“By Mr. Latrobe’s Report in 1839, it appears there were 35 Day and
Evening Schools, and 14 Sunday, of all denominations; whereas, by the
Return of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, the
Established Church alone has now 28 Schools, and it is calculated that
the present number in all is not less than from 50 to 60. As regards
Churches and Chapels, there are no less than 18 connected with the
Established Church, 11 Roman-catholic, 4 Wesleyan, and 1 Presbyterian,
together 34, for a population of from 50,000 to 60,000 souls; this
would give a School for every 1,000 souls, and a Church for every
2,000.
“In the Colonial Estimate for this year, there is a provision of
1,660_l._ for the Established Church, and for the Roman-catholic
3,236_l._, as fixed expenditure, besides 5,865_l._ towards building
Churches, and 1,937_l._ towards Education.”
“The soil of Trinidad is a rich marl that requires no manuring
whatever, and of such soil there are fully one million of acres in
brushwood and forest. Were there only a sufficiency of labour every
British market might be amply supplied with Sugar from this one
Island; hence, Foreign Sugars would be excluded, and the Slave Trade,
as it refers to Great Britain at least, would be practically
discouraged.
“In Trinidad too, Christian Ministers can live and labour with far
less risk of health and loss of time. Government is also extremely
willing to give half the amount required for the erection of Chapels,
School-houses, Teachers’ Salaries, &c. in any part of the Island where
we may have even a small Society of Emigrants.
“It is therefore my deliberate conviction that the people would gain
an accession to their religious privileges by quitting any part of
Western Africa for the Island of Trinidad.
“But again I think that the worldly circumstances of the Emigrants
would be considerably advanced. The labourers may very easily earn
half a dollar per day on their arrival here, and in a couple of weeks,
that is, as soon as they fully understand the nature of the work, the
able-bodied may make a dollar. A house and garden are given to every
labourer. On these particulars Mr. David and the labourers who have
returned with him will be able to satisfy you[9].”
[9] Extract from Letter addressed by Rev. J. Blackwell, Wesleyan
Minister in Trinidad, to Wesleyan Ministers at Sierra Leone.
Now after looking at such a picture, drawn from the most unsuspected
sources, we cannot doubt that, whether for the homeless Negro just
rescued from the hold of a Slave Ship, or for the ignorant and
uncivilised African who comes down to our Settlements to pick up a
small pittance by the hardest labour, and to return with it to his
barbarous home, it would be of the highest advantage, it would be the
greatest blessing, to make such an exchange. But how is it with the
Liberated African of Sierra Leone, who has been enjoying perhaps for
years the fostering care of the British Government? Now to that
Government, beyond his rescue from the Slave Ship, and emancipation
from future Slavery, and a temporary sustenance, and his being placed
within the reach of Missionary efforts, to which it has not
contributed, the Liberated African cannot fairly be said to owe much.
To the invaluable exertions of the Church Missionary Society more
especially, and also to a considerable extent, as in all our African
Settlements, to the Wesleyan body, the highest praise is due. The
former expend nearly 7,000_l._, the latter nearly 2,000_l._ annually
upon the Religious Instruction of the Colony. By their efforts nearly
one-fifth of the whole population, a most unusually high proportion in
any country, are at school, and the effects are visible in
considerable intellectual, moral, and religious improvement,--very
considerable under the peculiar circumstances of such a Colony. But a
few ill-supported Schools and one Chaplain is all that has been
contributed by the Government to the religious and moral improvement
of those of whom she has undertaken the protection, and their social
improvement has been unattempted. No Model Farm has been established,
no instruction in Agriculture has been afforded. The rate of wages,
when any are earned, which is chiefly by a few in the neighbourhood of
the towns, is 4_d._ to 7_d._ a day, and with this and a little
cultivation a sufficient subsistence, though nothing more, is gained.
The extent of good soil is limited; the inhabitants wander out of the
Colony for the subsistence which they cannot find within it. There is
little industry, there are small facilities for trade, as the Colony
itself produces little to export save a little arrow-root and ginger,
and the River which it commands is only navigable for 30 or 40 miles
to any useful purpose, and supplies no article but timber and camwood.
With such a climate, therefore, and thus circumstanced, the Colony can
never invite the residence of planters or of merchants of considerable
capital, or become a favourite with officers, either civil or
military, of a higher order. What elements of prosperity, therefore,
can it have? The Government has not done much, but under any
circumstances the Colony must be an artificial creation. The
Government ought to have established a Model Farm, or in some way
communicated agricultural knowledge; and we would recommend that it
should be attempted even now. But, after all, what is that to the
magnificent Model Farms which would surround the African in the West
Indies?
We need hardly add more to prove that it would be well for the
African, in every point of view, to find himself a Free Labourer in
the free British West India Colonies, enjoying there, as he would,
higher advantages of every kind, than have fallen to the lot of the
Negro race in any other portion of the globe.
We pass the question, though not absolutely to be lost sight of, that,
in Sierra Leone, the newly liberated African is a burden to the
British Government as well as to himself; and that, in the West
Indies, not only would his own condition be improved, but he would
become a source of wealth and prosperity to the Empire. But we must
not omit the advantage to Africa, of the probable return to her soil
of many of her own sons, enriched with civil and religious knowledge,
and bringing back with them wealth, and the means of wealth and
civilisation; “that reflux of the West upon the East, in moderate
numbers, and managed with caution,” in the words of Sir John Jeremie,
“to which we must look for the civilisation of the East.”
But Your Committee had next to consider, whether, in achieving this
object, any danger existed of creating a real, or plausible suspicion
of a real, Slave Trade under another name.--Under proper regulations,
they think there is not. A free passage may be offered to the African
already settled within the colony, and to the Free Settler or other
Native, who shall have remained long enough in the Colony to give the
authorities sufficient time to ascertain the circumstances under which
he came, and to assure themselves that they were entirely free from
all suspicion of fraud or force. To such as thus leave their homes, a
free passage back at the end of a certain period, say three or four
years, might be promised, with full permission to them to return at
any time at their own expense. To the homeless African, newly
liberated, the option should be given of settling at once in the West
Indies, if he please, with permission to return hereafter at his own
cost, or of removing from Sierra Leone, or of remaining in it on the
first adjudication, if he undertake for his own maintenance, or can
find friends or relations who will undertake it for him.
With regard to the Kroomen, however desirable they may be as
labourers, and however advantageous the object may be to themselves,
we are not prepared in the first instance to recommend other
facilities for emigration than those which we have suggested to be
offered to other Natives who might desire to make use of a British
Settlement as a point of departure[10]. If they should desire, as it
appears that it is not improbable they may, to make a Migration across
the Atlantic, with their habits they will find no difficulty in making
their way, for the purpose, to Sierra Leone, where some hundreds or
even thousands of their brethren habitually reside, some of whom have
already emigrated to Guiana, and seem to be as active in the field, as
we have long found them to be on the sea, and to be well pleased with
the experiment.
[10] On this point, however, we beg to refer to the important evidence
of Capt. Denman, who thinks that on account of the peculiar character of
the Kroomen, emigration, with common precaution, might be conducted from
their coast without risk of abuse. _See_ Q. 6995, _et preced._
If it should hereafter be thought desirable to form any Settlement on
the Kroo Coast, however small, it might facilitate arrangements
similar to those which we have recommended for the other Settlements.
Or they might possibly hereafter be embarked from the Coast itself
under the superintendence of a man-of-war. (_See_ Capt. Denman.)
The same door might be opened, under the same precautions, from the
Gambia; but with regard to the Gold Coast, the supply of labour there
not appearing to be more than necessary for the wants of the country,
we would not recommend any peculiar facilities to be afforded.
The expense of the Emigration would of course be defrayed by the
Colony to which each successive band of Emigrants was directed.
All this of course cannot be secured from abuse without the strictest
superintendence of some Government authority; which we believe,
dealing as it would do only with British Settlements, would be
substantially effective. But we would earnestly recommend, that it
should rather be undertaken altogether by the Government itself. In
that way only can perfect security be given and felt against the
abuses which might arise from the competition of the Agents of rival
Colonies; in that way only can perfect confidence be given, whether to
the African himself, or to the public opinion of England and the
civilised world, that nothing shall be done which shall even bring
suspicion upon a reputation, of which we are justly jealous, of which
we can still be proud, and which it is of the highest importance that
we should sustain. But under these sanctions, whether we look to the
effect of the prosperity of our Free Colonies in discouraging the
Slave Trade, or to the advantage of placing the African in that
position where he will be most likely to raise himself in the moral
and social scale, and to react beneficially upon the destinies of his
Mother Country[11], Your Committee cannot but strongly urge upon
Parliament not only not to prohibit the Emigration of Free Blacks from
our African Settlements to our West India Colonies, but to encourage
and promote it by the authority of Government, under the sanctions and
regulations above suggested, or such other as further consideration
may supply.
[11] To prove that this expectation is not altogether even now
unsupported by facts, we beg to quote a passage from a letter in the
Appendix, from Messrs. Anderson & Co.: “Demerara, 30 April, 1842. The
Superior is off to day for Sierra Leone; 68 people have gone in her,
including children, and with the exception of three or four, who are old
soldiers, the whole of them are people who came seven or eight years ago
from the Bahamas, (liberated Africans?) and they return to their native
country with a good deal of money; three of them have not less than
5,000 dollars each.”
As we have said before, the way in which this question is disposed of
will affect materially other questions connected with the internal
administration of the Colony.
If Emigration should go on to any great extent from the settled
Population of Sierra Leone, which we believe it might without in any
way injuring the condition of the Colony, but rather the reverse, (for
the rate of Wages would probably rise, and it appears that it is not
the successful and thriving who are inclined to go), it will probably
be possible to dispense with some of the Establishment which is now
requisite for watching over the interests of the Liberated Africans.
If, on adjudication, they are mostly located in the West Indies, the
much-discussed question of the best means of disposing of them, of the
necessity of maintaining them, as now, for six months, or the
expediency of leaving them at once to their own resources and the
charity of their countrymen; the question of the best means of
disposing of the Children, and the ever-new devices of successive
Governors for escaping from the inevitable evils of apprenticing them
to persons on whose character no dependence can be placed, will be got
rid of; and the British Government will be relieved from the necessity
of attempting to overcome the obstacles which nature seems herself to
have interposed at Sierra Leone, in the way of ensuring a prosperous
condition to the objects of its humane care.
We now come to the question which has of late excited so much interest
and feeling, that of the facilities which British Commerce is charged
with having furnished to the Slave Trade, and to the extent and nature
of the connexion which exists between them; a question which must be
considered dispassionately and soberly, rather with a view to what is
best for the object upon the whole, and to what is practicable, than to
what might at first appear to be desirable, and what might be perhaps a
partial good, producing possibly, in other ways, a greater evil. _Now,
in the first place, it is fair to state that we have no evidence, or
reason to believe, that any British Merchant concerned in the trade with
the West Coast of Africa, either owns or equips any vessel engaged in
the Slave Trade, or has any share in the risks or profits of any Slave
Trade venture. The charge is this, and it must be admitted, that whether
by selling condemned Slave Vessels back to Slave Dealers, which is the
rarer case, or, which is the more common, by selling to Slave Dealers
lawful goods, which are afterwards employed in barter for Slaves
(whether circuitously by sale to Merchants in Cuba and Brazil, or
directly on the Coast of Africa), the British Merchant and Manufacturer
does, in common with the Merchants of other nations, furnish very
considerable facilities for the Slave Trade._
It must further be admitted, that owing to the equipment article in our
recent Treaties, which has prevented the actual Slaver from hovering on
the Coast in safety, a large portion of the goods necessary for the
Slave Trade is driven into Vessels innocent in their apparent character,
but subserving the purposes of the Slaver; and that, in consequence, a
somewhat larger portion of this kind of traffic may possibly now pass
directly from the English or other Merchant to the Coast of Africa, than
heretofore, when those supplies went round by Cuba and Brazil in the
Slavers themselves, without risk of capture.
Now an opinion has prevailed, and that in very influential quarters, and
it runs through Dr. Madden’s Report, that at least such direct dealing
is illegal, and punishable under the Statute of the 5 Geo. IV, c. 5; and
if not so already, the same parties would urge on Parliament to make it
so by new enactment; and some even would extend it to all connexion,
however indirect, in which a guilty knowledge of the destination of the
goods or of the Vessel could be presumed. Now this view of the Act is
not unnatural, owing to the general and comprehensive nature of its
language, and to the desire which must naturally exist to understand it
in as comprehensive a sense as possible for the obstruction of so odious
and detestable a traffic as the Slave Trade. But looking closely at the
language of the Act itself, and to the interpretation put upon it by the
Law Officers of the Crown, as alluded to by the Under Secretary of the
Colonies, in his letter to Dr. Madden, April 1842, and to the opinion of
the Attorney General in the case inserted in the Evidence, _we cannot
affirm it to be illegal now_, and we shall presently state to The House
why, however reluctantly we may come to the conclusion, _we are not
prepared to recommend that it should be made so_.
Now in the first place, it is difficult to consider or to make that
illegal, which is and has been done at Sierra Leone for years, by a
Court of Judicature, (in doing so, acting under Treaties and under the
sanction of an Act of Parliament, namely,) selling publicly, and to the
highest bidder, Prize Vessels and Prize Goods condemned for Slave
Dealing, indiscriminately, and without precaution or restriction, to
persons of all descriptions, including Slave Dealers themselves, and
which, in regard to vessels at least, had been practised in that Colony
by persons of high character and station unreproved. But if it should be
made illegal hereafter to sell a Vessel to a party concerned in the
traffic in Slaves, the next question, and one that a Legislative body
must consider, is, in what manner shall such a prohibition be enforced?
A bond that the Vessel shall not be disposed of to a Slave Dealer has
been proposed; but how shall the Vessel be prevented from passing very
shortly from hand to hand till it reaches an unlawful owner? and is it
not unwise for the Law to attempt that which it has so little means of
effectually enforcing? There seems no remedy for this, which at Sierra
Leone, in the heart of the Slave Trade, and where the Vessel is often
sold for half its value, is an evil substantially as well as in feeling,
but that of extending the provisions of those Treaties which direct that
a Slave Vessel shall be broken up, not sold, and altering our own
Municipal Law to the same effect.
But in regard to goods and merchandise, should the Committee advise The
House to make such dealing illegal? Now all the witnesses, even those
who advocate this view most strongly, admit that legitimate trade, by
which is meant the exchange of merchandise for produce, is most
beneficial to Africa, and co-operates materially with the cruizer in his
operations, whether directly by the assistance and information with
which the British trader supplies him, or indirectly by diminishing the
necessity of a trade in Slaves, as the means of procuring European or
other goods; they admit that nothing therefore would be more injurious
to the interests of Africa, than to interfere materially with the
operations of lawful commerce. It appears, moreover, that in every place
on the Coast North of the Line, (to which limits our inquiries have
mainly been confined,) with the exception of perhaps two or three
points, a lawful trade of more or less extent is or has been carried on
contemporaneously with, and often, nay generally, by the same persons
as, the Slave Trade: they have told us that the same goods, such as
cottons, rum, tobacco, guns and gunpowder, are employed in both trades;
and that, although those employed in the Slave Trade are often of an
inferior description, yet that quality alone will not furnish the means
of distinguishing between one and the other, and that, practically,
there are no means of making such a distinction; they have told us that
any restriction on traffic which they would recommend, must therefore be
confined to places or persons _solely_ or _principally_ concerned in the
Slave Trade, and that the law should not attempt to interfere with any
other. The question still remains, how this is to be carried out?
With regard to those places, where the Slave Trade has been
extinguished, no difficulty will arise; but with regard to those places,
not few in number nor of slight importance, where, as in Bissao now, and
as it has been and may be again, in the Brass and Bonny Rivers, the most
important marts for lawful trade upon the Coast of Africa, a trade in
produce and slaves is carried on together and by the same persons; or
where, as in Whydah and Popo, a trade in produce has been gradually
growing up and gaining upon the Slave Trade in proportion as the
enterprise of the British merchant pushes on the one and the vigilance
of the British cruizer checks and cripples the other, how should the
Legislature deal with them? Shall they be lawful or unlawful ports or
persons? What is to legalise the traffic in such cases? What proportion,
or what positive amount, of lawful traffic? But, indeed, how is the
lawful traffic to spring up at all under such circumstances of
exclusion?
Some witnesses have argued, that this question of degree need not be
defined but may be left to be solved by the practical sense of a jury.
By what jury? In England or at Sierra Leone? Under what uncertainties
and obstructions would the most scrupulous trader deal with the Coast
of Africa, if, for the misinterpretation of such instructions, as the
nature of such a case will admit, by a supercargo, his vessel and
goods are liable to be brought some hundreds or thousands of miles out
of their course, to have the question decided by a jury, whether some
person or some factory dealt with was _principally_ or not engaged in
the Slave Trade, it being unlawful if _principally_, lawful if
_partially_, in some unknown and varying proportion, so engaged.
The question for the Legislature to consider is, whether it is worth
while to do all this, to infuse so much risk and uncertainty into a
trade which it wishes to encourage, which it looks to as one of the
main instruments for the civilisation of Africa, for the sake of
interfering with so small a proportion of the facilities which
commerce, permitted at all with Africa, under her present
circumstances, must of necessity afford more or less to the Trade in
Slaves. For unless all other countries can be persuaded to take the
same view, it must indeed be a small proportion, and little indeed
will have been done towards the object; an obstruction will merely
have been raised for such length of time as may be required for
conveying the same goods from England or from foreign countries
through other channels. It would be merely a transfer, and a transfer
to parties less friendly to the object, and less under control. We
have had ample evidence, that foreign vessels already carry on this
trade to a considerable extent; nor is there any right by existing
treaty with foreign nations, nor can it be expected, that we should
obtain it, to interrupt foreign vessels engaged in such a traffic.
But indeed, how would it be carried out? The right of search, in any
shape, is one, as we know by experience, that requires the greatest
delicacy in carrying out with the ships of friendly nations. But what
kind of search must that be, which would seek to ascertain, on board
of an apparently innocent vessel, innocent in her build and in her
equipment, and freighted with innocent goods, whether the destination
of such goods was not made unlawful by some document hidden in the
most obscure recesses of the vessel? How prolonged, how minute,
consequently how irritating at all times, how vexatious, if
unsuccessful; how likely to be unsuccessful, if not guided by more
obvious indications; how likely consequently to lead to disputes and
collisions among nations, most injurious, if not fatal to that
harmonious co-operation for the common object which is so absolutely
essential to success. It must not be lost sight of how large a share
of these evils must be inflicted on those who are engaged in our own
lawful commerce, if such a search be applied to them.
Now if we were bound by a rigid principle to do this, these arguments
must be rejected, as not affecting a case of conscience; but in this
case we are not trying the value of a rigid principle. The principle
would be intelligible which dictated the absolute interdiction of all
commerce with every place from which a single Slave was exported; or,
further still, with every place from which a Slave Trade was carried
on, such as Cuba and Brazil; or if it dictated a prohibition to send
goods where there was a probability that they might be exchanged for
Slaves. But this arbitrary and uncertain limitation, so little capable
of being referred to strict principle, and yet so injurious to lawful
commerce, can only rest on the ground of its expediency, of its
tendency to attain or promote the object; must submit to be tried by
that test, and so tried will be found wanting. It is no doubt galling
to a zealous and gallant officer, engaged in the service of his
country and humanity in watching anxiously a well-known slaver’s
haunt, to see foreign vessels, still more vessels bearing his own
country’s flag, passing inwards and supplying those goods, though
innocent in themselves, which are the medium of an atrocious traffic;
it is not surprising that under such circumstances that feeling should
have arisen which appears in Dr. Madden’s Report, and in the Evidence
of several, especially the naval, Witnesses. It is a feeling natural
and honourable in itself; and we hope that the English merchant,
animated as he is by the same feelings of horror for the Slave Trade,
will endeavour to extend the influence of those feelings through the
whole circle of his transactions. But we cannot recommend that a
provision so difficult to be carried out, so vexatious and yet so
ineffectual for its object, should be made the subject of Legislation.
Happily in this great work we need not despair. The measures lately
adopted have done much. The evidence of all the Naval Officers as well
as Commanders of Merchant Ships, concurs in stating, that North of the
Line, over a coast of many thousand miles, the Slave Trade, with the
exception of a few points in the neighbourhood of Sierra Leone and the
Gambia, is virtually extinct. And the continuance of these measures,
well guarded and considered in all their details, as well as extended,
together with such as we have recommended in different parts of our
Report, give fair ground for hoping for ultimate success. Under this
head we would venture to recommend that none but the swiftest vessels
should be employed; that some of the best Prizes should be converted
to the purposes of the service; that Steamers should be engaged in
watching the intricacies of Islands, and the mouths of Rivers; that
the system of paying by Head-money, so unjust to gallant men[12], or,
perhaps, by Bounty at all, should be reconsidered, and possibly
replaced by higher pay and the prospect of promotion. Encouragement
and ample protection, at the same time, should be given to lawful
trade in every shape[13]; and the Settlements which we hold, or which
we may form, upon the coast, should be kept open indifferently to all
nations as to ourselves, that they may see, and be compelled to
acknowledge, that in all we are attempting for Africa, we are only
endeavouring to provide a feast of which all may equally partake; and
seeking, as the reward of our exertions, no advantage to ourselves
save that which may fairly fall to our lot from a proportionate share
of a more abundant table, spread out for the common benefit of all.
[12] As an instance of the injustice of this system, we beg to refer to
a case cited by Captain Denman (Q. 7099), in which it appears that the
capture of two vessels, of the aggregate capacity of 80 tons, which
would have held 700 slaves, was remunerated with no more than 576_l._,
because they were empty; while that of a single vessel, of little more
than half that tonnage, brought in 1,654_l._, because she was full. Thus
the least laborious and dangerous, as well as the least effective
service, receives the highest reward.
[13] Perhaps one or two vessels might have this specific duty assigned
to them, apart from the general operations of the Cruizers connected
with the Slave Trade.
IN THE CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
REGINA _v._ ZULUETA.
_Counsel for the Prosecution._
MR. SERJEANT BOMPAS.
MR. SERJEANT TALFOURD.
MR. PAYNE.
_Counsel for the Defence._
MR. FITZ-ROY KELLY.
MR. CLARKSON.
MR. BODKIN.
_Attorney for the Prosecution._