+-------------------------------------------------+
|Transcriber's note: |
| |
|Obvious typographic errors have been corrected. |
| |
+-------------------------------------------------+
THE RIGHT WAY THE SAFE WAY,
PROVED BY
EMANCIPATION IN THE BRITISH WEST INDIES, AND ELSEWHERE.
BY L. MARIA CHILD.
"The world is beginning to understand, that injuring one class, for
the immediate benefit of another, is ultimately injurious to that other;
and that to secure prosperity to a community, _all_ interests must be
consulted."--_Dr. Davy._
NEW YORK:
PUBLISHED AND FOR SALE AT 5 BEEKMAN STREET.
1862.
CHAPTER I.
THE WEST INDIES BEFORE THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY.
It is a common idea that the British West Indies were a mine of wealth
before the abolition of slavery, and since that event have been sinking
into ruin. To correct those erroneous impressions, I have carefully
collected the following facts from authentic sources:--
Official Reports, returned to the British Parliament, prove that the
outcry about ruin in the West Indies began long _before_ the abolition
of slavery, and even before the abolition of the slave _trade_; and we
ought, moreover, never to forget that this outcry related solely to the
ruin of the _masters_; nobody expended a thought upon the ruin of their
800,000 laborers.
As early as 1792, a Report to Parliament stated that, in the course of
the preceding twenty years, one hundred and seventy-seven estates in
Jamaica had been sold for the payment of debts; the cultivation of
fifty-five had been abandoned; ninety-two were in the hands of
creditors; and 80,021 executions, amounting to £22,500,000 sterling
($109,012,500), had been lodged in the provost marshal's office. In
1805, the Reports described the condition of the West India planters as
one of "increasing embarrassment, and impending ruin." The Reports in
1807, 1808, 1812, 1830, and 1832, were still more lamentable. In 1830,
four years before emancipation, Lord Chandos presented to Parliament a
petition from West India planters and merchants, setting forth "the
extreme distress under which they labored." In his speech, in support of
the petition, he said, "They are reduced to a state in which they are
obliged earnestly to solicit relief from Parliament. It is not possible
for them to stand up against such a pressure any longer." Mr. Bright
said: "The distress of the West India Colonies is unparalleled in the
country. Many families, who formerly lived in comparative affluence, are
reduced to absolute penury." The West India Reporter also quoted thus
from a Report on the commercial state of the Colonies: "There are strong
concurrent testimonies and proofs that, unless some speedy and efficient
measures of relief are adopted, the ruin of a great number of the
planters must inevitably take place." An able writer in the _Edinburgh
Review_ informs us that, "In the small island of St. Lucia an Encumbered
Estate Court was established in 1833, and, small as that island is,[1]
in the first eighteen months, liabilities were recorded to the enormous
amount of £1,089,965 ($5,280,880); _all debts incurred under slavery_.
Nor did that island stand alone. In each one of them the same state of
things prevailed." The laborers were decreasing rapidly. The _Edinburgh
Review_ declares: "What gave the death-blow to slavery, in the minds of
British statesmen, was the appalling fact that the Population Returns,
from only eleven of the Colonies, showed that, in the course of twelve
years, the slaves had decreased 60,219. Had similar returns been
procured from the other seven Colonies, they must have shown a decrease
of little, if at all, less than 100,000. Had the same rate of decrease
gone on, one century would have seen the extinction of slavery by the
extinction of the slaves."[2] Production was also decreasing. A table of
exports, in the Appendix to Mr. Bigelow's work on Jamaica, shows that,
in the ten years ending 1830, there was a decrease in that island, of
201,843 hogsheads of sugar, from the amount in the ten years ending with
1820. In view of these, and similar facts, the _Edinburgh Review_ says:
"Plainly, the artificial, arbitrary interference of law with the freedom
of man, and freedom of trade, was bringing about the extinction of the
working-class, and was whirling their masters along to utter ruin."
At the time when the planters were complaining of such excessive
embarrassments, they had a monopoly of the sugar market in Great
Britain, so close that not even the East India Colonies were allowed to
compete with them; a monopoly, which cost the consumers $25,000,000
annually. They paid no wages to their laborers; and furnished them
merely with rags to tie about their loins, and enough of coarse food to
keep them in working condition. Yet while they produced from a prolific
soil the great staples of commerce, without paying for the labor, and
with an enormous premium from the consumers in Great Britain, they were
so nearly reduced to "ruin," that they were compelled "earnestly to
solicit relief from Parliament."
A few facts will help to explain this apparent anomaly. In the first
place, the system of slavery contravenes all the laws of human nature,
and therefore contains within itself the seed of ultimate ruin. It takes
away the motive power from the laborers, who naturally desire to shirk
as much as possible of the work, which brings them no pay; consequently,
overseers and drivers must be hired to force out of them their unwilling
toil. It makes them indifferent to the destruction of property on
estates, in whose prosperity they have no interest. It stimulates them
to theft, by perpetual privations, from which they have no prospect of
relief. It kills their ingenuity and enterprise, by rendering them
utterly unavailing for any improvement in their own condition; while all
their faculties are stupefied by the extreme ignorance in which they
must necessarily be kept in order to be held in slavery. The effects on
the white population are quite as injurious, though in a different way.
Slavery unavoidably renders labor a degradation, and consequently, it is
a matter of pride with them to live in idleness. Extravagance and
dissipation follow of course. All, who have examined into the subject,
are aware that intemperance, licentiousness, and gambling, are fearfully
prevalent in slave-holding countries. One hint will suffice to suggest
the immoral condition of the West Indies, during slavery. It is a
well-known fact that the white subordinates employed by planters were
very liable to lose their situations if they married; because it was for
the interest of the proprietors to have them live with slaves, and raise
up laborers for the estates. As for the slaves, being regarded as
animals, and treated like live-stock, they unavoidably lived like
animals. Modesty and self-respect were impossible to their brutalized
condition. In this Tract, I merely aim at presenting a _business_-view
of the subject. Therefore, I will not describe the cruelties, which were
continually practised, and which kept the worst passions of both masters
and slaves in perpetual excitement. The barbarities recorded were the
same that always _must_ prevail, under a system of coerced labor and
irresponsible power.
In addition to the unavoidable expenses, and inevitable deterioration
involved in the very nature of slavery, the West India planters had
another difficulty to contend with. "Nearly the whole of the sugar
estates were owned by absentees, the greater part of whom never set foot
in the islands." This involved the necessity of hiring managers and
attorneys to look after the property. Mr. Bigelow computes the average
annual expense of an estate to have been $3,000, solely to pay for the
absence of the proprietor. The Rev. Henry Bleby, who was a missionary in
the West Indies before emancipation, and has resided there ever since,
says: "Let us look at the condition of a West India estate under
slavery. There were four or five hundred slaves. True, there was little
expended for their food; but their masters had to supply them with so
many yards of cloth a year, and several other small articles. That was
one item of expense. Then, to superintend the labor of these slaves,
there must be four bookkeepers, as they were called; one to superintend
the still, another the boiling-house, another the cattle on the estate,
and another, sometimes two or three others, to superintend the people in
the field. All these had to be fed and salaried. Then there was the
overseer, with his harem, living at considerable expense out of the
estate, and at a high salary. Over all these was the attorney, who took
his commission out of every thing the estate produced, and lived in the
great house with his servants and harem. Then there was the proprietor
living with his family in princely style, in France or England. All this
was to be drawn out of the produce of one estate! I should like to know
whether there is any property that would not be brought to ruin, with so
many living upon it, and out of it."
Everybody knows how property is cared for, when there are none but
hirelings to look after it. All accounts of the West Indies abound with
the complaints of proprietors concerning the neglect, wastefulness, and
fraud of their subordinates. Accumulation of salaries being the
principal object in view, one manager often superintended many estates.
Dr. Davy, in his work on the West Indies, speaks of twenty-three estates
in Montserrat, managed by one agent. He reports nineteen of them as
"imperfectly cultivated," or "abandoned;" which is by no means
surprising, under the circumstances. Mr. Bigelow met in Jamaica, a
gentleman who had come from England to ascertain why he was always
sinking more and more money upon his estate. Upon inquiry, he discovered
that his manager lived sixty miles from the property, and had never seen
it.
With such drains upon their income, the proprietors were, of course,
obliged to borrow money continually. Year after year, a gambling game
was carried on between them and the merchants of London. The merchant
would advance money to the planter, on condition that all the produce of
the estate should be consigned to his house, and that whatever was
needed on the estate, in his line of business, should be bought of him.
The merchant charged what price he pleased for his own articles, and
took what commission he pleased for selling the produce. "Thus," says
Mr. Bigelow, "the planter's candle was burning at both ends." If there
was a hurricane, or a severe drought, or an insurrection of the slaves,
which caused a failure of the crops, the proprietor was obliged to
mortgage his lands to get the necessary supply of money. Thus a great
many of the estates passed into the hands of British merchants, and had
a heavy interest to pay in addition to other expenses.
Such was the state of things, when the British people, ignorant of this
financial chaos, and actuated solely by motives of justice and humanity,
started the idea of abolishing slavery. When the planters became aware
that the measure might be carried, they met it with a furious storm of
opposition. They characterized it as an "impertinent interference with
their rights," and threatened to withdraw from the British government,
unless the project were relinquished. Still they petitioned for relief;
any kind of relief, except from the destructive system, which had
brought them to the verge of ruin. To _that_ they swore they never would
submit. Missionaries, who went to the West Indies to impart religious
instruction to the slaves, were assaulted with brickbats and imprisoned
on false pretences. Their houses were attacked, and their chapels
demolished. A Colonial Union was formed, the object of which was to
drive away every instructor of the negroes. Those in England, who sought
to help on the cause of emancipation, were hated with inconceivable
intensity. Women in the West Indies expressed a wish to get hold of
Wilberforce "that they might pull his heart out." With these wrathful
vociferations were mingled every form of lamentable prediction
concerning the ruin "fanatical philanthropists" were bringing on the
Colonies. They said if their mad designs were carried into execution,
the masters would all have their throats cut, and their houses burned.
What they seemed especially concerned about was that "the negroes could
not possibly take care of themselves." They were too lazy to work
without the whip. They would abscond to the woods, and live there like
animals. The few, who might be willing to work, would be robbed by the
others; that would lead to continual fighting, and there would be
prodigious slaughter. Thousands also would die of disease, from want of
the fostering care of their masters. In short, blacks and whites would
all be swallowed up in one great gulf of swift destruction.
The Colonial press was, of course, on the side of slavery. There was all
manner of suppression of truth, and propagation of every sort of
falsehood on the subject. But through all these obstacles, the work of
reform went slowly and steadily on. It took twenty years of hard labor
and violent agitation to abolish the slave-_trade_; then eleven years,
still more stormy, to abolish the _system_. But, at last, the Act of
Emancipation was passed, and went into effect in 1834. The slaves
received nothing from the British government for centuries of unrequited
toil. But £20,000,000 ($96,900,000) were paid to the masters, for
ceasing to extort labor by the lash. That was called Compensation. With
the idea of preparing the bondmen for freedom, the Act of Emancipation
was unfortunately clogged with an Apprenticeship System, by which it
was ordained that the emancipated laborers were to work six years for
their masters, without wages, as before. But they were to work nine
hours a day, instead of twelve; and were to have half of Friday, and the
whole of Saturday, for themselves. The power of punishing was also taken
from masters, and transferred to magistrates. Household slaves were to
become entirely free in 1838, and field slaves in 1840.
Men long accustomed to arbitrary power are not easily convinced that it
is both right and politic to relinquish the exercise of it. Moreover we
are all, more or less, the creatures of custom and prejudice. Therefore,
it is not surprising that the great body of the planters were opposed to
emancipation, until the eventful crisis had actually passed. Up to the
last month, they remonstrated, and threatened, and entreated the Home
Government not to consign them to such inevitable destruction. Many
judicious and kindly men among them thought otherwise. They were
convinced that the present system was certainly bringing ruin upon the
Colonies, and they felt persuaded that nothing worse could come in its
place. Their belief in the safety of emancipation was partly founded
upon general principles of human nature, and partly upon their
experimental knowledge of the docility of the negroes, when justly and
humanely treated. But very few of these individuals dared, however, to
express such opinions; for the community was in such an excited state,
that they were sure to suffer for it, in some form or other.
Mr. James Scotland, of St. John's, Antigua, said to Mr. Thome: "Whoever
was known or suspected of being an advocate for freedom, became an
object of vengeance, and was sure to suffer by a loss of business, if in
no other way. Every attempt was made to deprive my son of business, as a
lawyer; and I was thrown into prison, without any form of trial, or any
opportunity of saying one word in my own defence. There I remained, till
discharged by the peremptory orders of the Colonial Secretary, to whom I
appealed for relief. The opinions of the clergymen and missionaries,
with the exception of a few of the clergy, were favorable to
emancipation; but neither in their conduct, preaching, nor prayers, did
they declare themselves openly, until the measure of abolition was
determined on. The missionaries felt restrained by their instructions
from home; and the clergy thought it did not comport with their order to
take part in politics. I never heard of a single planter, who was
favorable, until about three months before emancipation took place; when
some few of them began to perceive that it would be advantageous to
their interest."
Mr. Thome, in his work on the West Indies, says: "We were informed that,
some time previous to the abolition of slavery, a meeting of the
influential men in Antigua was called at St. John's, to memorialize
Parliament against the measure of abolition. When the meeting convened,
the Hon. Samuel O. Baijer, who had been the champion of the opposition,
was called upon to propose a plan of procedure. To the consternation of
the pro-slavery meeting, their leader rose and spoke to the following
effect: 'Gentlemen, my previous sentiments on this subject are well
known to you all. Be not surprised to learn that they have undergone an
entire change. I have not altered my views without deliberation. For
several days past I have been making calculations with regard to the
probable results of emancipation; and I have ascertained, beyond a
doubt, that I can cultivate my estate at least one-third cheaper by free
labor, than by slave labor.' The honorable gentleman proceeded to draw
out the details of his calculations, and he presented an array of
pecuniary considerations altogether new and imposing to the majority of
the assembly. After he had finished his remarks, Mr. S. Shands, Member
of Assembly, and a wealthy proprietor, observed that he entertained
precisely the same views with those just expressed; but he thought the
honorable gentleman had been unwise to utter them in so public a manner;
for should these sentiments reach the ear of Parliament, it might induce
them to withhold compensation. Colonel Edwards, Member of Assembly, rose
and said he had long been opposed to slavery, but had not dared to avow
his sentiments."
When the question came before the Colonial Assembly similar discussions
ensued. The abolition of slavery was now seen to be inevitable. The only
alternative presented to the colonists was the apprenticeship system, or
immediate, unconditional emancipation. When the question came to this
issue in the Antigua Assembly, both bodies _unanimously_ passed a bill
in favor of _immediate emancipation_; on the ground that it was the
wisest _policy_.
The first of August, 1834, was the day fixed by Parliament for the
Abolition Act to go into effect. As the time approached, a heavy cloud
lowered over the minds of most of the white population. A merchant of
St. John's told Mr. Thome that several American vessels which had lain
in the harbor, weighed anchor on the 31st of July, through actual fear
that the island would be destroyed on the following day; and they
earnestly entreated the merchant to escape with them, if he valued his
life. Many planters believed it would be unsafe to go out in the
evening, after emancipation. Some timid families did not venture to go
to bed on the night of the 31st. They waited anxiously for the hour of
midnight, fearing that the same bell which proclaimed "Liberty
throughout the land, to _all_ the inhabitants thereof," would prove the
signal for general conflagration, and massacre of the white
inhabitants.[3]
FOOTNOTES:
[1] It is about as large as eight common New England towns.
[2] It must not be inferred from this statement that the system of
slavery was more cruel in the West Indies, than in other sugar-growing
Colonies and States. Wherever _sugar_ is produced by slave-labor, there
is always an awful destruction of negro life, owing to the severely hard
pressure of work, continued night and day, during one particular season
of the crops.
[3] There were in Antigua, at that time, 1,980 whites; 29,537 slaves;
and 3,895 free colored people.