as accurately as
possible, the number in each class respectively: also,

“An account of the total number of free Negroes and coloured people.

“_N.B._ It is desirable that the manner in which the information is
obtained, and the account made up, should be stated as distinctly as
possible.

“You are also desired to transmit at the same time, in original and
duplicate, the following further information, viz.

“A list and abstract, or general account of all returns, made upon
oath by owners, overseers, or managers, in pursuance of the 7th
and 8th clauses or sections of an act, passed in December 1788,
intituled, ‘An Act for the Encouragement, Protection, and better
Management of Slaves[10].’

“If it appears that no such accounts or returns have been duly made,
or that they have been in any great measure neglected, you are
requested further to send,

“An account or list of all convictions had, and fines or forfeitures
recovered, and of all prosecutions commenced against the defaulters,
pursuant to the said act of Assembly.

“If the said returns and accounts have been wholly or generally
neglected, and no prosecutions have taken place for that cause, you
are to send a certificate to that effect.

“You will also state whether the island had in 1788, or in 1799, when
the act was made perpetual, or yet has, any and what parochial or
established clergy, by whom the regulations in sections 3 and 4, have
been or can be carried into effect[11].”

To these inquiries no answer appears to have been returned by the
Governors, either of Jamaica or the Bahamas. From those of the
Leeward Islands, St. Vincent and Grenada, letters have been received,
stating the difficulty of immediately complying with the requisitions
of Earl Camden, but promising to take measures, without delay, for
procuring the desired information. Now here it may be proper to
remark, that with respect to several important heads of inquiry,
particularly those which relate to the execution of the laws enacted
for the protection of Slaves, a very short delay must have been
sufficient. The Governors, by referring to the Secretary of the
island, or to the clerks of the several courts of record, could have
at once ascertained whether the legal provisions mentioned by Earl
Camden had or had not been carried into effect. If they had; a copy
of the record would have been all the answer which was requisite:
If they had not; it was only necessary to say so, and to state the
reasons of the failure.

This manly and becoming course has been pursued only in one
instance, viz. in that of the Governor of Dominica: and his answers,
though defective in some important particulars, yet contain a
candid disclosure of facts, and are therefore calculated to throw
considerable light, not only on the causes which may possibly have
impeded the returns from the other islands, but on the general state
of Negro slavery in the West Indies.

Governor Prevost, in his letter to Earl Camden, represents Dominica
“as distinguished by the laws it has passed for the encouragement,
protection, and government of Slaves;” but he goes on to remark, “I
am sorry _I cannot add that they are as religiously enforced as you
could wish_[12].” Now this is precisely what has been asserted,
with respect to the laws in question, by the advocates of abolition,
and as strenuously denied by West Indians. The laws may look well
on paper, but they are inefficient: nay, they were never meant to
be otherwise. If any one is so extremely ignorant of West Indian
affairs, as not to have been already apprized of this fact, let him
read the following passage in an official letter of the Governor of
Dominica:

“The Act of the Legislature, intituled, ‘An Act for the
Encouragement, Protection, and better Government of Slaves,’ _appears
to have been considered, from the day it was passed until this
hour, as a_ POLITICAL MEASURE _to avert the interference of the
mother-country in the management of Slaves_[13]. Having said this,
your Lordship will not be surprised to learn the clause seventh of
that Bill has been wholly neglected[14]. As to the eighth clause, it
is too intimately connected with the public interest to be allowed to
sleep.

“I am apprehensive you will find the _account_ of all convictions
had, and fines or forfeitures recovered, and of all prosecutions
commenced against the defaulters, pursuant to the said act, _very
unsatisfactory_; however, here, now and then, the act has shewn some
signs of life.” P. 36.

After examining with the utmost attention the _account_ to which
Governor Prevost refers (and which is inserted at page 39), it does
not appear that _a single fine or forfeiture has been recovered_,
nor _a single prosecution commenced against defaulters, during the_
SEVENTEEN YEARS that the act has been, not to say in force, for that
would be ridiculous, but in existence. Of convictions there is indeed
a considerable number, but, with the exception of two, they are all
convictions of Negroes. Of these two, one is for the murder of a
Negro: but the record which states the conviction, states also that
the convict was pardoned by Governor Johnstone. The murderer was a
soldier in the 68th regiment. The other case is that of a man who was
fined thirty pounds currency for ill-treating a Slave, the property
of Doctor Fellan. No other particulars are mentioned respecting this
singular trial and conviction. The _signs of life_, therefore, which
have been shewn by this act, as far as regards the _protection_ of
Negro Slaves, must be admitted to be very equivocal.

Governor Prevost refers Earl Camden to a letter from the Rev. John
Audain, Rector of St. George’s, as explaining “why the clauses 3
and 4 _are not carried into effect_.” Mr. Audain’s letter, however,
throws little light on the subject. He can furnish no returns of
marriages, because (he says) “a very few even of the free coloured
people marry, and _not one Slave_ since I have been here. Why they do
not, I readily conceive, particularly the Slaves. Their owners _do
not exhort them to it_, and they shew no dispositions themselves to
alter that mode of cohabitation which they have been accustomed to.”
P. 40.

It appears then, that the 3rd and 4th clauses of this boasted act
are as nugatory as the 7th: “they are not,” says Governor PREVOST,
“carried into effect[15].” And yet if the reader will turn back to
page 20, he will find that these clauses are introduced by a preamble
of peculiar solemnity. They are enacted with the professed view
of “_improving the morals and advancing the temporal and eternal
happiness of the Slaves_.” What is this but impious mockery? Have
they been executed? No. Has a single penalty been enforced for their
non-execution? No. Surely, after this discovery, it is impossible
that such mere mummery of legislation should continue to impose on
the good sense of the people of Great Britain. They will see that
the difference between Barbadoes, and the other islands, is in fact
merely nominal: and that the same lamentable deficiency of legal
protection, the same system of unqualified oppression, characterizes
Negro bondage throughout the whole extent of our West Indian
possessions.

Before the pamphlet closes, it will be proper to devote a few pages
to the consideration of a long Report of the Assembly of Jamaica
which forms a part of these papers.

The picture given in that Report of the situation of the West Indian
islands is in the highest degree discouraging; but it is represented
by the reporters as less gloomy than the truth. “A faithful detail,”
it is said, p. 26, “would have the appearance of a frightful
caricature; and unless speedy and efficacious measures are adopted
for giving permanent relief, by a radical change of measures, we must
suppose that the West Indian islands are doomed to perish as useless
appendages to the British empire.” Credit is represented to be at an
end; the planters, generally, to be labouring under the pressure of
accumulating debt; and the greatest distress to pervade all classes
of the community. Admitting the fidelity of this representation, a
question will still arise respecting the causes which have produced
so unfavourable a state of things. The Report affirms, that it
has chiefly been produced by the enormous duties imposed on West
Indian produce; by the competition of East Indian sugars; and by the
attempts made to abolish the Slave trade.

The two first points would lead to very lengthened details, and
are foreign from the design of this pamphlet. It may be observed,
however, in general, that notwithstanding the labour employed by the
reporters to prove that the additional duties imposed on West Indian
produce fall not on the consumer, as in every other instance, but
on the grower, no peculiarity appears to exist in the case under
consideration, which exempts it from the operation of the general
rule; a rule which is familiar to the merest sciolist in political
economy. The protecting duties imposed on East India sugar appear
also to be sufficiently high to exclude them from competition with
West Indian sugar in the British market. A part of the East Indian
sugar, it is true, is consumed in this country; but it is a small
part, the demand for it being confined to a few individuals, who
are willing to pay a high price for sugar rather than wound their
consciences, by using what is procured through the oppression of
their brethren: the rest is exported.

The attempts made to abolish the Slave trade operate, it is said,
to the disadvantage of the island, by increasing the danger of
insurrection among the Slaves[16], and by discouraging the hope of
a permanent supply of labourers. West Indian property, it is added,
is thus so greatly diminished in its value, that merchants will no
longer advance money upon it; and without an advance of money, the
plantations cannot be carried on with advantage.

The Report, however, overlooks the effect produced on the value of
property in the old islands by the extended cultivation of Trinidad
and Dutch Guiana. But is not the great and growing rivalry of these
colonies a far more formidable evil than that of the East Indies?
Why then have they so much insisted on the latter, while the former,
though much more obvious and much more mischievous, is passed over in
silence? Is it that the reporters have a sympathy with the owners of
Slaves, which even self-interest cannot overcome; and that they dread
the precedent of cultivating sugar by free men, as is done in Bengal?
They must feel that it would have been greatly to the advantage of
the old islands, had they consented to an abolition of the Slave
trade fourteen years ago, before the fertile plains of Guiana had
yet been brought into cultivation by the enormous amount of British
capital, which has been transferred thither.

The reporters labour to keep out of view the dangers which threaten
Jamaica from the example and proximity of St. Domingo, and from an
increase of the Negro population in the island; and they absurdly
argue, that the more the Negro population is increased, the greater
will be the security of the West Indies. As to the plea so strongly
urged, of danger, even from discussing the question of abolition
in the British Parliament, it is rendered almost ridiculous by the
circumstance, that the debates which have taken place on that subject
are regularly published, at great length, in the official newspapers
of Jamaica; and that even _the present Report_, in which the question
of abolition is largely discussed, has been inserted, by authority of
the Assembly, in the Royal Gazette of that island.

The reporters are greatly displeased that they should be thought not
to know their own interests, and what is most _likely_ to promote
them. This however is an imputation which they share in common with
a great part of mankind, and which particularly attaches to all who,
like them, are engaged in gambling speculations. The West Indian
party, it will be remembered, vehemently opposed the bills for
regulating the Middle Passage, and yet they have since confessed,
that those bills have been productive of great benefit to their
concerns: and had they not been so infatuated as to oppose, fourteen
years ago, unfortunately with more effect, the abolition of the Slave
trade, they would have been saved the ruinous competition of Dutch
Guiana; and they would have had at this moment the almost exclusive
possession of the sugar-market of Europe.

The reporters insist with much earnestness on their right to the
continuance of the Slave trade, on the ground of its having been
sanctioned by Acts of Parliament. But is it not absurd to suppose
that any Acts of Parliament, which may have been framed to encourage
the importation of African labourers into the West Indies, can have
conveyed to West Indians the right of establishing such a frightful
system of oppression as the preceding part of this pamphlet has
proved to exist among them? What act can be produced which binds the
Imperial Parliament to uphold a system so outrageously opposed to
every principle of British policy and of British law; and not only to
uphold it, but to enlarge its influence by the perpetual increase of
its wretched victims? Granting that West Indians have that claim to
which they pretend on the justice and faith of Parliament, the claim
attaches to this country, and not to Africa, which was no party in
the contract.

The reporters are very indignant that any of the parliamentary
orators should have dared to express an opinion that the Slave trade
is “contrary to the principles of justice and humanity;” and they
add, that “the particular accusations of oppression, without the
means of redress; of avaricious and unfeeling rigour towards our
Slaves, unrestrained by a sense of interest, or the dictates of
humanity; heaped upon the inhabitants of the British West Indian
colonies; _have been repelled and refuted by such irrefragable
evidence, that they can now make little impression, except on the
prejudiced and uninformed_.” Page 12.

How far a sense of interest or the dictates of humanity are capable
of preventing _unfeeling rigour_ from being exercised towards Negro
Slaves, let the correspondence of Lord Seaforth, already referred
to, testify. If farther evidence were required on this point, that
of Governor Prevost might be adduced. He expressly declares (p.
34), that “the interest of the master in his Slaves’ well-being is
_not_ always _a sufficient check_.” But even supposing that a sense
of interest should operate with the _owners_ of Negro Slaves in
restraining cruel treatment, yet what is likely to be the operation
of this potent principle in cases where the management of the estates
of absent proprietors is left to attornies, whose commissions are
enlarged in proportion to the amount of the crops; and to overseers,
who hold their office during the pleasure of those attornies, and
whose reputation as planters depends not on the increase of Slaves,
but on the increase of the yearly produce of the estate? It is the
more necessary to make the inquiry, because by far the greater
part of the sugar plantations of Jamaica are in this predicament.
Allowing, therefore, that the principle of self-interest possesses
all the force which is attributed to it, yet in the present
circumstances of Jamaica its operation on the whole is more likely to
be injurious than beneficial to the Negro Slaves[17].

But what is this “IRREFRAGABLE TESTIMONY” to which the Assembly
of Jamaica refer, as disproving the allegations of abolitionists?
It cannot have been the correspondence of Lord Seaforth with Earl
Camden, for that had not yet been made public. They ought to have
pointed to the chapter and page in which this invaluable testimony
lies concealed. For my own part, anxious as I am that this great
cause should have an impartial hearing, I still would be willing
that it should be decided without referring to any other testimony
than that which has already been produced by West Indians and their
friends. Even on their own shewing, the charges of “_inhumanity and
injustice_,” at least to the moral perceptions of Englishmen, are not
only not disproved, but incontrovertibly established. West Indians
cannot deny that the Negroes whom they purchase are procured in
Africa by means the most revolting to _humanity and justice_. BRYAN
EDWARDS, their own historian and apologist, has said, that to deny
this would be “insult and mockery.” They cannot deny that the Negroes
are transported in fetters to the West Indies, and there sold like
cattle in a fair. Neither can they deny that the Negroes, being sold,
become the absolute property of their purchaser, who may separate
parents from children and from each other, and sell them when and to
whom he pleases: that, moreover, West Indian Slaves have no civil
rights whatever, which are not equally enjoyed by brutes, the parade
of laws in their favour signifying nothing, as has already been
proved, while their evidence is inadmissible in a court of justice,
and while the men who administer those laws have an interest, real or
supposed, in their violation: and that therefore no effectual limit
can be put to the master’s discretion, either as to the quantity
of food to be given, of labour to be enforced, or of punishment to
be inflicted. It is a fact equally undeniable, that the labour of
Negro Slaves is extracted from them, as it is from a team of oxen,
by the lash or the terror of the cart-whip[18]: that, in a climate
congenial to their own, they nevertheless decrease so fast as to
require constant importations to keep up their wasted numbers: and
lastly, that they are regarded as an inferior order of beings[19];
from which it flows as a corollary that they can have no claim to a
participation in those rights of humanity, or in that sympathy which
men in general are willing to bestow on those whom they consider
as fellow men. Now these are all points of general notoriety: they
are either distinctly admitted by the West Indians, who have given
evidence before the Privy Council and the House of Commons; or they
are established beyond dispute by written documents which the West
Indian Legislatures and Governors have officially furnished. That
they are confirmed in some important particulars by the papers which
have now been reviewed, will scarcely be controverted. If, however,
the bare statement of the above facts, facts, let it be remembered,
resting on West Indian testimony, should amount (as it will appear
to do to all who have not been accustomed to breathe the moral
atmosphere of our Slave colonies) to a charge of “injustice and
inhumanity,” of “oppression,” and “unfeeling rigour,” against the
West Indian system, then surely the bold and unqualified assertion
that such a charge has been “_refuted by irrefragable testimony_,”
has no foundation on which to stand.

The reporters have incidentally introduced into their Report a
comparison between the state of the Negro Slaves and that of
“the oppressed peasantry” of Bengal. After giving an exaggerated
representation of the wretchedness of the latter, they add, “such
is the situation of twenty millions of free subjects of the British
empire in India, whilst its legislature is hunting for _imaginary
misery_[20] in the West Indian colonies, where the lot of the
labourer is a thousand times more fortunate.” P. 18.

I would here ask the framers of this Report a few questions,
which may serve to throw light on the comparison, which they have
instituted. Do they not know that the Bengal peasant is not dragged
from his own country by force or fraud, loaded with fetters, chained
to the deck, or stifled in the hold of a Slave-ship; bartered as a
mere implement of agriculture; separated at the pleasure of another
from his wife and children; worked under the lash without the liberty
even of pausing in his toil, but at the bidding of the driver; and
liable to be punished to any extent, and with any circumstances of
cruelty, which the caprice of his master may direct? Do they not
know that the Bengal peasant is not punishable by any other sentence
than that of the law, after a regular trial and conviction; that
his person and property are as fully secured to him as those of the
Governor General of India; and that he is the sole judge both of the
labour and of the food which suit him? There is only one answer which
can be returned to these questions; and that answer will prove it to
be no better than absolute mockery in the Assembly of Jamaica thus to
compare the condition of the Bengal peasant with that of the Negro
Slave.

But this is not all. The reporters enter into tedious calculations
to shew how much higher the wages of the Negro Slave are than those
of the Bengal peasant; but they omit to advert to one very material
point of difference between them. The wages of the Bengal peasant are
paid to himself: he labours for his own benefit solely. But it is to
his master, and not to himself, that the wages of the Negro Slave
are paid. From his thankless toil must be extracted, not only the
means of his own subsistence, but the means of pampering the luxury,
swelling the pomp, gratifying the avarice, or discharging the debts
of his owner. And when the circumstances in which the planters are
now placed have been considered, it cannot be expected that a very
ample proportion of the Slave’s earnings should be applied to his own
sustentation, especially as that proportion, whatever it may be,
depends entirely on the will of an insolvent, or nearly insolvent
master.

The reporters complain that they were not permitted, in the session
of 1804, to produce fresh evidence at the bar of the House of Commons
in favour of their right to a continuance of the Slave trade. But
would any evidence which they could produce contradict that statement
of the nature of West Indian slavery which they themselves have
already furnished, and by which its injustice and inhumanity are
clearly demonstrated? And supposing they had been hardy enough
to do this, would any credit have been due to such contradictory
testimony? Besides, what confidence can the British Parliament or
the British Public repose in the declarations of West Indians, even
if they should sanction those declarations with all the solemnity
of an oath; when it appears from the acknowledgment of Governor
Prevost, and from the concurring testimony of their own records, that
the most _honourable_ men among them could so far forget their high
obligations as legislators, as to join in a combination to deceive
the Government and the Legislature of this country, and to obtain
credit to themselves for humanity, by passing laws which they meant
at the time to be wholly inoperative?

I shall only detain the reader while I notice one more argument in
favour of the Slave trade which is contained in this Report. The
continuance of importations, it is affirmed, will not increase the
disproportion of Blacks and Whites so much as the abolition would.
This is an argument not very level to common understandings; but the
reasoning on which it is built is of this kind. If the Slave trade
were abolished, the number of adventurers who repair to the West
Indies in the hope of amassing a fortune would be diminished, and
consequently the white population would decrease. But supposing the
number of adventurers who go out with such large expectations were
diminished, does it follow that an equal number, with more moderate
views, might not be procured to supply their place? While emigrations
to America are so frequent and numerous, might not a part of them,
with proper encouragement, be easily diverted to the filling of
vacancies in Jamaica? The planters of that island, however, are far
from feeling, on this point, the solicitude which they express.
Several proofs of this might be given. In the first place, do they
not almost universally refuse to employ on their estates, in any
capacity, white men who are married and have families? If they really
wished to increase the number of whites, would not men with families
be the most desirable persons to employ? Another proof is, that
although there is a law of the island requiring the proprietors of
estates to maintain a certain number of white servants in proportion
to their slaves (about one white to thirty slaves), yet the tax,
which is payable in case of a deficiency in that number, is so
low, that it is in general a gain to the proprietor to pay the tax
rather than to procure the individuals. In short, it is notorious,
notwithstanding the language employed in the Report, that no pains
have been taken to remedy the disproportion of the black and white
population.

The true reason, however, of this argument is to be found, not in
the increased danger which will result to the island from abolishing
the Slave trade, but in the constitution of the Jamaica Assembly.
That Assembly (though containing a small proportion of wealthy
planters) is chiefly composed of such adventurers as are alluded
to in the Report, and for whose privileges so much solicitude is
there manifested: viz. either merchants who are concerned in the
sale of Slave cargoes, or agents employed to manage the estates of
absent proprietors; to whom are added a few insolvent proprietors of
sugar estates, largely indebted, perhaps, to those very merchants
and agents. Now it is the voice of these adventurers which is heard
on the present occasion, and not that of the real proprietors of
Jamaica. The real proprietors, if their voice could be heard, might
possibly speak a different language; and we see that in some cases
they do so. Many of them are sensible, that, added to the fatal
rivalry of Guiana, the true cause of their embarrassment (as their
historian Long has well shewn), and the grand source of their danger
also, is the continuance of the Slave trade: and if they were not
influenced by prejudice or party connexions, or deterred by the
threats of creditors, or duped by the misrepresentations of agents,
they would follow the example which Mr. Barham has set them, and take
that part which prudence and policy concur with justice and humanity
in dictating; I mean the part of forwarding a legislative abolition
of the Slave trade, as the only safe and practicable, and at the same
time effectual remedy, which can be applied to the dreadful evils of
our colonial system. Eighteen years have passed since this question
was first agitated in Parliament; and since the public have been
amused with tales of the amelioration of Colonial bondage. That every
hope of this kind is completely blasted, the information contained in
this pamphlet sufficiently proves. Nor can such a hope be otherwise
than abortive, until Parliament shall consent to abolish the Slave
trade.


THE END.

S. GOSNELL, Printer, Little Queen Street.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Not of one or two, or of a few individuals, but of THE PEOPLE.

[2] What can more expressively shew the dreadful state of society
which prevails in this island, than that a Magistrate should find
himself without the power even of commitment in the case of a man
apprehended in the very act of perpetrating a most foul and wanton
murder?

[3] This short, but significant sentence is of more weight than a
thousand arguments in favour of the mild treatment of Negro slaves;
and it furnishes an unanswerable proof, that they are regarded by
their oppressors as a different order of beings from themselves:
under the influence of this sentiment they are naturally enough
denied the common rights of humanity, and excluded from the
participation of that sympathy which the sense of a common nature and
a common extraction is calculated to inspire.

[4] Namely, the eleven pounds four shillings mentioned above.

[5] Mr. President Ince seems properly aware of the illegality of
his proceeding: doubtless Halls also is aware of it; nor should I
be surprised to hear that he has been able to rouse the popular
feeling of the island in his favour, as a man unjustly and illegally
oppressed. To have suffered so severe a punishment as that of
imprisonment, for so paltry an offence as killing a _Negro slave_,
particularly as his commitment was contrary to law, will be likely
to excite no small degree of _virtuous_ indignation among the
Barbadians: and the danger lest such an unauthorized restriction
of the freedom of individuals should grow into a precedent may
possibly call forth the most vigorous resistance. This expectation
seems perfectly justified by what took place some years ago on a
similar occasion in the neighbouring island of St. Kitt’s, where
the prosecution of a man of the name of Herbert, who had treated
one of his slaves with the most wanton barbarity, was not only not
productive of any punishment to the offender, though the facts
were clearly proved, but was likely to have been followed by very
inconvenient effects to the prosecutor, in consequence of the popular
clamour which was excited against him.

[6] Meaning the Slave-yard, where Negroes are exposed to sale in the
same manner as cattle and sheep in Smithfield-market.

[7] If any thing could add to the horror which the shocking barbarity
of Nowell must excite, it is the doubt existing, “after many
inquiries”—existing too in the minds of the Advocate and Attorney
General—as to whether this poor creature was alive or dead. Were
there no means of forcing Nowell to produce her? Could no inquest
have been instituted? Dreadful state of things!

[8] Had the Attorney General then no means of ascertaining whether
the woman was alive or dead?

[9] Papers, &c. page 43, 44.

[10] The 7th clause enacts, that “_in order to secure, as far as
possible, the good treatment of the Slaves, and to ascertain the
cause of the decrease of the Slaves_, every owner, overseer, &c.
shall, in the month of January every year, deliver in on oath a
certificate of the increase or decrease of the Slaves under his
direction, how many have been born, or how many have died, within
twelve months previous thereto, and the cause of the death of such
Slaves; _which certificate shall be lodged in the Secretary’s office
of this island_; for the filing of which the Secretary shall be
allowed a fee of ninepence: and _if any owner, &c. shall fail to
deliver in such certificate on oath at the time appointed, he shall
be fined in the sum of fifty pounds_.” The 8th clause enacts, that
Slaves, convicted of murder, highway robbery, or burglary, shall
suffer death.

[11] These clauses run thus: “_Whereas a knowledge of the doctrines,
and a due attention to the exercise of the duties of the Christian
religion, would tend to improve the morals, and to advance the
temporal and eternal happiness of the Slaves_, it is enacted,
that all owners, overseers, &c. shall, on every Sunday on their
several plantations, convene together the Slaves for the purpose
of performing divine worship, and _shall not fail to exhort_ all
unbaptized Slaves to receive the holy sacrament of baptism; and all
the unbaptized children of Slaves shall receive the said sacrament:
and _on neglect of these duties_ the owners, &c. _shall be fined in
not less than 10l. nor more than 25l._ And all owners, &c. shall
_encourage and exhort all Slaves_, arrived at years of maturity, and
desirous of entering into a connubial state, _to receive the ceremony
of Christian marriage, and in neglect of doing so shall be subject to
a fine 5l._”

[12] Papers, &c. page 34.

[13] This representation, it may be presumed, is fairly applicable
to all the West Indian Legislatures: indeed it would be unjust to
them to suppose, that they were less politic and provident than
the Legislature of Dominica. The charge involved in it, however,
is certainly far from being light or trivial, especially as it is
made by one who is a thorough master of the subject on which he
writes, “having passed many years in the West Indies, and having been
resident in most of the Colonies.” P. 34. The charge amounts to this:
that the individuals composing the legislatures of the Islands, and
who we may suppose to be the most honourable part of the community,
have entered into a combination to deceive the British Parliament and
the British public; that they have prostituted the solemn legislative
functions with which they were invested, to the promotion of this
dishonourable purpose; and that, with the pretended view of promoting
the protection, security, and comfort of the Negroes, they have
framed a set of laws, the real object of which is not to benefit
the Negroes, but to prevent the mother-country from interfering to
mitigate the cruel oppression under which they groan. The reader must
form his own judgment of persons capable of such conduct.

[14] If the reader will have the goodness to refer back to p. 19, he
will see with what parade this very clause is introduced into the
Act. It was framed expressly “_to secure, as far as possible, the
good treatment of the Slaves_;” and yet it appears from the first
to have been regarded in the island as an absolute nullity. “IT
HAS BEEN WHOLLY NEGLECTED.” Not one certificate has been filed in
consequence of it, nor has one penalty been enforced for the neglect.
How different this from the fate of the eighth clause, denouncing the
punishment of death on Negro Slaves guilty of certain crimes! _This
clause_, we are told, _has not been allowed to_ SLEEP! Here we have
a lively picture of the nature of West Indian legislation. When laws
are directed _against_ the Negro Slave, they operate with certainty
and permanent effect. When enacted in his favour, they prove dormant
from the moment of their birth.

[15] The act requires owners, &c. to _exhort_ their Slaves to marry.
Mr. AUDAIN says, that their owners do NOT _exhort_ them to it.

[16] The Slaves, it is affirmed, will confound abolition with
emancipation. But what proof is there of this? Have they done so in
Virginia? The Slave trade has been abolished in that state for near
thirty years. Has any such misconception, as is now anticipated,
taken place among the Virginian Slaves? Certainly not. Experience
therefore is against the reasoning of the West Indian body.

[17] Suppose a plantation under the management of such a man as
Crone, the proprietor being in England; what a sum of misery might be
crowded into a short space of time!

[18] This horrid feature of our colonial system prevails uniformly
throughout the whole range of our West Indian possessions. No one
can have visited them without knowing that the practice of _driving_
Negroes at their work by means of the whip is _universal_: and
yet such is the gross ignorance of the subject prevailing in this
country, that the fact, though as notorious in the West Indies as
that slavery exists there at all, has been sometimes disputed even in
the House of Commons.

[19] See Long’s History of Jamaica, and, in addition to many other
proofs which might be adduced, the preceding part of this pamphlet.

[20] _Imaginary misery!_ Am I then wrong in having attributed to
West Indians a different set of moral perceptions from those which
prevail among the inhabitants of Great Britain? If at the time when
this Report was framed the reporters were ignorant of the horrors
which have recently taken place in the West Indies, they could not be
ignorant that such horrors might be practised with impunity.




  Transcriber’s Notes

  pg 16 Changed: to which he fastensd
             to: to which he fastened