Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mexico, the civil war actually raging there at the time; and of which he admits, in other parts of the Review, the destructive effects.

:

[ocr errors]

But, to come to the more recent article on this subject. The Reviewer professes there to give a true account of the reception which the recommendations of Earl Bathurst, on the subject of improving the 'condition of the slaves, met with in the West Indies. Jamaica and Barbadoes, he admits, took the lead in protesting against them, and much irritation and violence prevailed, especially in the former of those islands. He might have said, in both witness the destruction, in open day, at Barbadoes, of the Methodist chapel, and the violent expulsion, at the hazard of their lives, of the missionary and his wife. "The impression," he goes on to say, "produced in other colonies was various. In some, the discontinuance of the stimulus of the whip in the field, and of the punishment of female slaves under any circumstances by flogging, was protested against, as a measure incompatible with a state of slavery and with the necessary authority of the masters over their slaves." So far well. The Reviewer, however, proceeds: "In others, these innovations did not appear to create any alarm. In the Address of St. Vincent, it is observed, that these practices had been virtually discontinued; and the government are reproached with their ignorance of the fact. In Demerara, the Court of Policy were particularly zealous in assenting to, and expressing their readiness to enforce, those two particular regulations. In Antigua, the draft of a bill was submitted to the legislature for ameliorating the condition of the slaves; but it was lost on the third reading." Again: "No legislative measure has hitherto passed any assembly, comprehending the whole of the improvements suggested," by Lord Bathurst.

But, it may here be asked, has any legislative measure passed any

one of the assemblies, since their receipt of Lord Bathurst's dispatches, which comprehends-not to say the whole any one of his Lordship's suggested improvements? If the Reviewer cannot answer this question in the affirmative, then, is not the language he employs calculated, however unintentionally, to mislead the reader, and to produce the false impression that some of Lord Ba thurst's recommendations have been adopted by some of the assemblies ? The legislature of Antigua cannot deserve much credit for having rejected a bill for ameliorating the condition of the slaves, which is all they seem to have done; and whatever zeal the Court of Policy of Demerara may have shown in inditing resolutions for the abolition of the driving-whip and of the flogging of females, we have not heard that it has extended beyond the council table.

[ocr errors]

There is, however, the island of St. Vincent, which the Reviewer tells us had discontinued the prac tice of flogging women, and of driving the slaves in the field by the stimulus of the whip; and the plant ers of that island, it seems, even reproach government with their igno rance of the fact. The planters of St. Vincent's, it is true, do insinuate something of this kind; but they fortunately refer, in support of the insinuation (which, after all, is cautiously and ambiguously expressed), to the 18th clause of their new Slave Law, passed in 1820. Now this very clause, on being examined, stands directly opposed both to their insinuation and to the Reviewer's assertion on the subject, Indeed, this clause, as well as every other part of the Act, is little more than a copy of the Slave Law paseed in Jamaica in 1816. The St. Vincent's law on the subject is "as follows:

"That, in order to restrain arbi trary punishment, no slave, on any plantation or estate, shall receive more than ten stripes at one time, and for one offence, unless the

[ocr errors]

owner, attorney, guardian, admini strator, or manager of such estate or plantation, having such slave under his care, shall be present and no such owner, attorney, guardian, administrator, or manager, shall, on any account, punish a slave with more than thirty-nine stripes at one time, and for one offence, nor inflict, nor suffer to be inflicted, such last mentioned punishment, nor any other number of stripes, in the same week †, nor until the delinquent has recovered from the effects of any former punish ment, under a penalty of not less than 15%. (77. 10s. sterling), or more than 307. (157. sterling) for every so offence."

It certainly would not be very easy to shew how it is that this clause (which is at this moment the law of St. Vincent) operates to prohibit the flogging of women, or the driving the slaves in the field by the stimulus of the whip. On the contrary, it comprehends all slaves, male and female, and that under the pretext of restraining arbitrary punishment, in the terrible power which it gives to every owner, at torney, guardian, administrator, and manager, to inflict upon them, at their discretion, and without the possibility of any legal remedy, thirty-nine lashes of the cart whip; and it leaves inferior agents the no less terrible power (considering who they are) of punishment, to the extent of ten stripes, without any limitation whatever as to the frequency of their infliction. Nor does this law impose any restraint on the power of whipping slaves not belonging to plantations. And this is the boasted law of St. Vincent, of which so much has been said, and the humanity of which the Go

The "Manager" of the St. Vincent's Act is called "Overseer" in the Jamaica

Act.

[merged small][ocr errors]

vernment are reproached for not having recognised!!! 16 9ft ym

But, says the Reviewer, these practices, according to the St. Vin cent's Address, have been virtually discontinued." But what is the proof of this ?the assertion, at most, of the planters of St. Vin cent; and not even their assertion

their insinuation merely; and this in the very teeth of their law, But in what one of the colonies has it not been asserted, over and over again, in resolutions and addresses, that the slaves are better off than the peasantry of Great Britain? Has the St. Vincent's Address gone beyond this? And yet the Re viewer has (carelessly, we believe) given the sanction of his authority to the delusive statement, that the island of St. Vincent had disconti nued the practice of flogging wo men and driving the Negroes in the field, and that in direct contradic↓ tion to its own recent lawen, bond.

The Reviewer is right in regard ing the Order in Council for the regulation of slavery in Trinidad as a very important and beneficial measure. He does not, however, seem to be aware, that in some particu lars it deteriorates the state of the slaves in Trinidad, instead of improving it. To prove this, it will be sufficient to contrast some of the provisions of the Spanish Slave Code, which is the law of Trinidad, with the corresponding provisions of the Order in Council.

1st. By the Spanish law, the slaves, besides Sunday, are entitled to a day in each week, and to thirty holidays in the year, to be employed for their own benefit.-By the Order in Council, no time, exclusive of Sunday, is allotted to the slaves. This is so glaring a defect, that it must have been a mere oversight in the framers of the Order, and they will doubtless be desirous of immediately remedying it....

Here, however, it will be proper to advert for one moment to a minute of the Council of Trinidad 4 B

* *

'on this subject, dated the 9th July 1823. One of the propositions discussed by the Council is this"That the Sunday should be devoted, by the slave, to repose and religious instruction; and that other time should be allotted for the cultivation of the provision ground." On this proposition the Council remarks" No objection to this, under the guarantee, already pledged by his Majesty's Government, of allowing full compensation to the proprietor for the loss of the additional day."

The fair inference from this reply is, that hitherto the slaves in Trinidad have had no time but Sunday for cultivating their grounds, and providing for their subsistence and that of their families. But, if so, how come the authorities of the island not to enforce the provisions of the Spanish law? Instead of indemnity to the planters, for appropriating a day in lieu of Sunday to the slaves, they ought to be punished for violating the law, by withholding it from them. Or do they pretend to have a right, by any law, Divine or human, to the labour of their slaves on the Sunday? for that labour is in fact given to the master if it be appropriated to feeding the slaye. Alas! we know not as yet, in this country, half the abominations of the slave system. Who would have believed it possible, prior to this minute of the Council of Trinidad, that if any day besides Sunday should be allotted to the slave for raising food, to enable him to work for his master, the master would claim to be indemnified for so doing by the parent state? No doubt these gentlemen will find themselves mistaken in supposing that the Government has guaranteed to them any such indemnity. Nevertheless, we must lament that the Order in Council should have wholly overlooked this important part of the case; and while it prohibits the Sunday to be employed in labouring for the master, it gives no other

time to the slave for his provision grounds.

2. By the Spanish law, husband and wife cannot be separated by sale or transfer.-By the Order in Council the prohibition to separate them is restricted to judicial sales. A proprietor, therefore, may now sell them separately at his discretion, which by the Spanish law he could not have done. This defect in the Order is the more remarkable, as Mr. Canning in his speech states that" in all future sales, families shall not be separated;" and yet, if the 23d clause of the Order be examined, it will be found that the prohibition applies to judicial sales exclusively.

3d. By the Spanish law (see the minute of the Council of Trinidad of the 9th July 1823), the testimony of slaves is received in all cases quantum valeat. By the Order in Council, this general admission of slave evidence is laid under several new and important restrictions. It cannot now be received unless the slave is certified by some clergyman or religious teacher to understand the nature of an oath. Neither can it be received in civil suits against the master, nor in any trial affecting the life of a WHITE

man.

This last exception, wholly unknown to the Spanish law, is in itself perfectly monstrous. It makes a most unjustifiable distinction between the White and all other classes, although half of the slaves and other property in the island belongs to free Persons of Colour. But, independently of this circumstance, it is impossible to use terms too strong in describing its cruelty and injustice. A White man, against whom, till now, slave evidence might have been legally adduced, may now murder a slave; and though a thousand slaves may have witnessed the fact, not one of them can be heard in evidence. And this is an enactment of our Government in annulment of the humane provisions of the Spanish law!!! It moreover

holds out an actual premium to murder. If a White man should be twice convicted of cruelly treating a slave, he forfeits, according to the Order in Council, all the slaves he possesses. All therefore that is now necessary for him to do, in order to protect himself from this calamitous result, is to kill the slave outright. No slave evidence can then be received against him. The following extract of a letter from Trinidad, dated the 17th of June 1824, will be found to confirm this view of the clause in question. It is from a proprietor of Colour:"The draft of the Order in Council of the 15th March has quite disheartened us, and has completely removed every doubt concerning the system which his Majesty's Ministers propose following with respect to us. I confine myself to the 36th clause, by which, in capital cases, the evidence of a slave is rejected against a White man, and received against a Coloured individual; and yet the Order is said to be for the melioration of slavery! It is quite the contrary. Under the Spanish law the evidence of a slave was admitted against a White man; so that, instead of bettering his condition, it has deteriorated it. At this time, murder may be perpetrated by the privileged class with impunity, unless a free person be pre

sent."

There is one passage in Mr. Canning's speech, quoted by the Reviewer, to which we must briefly advert, because it shews the impositions which are practised on this question, even on a mind so acute and penetrating as Mr. Canning's. Mr. Canning observes, that "it is but just to state, that, under certain qualifications, the evidence of slaves is already admitted in the courts of justice of Dominica, Grenada, St. Vincent's, and I believe St. Christopher's and Tobago." Now, certainly, in no law which has appear ed from Grenada, St. Vincent's, St. Christopher's, and Tobago, can we discover the slightest ground for this

assertion; and we do not believe that by any one of them has such a regulation been adopted. If there has, let it be produced. Indeed, with respect to St. Vincent's the very contrary is the fact. The improved slave code of that island, passed in 1820, which it has been vaunted had anticipated all Lord Bathurst's suggested improvements, contains a clause (the 61st) which expressly enacts, "That the evidence of any slave or slaves, on oath, shall be taken for or against slaves, but in no other case whatever be admissible." Mr. Canning may see, in this single fact, and so may the Reviewer, how little, on this question, West-Indian information is to be relied upon.

The slave law of Dominica alone admits, in certain cases, the evidence of slaves, but this admission is restricted and guarded with such excessive jealousy as to render it really of little or no use.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer. IN your number for September 1823, you inserted a communication from a correspondent signing himself R. H., entitled, " Query on training young Children to keep the Sabbath." The question does not seem to have given rise to the full discussion which its importance deserves; and I trust your readers and correspondents will allow me to recal their attention to it.

Many difficulties, it must be admitted, present themselves in prosecuting the inquiry, but upon the principle on which it rests I apprehend that no doubt can be entertained. The experience of persons of mature years, even of those who aim, with the purest religious motives as their guide, at the best improvement of the Sabbath, cannot fail to have convinced them that the mind is unequal to unintermitted devotional exertions throughout the day, and betakes itself to such relaxations as suitable conversation

and other resources may offer, in order to refresh without unseasonably distracting the thoughts. It is clear, therefore, that some ap propriate relaxation must be sought, of which young children may be allowed to avail themselves on the Sunday, after due attention has been paid to their instruction in the Scriptures, the Church Catechism, Hymns, &c. in which R. H. properly concludes that a due portion of the day will be employed. His inquiry is, whether the remainder of the day should be decidedly marked off from all the rest of the week, by a prohibition of all the usual plays and amusements of young children. Surely nothing can be of greater importance. The impressions received in early youth rapidly strengthen with increasing years; and the child who, from six to twelve or fourteen years of age, has been allowed to indulge, during any portion of the Sunday, in those plays and amusements which occupy his hours of entertainment during the remainder of the week, will in after-life regard the newspaper, and the dinner party, or even (in families where such amusements are sanctioned) the novel and the card-table, as innocent relaxations after a formal attendance upon the stated services of the church.

How then, as R. H. inquires, may this prohibition be best enforced; or, in other words, how may it be enforced without rendering the Sunday irksome to a child, and its duties a heavy task, instead of, what they should be at all seasons of life, a pleasure both in anticipation and in enjoyment?

I reply, that, in order to secure this point, it is necessary that great attention should be paid to the Sunday habits of a child, before the period at which its age will admit of instruction being given in the Church Catechism, and the truths and duties of our Christian faith in general. The infant mind should be thoroughly imbued with the idea that one day in the week is marked

by a peculiar character. This should be taught, (long before any reason can be given for it), by a refusal on the part of the parent to allow the use of the customary toys, books of pictures, &c. Not that toys and books of pictures should be denied, but those allowed upon the Sunday should be appropriate to the day, and different from those in use during the week. As the infant mind expands, the explanations and instructions of the parent will gradually develop the appropriate and peculiar character of the amusements by which the day is marked, and the child will lay up, by a mere act of memory,a store of information, which will afterwards be brought to bear upon more serious and important topics. When the infant mind has been thus trained, and the child has attained the age to which the remarks of R. H. refer, there will no longer be any lack of amusement, and that of a character combining the highest advantages for present improvement and the formation of the future religious character. S. G. E.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

To find fault, ought ever to be a painful duty to a feeling mind; and becomes especially so, when the admonition falls upon things, not merely excellent in part in themselves, but which are surrounded, as it were, by a magic glow of colouring, the tendency of which is to heighten their excellence and conceal their defects. Wherever zeal and imagination are peculiarly called into action, there is always a corresponding danger of the diffusion of this deceptive light, which, like a mist in nature interposing between the object and the sober faculty of judgment, prevents its correct appreciation, till the prejudicial effects of the error divest it at length of its delusive appearance.

As a sober, retired, and aged observer of the passing scenes in the

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »