Part 1 (1/2)

Thoughts On The Necessity Of Improving The Condition Of The Slaves In The British Colonies.

by Thomas Clarkson.

PREFACE.

The following sheets first appeared in a periodical work called The Inquirer. They are now republished without undergoing any substantial alteration. The author however thinks it due to himself to state, that _he would have materially qualified those parts of his essay which speak of the improved Condition of the Slaves in the West Indies since the abolition_, had he then been acquainted with the recent evidence obtained upon that subject. His present conviction certainly is, that he has overrated that improvement, and that in point of fact Negro Slavery is, in its main and leading feature, the same system which it was when the Abolition controversy first commenced.

It is possible there may be some, who, having glanced over the t.i.tle Page of this little work, may be startled at the word _Emanc.i.p.ation_. I wish to inform such, that Mr. Dundas, afterwards Lord Melville, an acute Man, and a Friend to the Planters, _proposed this very measure to Parliament_ in the year 1792. We see, then, that the word Emanc.i.p.ation cannot be charged with _Novelty_. It contains now _no new ideas_. It contains now nothing but what has been _thought practicable_, and _even desirable to be accomplished_. The Emanc.i.p.ation which I desire is such an Emanc.i.p.ation only, as I firmly believe to be compatible not only with the due subordination and happiness of the labourer, but with the permanent interests of his employer.

I wish also to say, in case any thing like an undue warmth of feeling on my part should be discovered in the course of the work, that I had no intention of being warm against the West Indians as a body. I know that there are many estimable men among them living in England, who deserve every desirable praise for having sent over instructions to their Agents in the West Indies from time to time in behalf of their wretched Slaves.

And yet, alas! even these, _the Masters themselves, have not had influence enough to secure the fulfilment of their own instructions upon their own estates_; nor will they, _so long as the present system continues_. They will never be able to carry their meritorious designs into effect against _Prejudice, Law, and Custom_. If this be not so, how happens it that you cannot see the Slaves, belonging to such estimable men, _without marks of the whip upon their backs_? The truth is, that _so long as overseers, drivers, and others, are entrusted with the use of arbitrary power_, and _so long as Negro-evidence is invalid against the white oppressor_, and _so long as human nature continues to be what it is_, _no order_ from the Master for the better personal treatment of the Slave _will or can be obeyed_. It is against the _system_ then, and not against the West Indians as a body, that I am warm, should I be found so unintentionally, in the present work.

One word or two now on another part of the subject. A great noise will be made, no doubt, when the question of Emanc.i.p.ation comes to be agitated, about _the immense property at stake_, I mean the property of the Planters;--and others connected with them. This is all well. Their interests ought undoubtedly to be attended to. But I hope and trust, that, if property is to be attended to _on one side_ of the question, it will be equally attended to _on the other_. This is but common justice.

If you put into one scale _the gold_ and _jewels_ of the Planters, you are bound to put into the other _the liberty_ of 800,000 of the African race; for every man's liberty is _his own property_ by the laws of _Nature_, _Reason_, _Justice_, and _Religion_? and, if it be not so with our West Indian Slaves, it _is only because_ they have been, and continue to be, _deprived_ of it _by force_. And here let us consider for a moment which of these two different sorts of property is of the greatest value. Let us suppose an English gentleman to be seized by ruffians on the banks of the Thames (and why not a _gentleman_ when African _princes_ have been so served?) and hurried away to a land (and Algiers is such a land, for instance), where white persons are held as Slaves. Now this gentleman has not been used to severe labour (neither has the African in his own country); and being therefore unable, though he does his best, to please his master, he is roused to further exertion _by the whip_. Perhaps he takes this treatment indignantly. This only secures him _a severer punishment_. I say nothing of his being badly fed, or lodged, or clothed. If he should have a wife and daughters with him, how much more cruel would be his fate! to see the tender skins of these lacerated by the whip! to see them torn from him, with a knowledge, that they are going to be compelled to submit to the l.u.s.t of an overseer! _and no redress_. ”How long,” says he, ”is this frightful system, which tears my body in pieces and excruciates my soul, which kills me by inches, and which involves my family in unspeakable misery and unmerited disgrace, to continue?”--”For _ever_,” replies a voice Suddenly: ”_for ever_, as relates to your _own_ life, and the life _of your wife and daughters_, and that of _all their posterity_,” Now would not this gentleman give _all that he had left behind him_ in England, and _all that he had in the world besides_, and _all that he had in prospect and expectancy_, to get out of this wretched state, though he foresaw that on his return to his own country he would be obliged to beg his bread for the remainder of his life? I am sure he would. I am sure he would _instantly_ prefer his _liberty to his gold_. There would not be _the hesitation of a moment_ as to the choice he would make. I hope, then, that if _the argument of property_ should he urged on _one side_ of the question, the _argument of property (liberty) will not be overlooked on the other_, but that they will be fairly weighed, the one against the other, and that an allowance will be made as the scale shall preponderate on either side.

THOUGHTS, &c.

I know of no subject, where humanity and justice, as well as public and private interest, would be more intimately united than in that, which should recommend a mitigation of the slavery, with a view afterwards to the emanc.i.p.ation of the Negroes, wherever such may be held in bondage.

This subject was taken up for consideration, so early as when the Abolition of the slave trade was first practically thought of, and by the very persons who first publicly embarked in that cause in England; but it was at length abandoned by them, not on the ground _that Slavery was less cruel, or wicked, or impolitic, than the slave trade_, but for other reasons. In the first place there were not at that time so many obstacles in the way of the Abolition, as of the Emanc.i.p.ation of the Negroes. In the second place Abolition could be effected immediately, and with but comparatively little loss, and no danger. Emanc.i.p.ation, on the other hand, appeared to be rather a work of time. It was beset too with many difficulties, which required deep consideration, and which, if not treated with great caution and prudence, threatened the most alarming results. In the third place, it was supposed, that, by effecting the abolition of the slave trade, the axe would be laid to the root of the whole evil; so that by cutting off the more vital part of it, the other would gradually die away:--for what was more reasonable than to suppose, that, when masters could no longer obtain Slaves from Africa or elsewhere, they would be compelled individually, by a sort of inevitable necessity, or a fear of consequences, or by a sense of their own interest, _to take better care of those whom they might then have in their possession_? What was more reasonable to suppose, than that the different legislatures themselves, moved also by the same necessity, _would immediately interfere_, without even the loss of a day, _and so alter and amend the laws_ relative to the treatment of Slaves, as to enforce that as a public duty, which it would be thus the private interest of individuals to perform? Was it not also reasonable to suppose that a system of better treatment, thus begun by individuals, and enforced directly afterwards by law, would produce more willing as well as more able and valuable labourers than before; and that this effect, when once visible, would again lead both masters and legislators on the score of interest to treat their slaves still more like men; nay, at length to give them even privileges; and thus to elevate their condition by degrees, till at length it would be no difficult task, and no mighty transition, _to pa.s.s them_ to that most advantageous situation to both parties, _the rank of Free Men?_

These were the three effects, which the simple measure of the abolition of the slave trade was expected to produce by those, who first espoused it, by Mr. Granville Sharp, and those who formed the London committee; and by Mr. Pitt, Mr. Fox, Mr. Burke, Mr. Wilberforce, and others of ill.u.s.trious name, who brought the subject before Parliament. The question then is, how have these fond expectations been realized? or how many and which of these desirable effects have been produced? I may answer perhaps with truth, that in our own Islands, where the law of the abolition is not so easily evaded, or where there is less chance of obtaining new slaves, than in some other parts, there has been already, that is, since the abolition of the slave trade, a somewhat _better individual_ treatment of the slaves than before. A certain care has been taken of them. The plough has been introduced to ease their labour.

Indulgences have been given to pregnant women both before and after their delivery; premiums have been offered for the rearing of infants to a certain age; religious instruction has been allowed to many. But when I mention these instances of improvement, I must be careful to distinguish what I mean;--I do not intend to say, that there were no instances of humane treatment of the slaves before the abolition of the slave trade. I know, on the other hand, that there were; I know that there were planters, who introduced the plough upon their estates, and who much to their Honour granted similar indulgences, premiums, and permissions to those now mentioned, previously to this great event. All then that I mean to say is this, that, independently of the common progress of humanity and liberal opinion, the circ.u.mstance of not being able to get new slaves as formerly, has had its influence upon some of our planters; that it has made some of them think more; that it has put some of them more upon their guard; and that there are therefore upon the whole, more instances of good treatment of slaves by individuals in our Islands (though far from being as numerous as they ought to be) than at any former period.

But, alas! though the abolition of the slave trade may have produced a somewhat better individual treatment of the slaves, and this also to a somewhat greater extent than formerly, _not one of the other effects_, so anxiously looked for, has been realized. The condition of the slaves has not yet been improved by _law_. It is a remarkable, and indeed almost an incredible fact, _that no one effort has been made_ by the legislative bodies in our Islands with _the real_ intention of meeting the new, the great, and the extraordinary event of the abolition of the slave trade. While indeed this measure was under discussion by the British Parliament, an attempt was made in several of our Islands to alter the old laws with a view, as it was then pretended, of providing better for the wants and personal protection of the slaves; but it was afterwards discovered, that the promoters of this alteration never meant to carry it into effect. It was intended, by making a show of these laws, _to deceive the people of England_, and _thus to prevent them from following up the great question of the abolition_. Mr. Clappeson, one of the evidences examined by the House of Commons, was in Jamaica, when the a.s.sembly pa.s.sed their famous consolidated laws, and he told the House, that ”he had often heard from people there, that it was pa.s.sed because of the stir in England about the slave trade;” and he added, ”that slaves continued to be as ill treated there _since the pa.s.sing of that act as before_.” Mr. Cook, another of the evidences examined, was long resident in the same island, and, ”though he lived there also _since the pa.s.sing of the_ act, _he knew of no legal protection_, which slaves had against injuries from their masters.” Mr. Dalrymple was examined to the same point for Grenada. He was there in 1788, when the Act for that island was pa.s.sed also, called ”An Act for the better Protection and promoting the Increase and Population of Slaves.” He told the House, that, ”while he resided there, the proposal in the British Parliament for the abolition of the slave trade was a matter of general discussion, and that he believed, that this was a princ.i.p.al reason for pa.s.sing it.

He was of opinion, however, that this Act would prove ineffectual, because, as Negro evidence was not to be admitted, those, who chose to abuse their slaves, might still do it with impunity; and people, who lived on terms of intimacy, would dislike the idea of becoming spies and informers against each other.” We have the same account of the ameliorating Act of Dominica. ”This Act,” says Governor Prevost, ”appears to have been considered from the day it was pa.s.sed until this hour as _a political measure to avert the interference of the mother country in the management of the slaves_.” We, are informed also on the same authority, that the clauses of this Act, which had given a promise of better days, ”_had been wholly neglected_.” In short, the Acts pa.s.sed in our different Islands for the pretended purpose of bettering the condition of the slaves have been all of them most shamefully neglected; and they remain only a dead letter; or they are as much a nullity, as if they had never existed, at the present day.

And as our planters have done nothing yet effectively by _law_ for ameliorating the condition of their slaves, so they have done nothing or worse than nothing in the case of their _emanc.i.p.ation_. In the year 1815 Mr. Wilberforce gave notice in the House of Commons of his intention to introduce there a bill for the registration of slaves in the British colonies. In the following year an insurrection broke out among some slaves in Barbadoes. Now, though this insurrection originated, as there was then reason to believe, in local or peculiar circ.u.mstances, or in circ.u.mstances which had often produced insurrections before, the planters chose to attribute it to the Registry Bill now mentioned. They gave out also, that the slaves in Jamaica and in the other islands had imbibed a notion, that this Bill was to lead to _their emanc.i.p.ation_; that, while this notion existed, their minds would be in an unsettled state; and therefore that it was necessary that _it should be done away_. Accordingly on the 19th day of June 1816, they moved and procured an address from the Commons to the Prince Regent, the substance of which was (as relates to this particular) that ”His Royal Highness would be pleased to order all the governors of the West India islands to proclaim, in the most public manner, His Royal Highness's concern and surprise at the false and mischievous opinion, which appeared to have prevailed in some of the British colonies,--that either His Royal Highness or the British Parliament had sent out orders for _the emanc.i.p.ation_ of the Negroes; and to direct the most effectual methods to be adopted for discountenancing _these unfounded and dangerous impressions_.” Here then we have a proof ”that in the month of June 1816 the planters _had no notion of altering the condition of their Negroes_.” It is also evident, that they have entertained _no such notion since_; for emanc.i.p.ation implies a _preparation_ of the persons who are to be the subjects of so great a change. It implies a previous alteration of treatment for the better, and a previous alteration of customs and even of circ.u.mstances, no one of which can however be really and truly effected without _a previous change of the laws_. In fact, a progressively better treatment _by law_ must have been settled as a preparatory and absolutely necessary work, had _emanc.i.p.ation been intended_. But as we have never heard of the introduction of any new laws to this effect, or with a view of producing this effect, in any of our colonies, we have an evidence, almost as clear as the sun at noonday, that our planters have no notion of altering the condition of their Negroes, though fifteen years have elapsed since the abolition of the slave trade. But if it be true that the abolition of the slave trade has not produced all the effects, which the abolitionists antic.i.p.ated or intended, it would appear to be their duty, unless insurmountable obstacles present themselves, _to resume their labours:_ for though there may be upon the whole, as I have admitted, a somewhat better _individual_ treatment of the slaves by their masters, arising out of an increased prudence in same, which has been occasioned by stopping the importations, yet it is true, that not only many of the former continue to be ill-treated by the latter, but that _all may be so ill-treated_, if the _latter be so disposed_. They may be ill-fed, hard-worked, ill-used, and wantonly and barbarously punished. They may be tortured, nay even deliberately and intentionally killed without the means of redress, or the punishment of the aggressor, so long as the evidence of a Negro is not valid against a white man. If a white master only take care, that no other white man sees him commit an atrocity of the kind mentioned, he is safe from the cognizance of the law. He may commit such atrocity in the sight of a thousand black spectators, and no harm will happen to him from it. In fact, the slaves in our Islands have _no more real protection or redress from law_, than when _the Abolitionists first took up the question of the slave trade_. It is evident therefore, that the latter have still one-half of their work to perform, and that it is their duty to perform it. If they were ever influenced by any good motives, whether of humanity, justice, or religion, to undertake the cause of the Negroes, they must even now be influenced by the same motives to continue it. If any of those disorders still exist, which it was their intention to cure, they cannot (if these are curable) retire from the course and say--there is now no further need of our interference.

The first step then to be taken by the Abolitionists is to attempt to introduce an _entire new code of laws_ into our colonies. The treatment of the Negroes there must no longer be made to depend upon _the presumed effects_ of the abolition of the slave trade. Indeed there were persons well acquainted with Colonial concerns, who called the abolition _but a half measure_ at the time when it was first publicly talked of. They were sure, that it would never _of itself_ answer the end proposed. Mr.

Steele also confessed in his letter to Dr. d.i.c.kson[1] (of both of whom more by and by), that ”the abolition of the stave trade would _be useless_, unless at the same time the infamous laws, which he had pointed out, _were repealed_.” Neither must the treatment of the Negroes be made to depend upon what may be called _contingent humanity_. We now leave in this country neither the horse, nor the a.s.s, nor oxen, nor sheep, to the contingent humanity even of _British bosoms_;--and shall we leave those, whom we have proved to be _men_, to the contingent humanity of a _slave colony_, where the eye is familiarized with cruel sights, and where we have seen a constant exposure to oppression without the possibility of redress? No. The treatment of the Negroes must be made to depend _upon law_; and unless this be done, we shall look in vain for any real amelioration of their condition. In the first place, all those old laws, which are repugnant to humanity and justice, must be done away. There must also be new laws, positive, certain, easy of execution, binding upon all, by means of which the Negroes in our islands shall have speedy and substantial redress in real cases of ill-usage, whether by starvation, over-work, or acts of personal violence, or otherwise. There must be new laws again more akin to the principle of _reward_ than of _punishment_, of _privilege_ than of _privation_, and which shall, have a tendency to raise or elevate their condition, so as to fit them by degrees to sustain the rank of free men.

But if a new Code of Laws be indispensably necessary in our colonies in order to secure a better treatment to the slaves, to whom must we look for it? I answer, that we must not look for it to the West Indian Legislatures. For, in the first place, judging of what they are likely to do from what they have already done, or rather from what they have _not_ done, we can have no reasonable expectation from that quarter. One hundred and fifty years have pa.s.sed, during which long interval their laws have been nearly stationary, or without any material improvement.

In the second place, the individuals composing these Legislatures, having been used to the exercise of unlimited power, would be unwilling to part with that portion of it, which would be necessary to secure the object in view. In the third place, their prejudices against their slaves are too great to allow them to become either impartial or willing actors in the case. The term _slave_ being synonymous according to their estimation and usage with the term _brute_, they have fixed a stigma upon their Negroes, such as we, who live in Europe, could not have conceived, unless we had had irrefragable evidence upon the point. What evils has not this cruel a.s.sociation of terms produced? The West Indian master looks down upon his slave with disdain. He has besides a certain antipathy against him. He hates the sight of his features, and of his colour; nay, he marks with distinctive opprobrium the very blood in his veins, attaching different names and more or less infamy to those who have it in them, according to the quant.i.ty which they have of it in consequence of their pedigree, or of their greater or less degree of consanguinity with the whites. Hence the West Indian feels an unwillingness to elevate the condition of the Negro, or to do any thing for him as a human being. I have no doubt, that this prejudice has been one of the great causes why the improvement of our slave population _by law_ has been so long r.e.t.a.r.ded, and that the same prejudice will continue to have a similar operation, so long as it shall continue to exist. Not that there are wanting men of humanity among our West Indian legislators. Their humanity is discernible enough when it is to be applied to the _whites_; but such is the system of slavery, and the degradation attached to this system, that their humanity seems to be lost or gone, when it is to be applied to the _blacks_. Not again that there are wanting men of sense among the same body. They are shrewd and clever enough in the affairs of life, where they maintain an intercourse with the _whites_; but in their intercourse with the _blacks_ their sense appears to be shrivelled and not of its ordinary size. Look at the laws of their own making, as far as the Negroes are concerned, and they are a collection of any thing but--wisdom.

It appears then, that if a new code of laws is indispensably necessary in our Colonies in order to secure a better treatment of the slaves there, we are not to look to the West Indian Legislatures for it. To whom then are we to turn our eyes for help on this occasion? We answer, To the British Parliament, the source of all legitimate power; to that Parliament, _which has already heard and redressed in part the wrongs of Africa_. The West Indian Legislatures must be called upon to send their respective codes to this Parliament for revision. Here they will be well and impartially examined; some of the laws will be struck out, others amended, and others added; and at length they will be returned to the Colonies, means having been previously devised for their execution there.

But here no doubt a considerable opposition would arise on the part of the West India planters. These would consider any such interference by the British Parliament as an invasion of their rights, and they would cry out accordingly. We remember that they set up a clamour when the abolition of the slave trade was first proposed. But what did Mr. Pitt say to them in the House of Commons? ”I will now,” said he, ”consider the proposition, that on account of some patrimonial rights of the West Indians, the prohibition of the slave trade would be an invasion of their legal inheritance. This proposition implied, that Parliament had no right to stop the importations: but had this detestable traffic received such a sanction, as placed it more out of the jurisdiction of the Legislature for ever after, than any other branch of our trade? But if the laws respecting the slave trade implied a contract for its perpetual continuance, the House could never regulate any other of the branches of our national commerce. But _any contract_ for the promotion of this trade must, in his opinion, _have been void from the beginning_; for if it was _an outrage upon justice_, and only another name for _fraud, robbery, and murder_, what _pledge_ could devolve upon the Legislature to incur the obligation of becoming princ.i.p.als in the commission of such enormities by sanctioning their continuance?”

They set up again a similar clamour, when the Registry Bill before mentioned was discussed in Parliament, contending that the introduction of it there was an interference with their rights also: but we must not forget the reply which Mr. Canning made to them on that occasion. ”He had known, (he said,) and there might again occur, instances of obstinacy in the colonial a.s.semblies, which left the British Parliament no choice but direct interference. Such conduct might now call for such an exertion on the part of Parliament; but all that he pleaded for was, that time should be granted, that it might be known if the colonial a.s.semblies would take upon them to do what that House was pleased to declare should be done. The present address could not be misunderstood.

It told the colonial a.s.semblies, You are safe for the present from the interference of the British Parliament, on the belief, and on the promise made for you, that left to yourselves you will do what is required of you. To hold this language was sufficient. The a.s.semblies might be left to infer the consequences of a refusal, and Parliament might rest satisfied with the consciousness, that they held in their hands the means of accomplis.h.i.+ng that which they had proposed.” In a subsequent discussion of the subject in the House of Lords, Lord Holland remarked, that ”in his opinion there had been more prejudice against this Bill than the nature of the thing justified; but, whatever might be the objection felt against it in the Colonies, it might be well for them to consider, that it would be _impossible for them to resist_, and that, if the thing was not done by them, _it would be done for them_.” But on this subject, that is, on the subject of colonial rights, I shall say more in another place. It will be proper, however, to repeat here, and to insist upon it too, that there is no _effectual way_ of remedying the evil complained of, but by subjecting the colonial laws to the _revision of the Legislature of the mother country_; and perhaps I shall disarm some of the opponents to this measure, and at any rate free myself from the charge of a novel and wild proposition, when I inform them that Mr.

Long, the celebrated historian and planter of Jamaica, and to whose authority all West Indians look up, adopted the same idea. Writing on the affairs of Jamaica, he says: ”The system[2] of Colonial government, and the imperfection of their several laws, are subjects, which never were, but _which ought to be_, strictly canva.s.sed, examined, and amended by the British Parliament.”

The second and last step to be taken by the Abolitionists should be, to collect all possible light on the subject of _emanc.i.p.ation_ with a view of carrying that measure into effect in its due time. They ought never to forget, that _emanc.i.p.ation_ was included in _their original idea of the abolition of the slave trade_. Slavery was then as much an evil in their eyes as the trade itself; and so long as the former continues in its present state, the extinction of it ought to be equally an object of their care. All the slaves in our colonies, whether men, women, or children, whether _Africans or Creoles_, have been unjustly deprived of their rights. There is not a master, who has the least claim to their services in point of equity. There is, therefore, a great debt due to them, and for this no payment, no amends, no equivalent can be found, but a _restoration to their liberty_.

That all have been unjustly deprived of their rights, may be easily shown by examining the different grounds on which they are alleged to be held in bondage. With respect to those in our colonies, who are _Africans_, I never heard of any t.i.tle to them but by the _right of purchase_. But it will be asked, where did the purchasers get them? It will be answered, that they got them from the sellers; and where did the sellers, that is, the original sellers, get them? They got them by _fraud or violence_. So says the evidence before the House of Commons; and so, in fact, said both Houses of Parliament, when they abolished the trade: and this is the plea set up for retaining them in a cruel bondage!!!

With respect to the rest of the slaves, that is, the _Creoles_, or those born in the colonies, the services, the perpetual services, of these are claimed on the plea of the _law of birth_. They were born slaves, and this circ.u.mstance is said to give to their masters a sufficient right to their persons. But this doctrine sprung from the old Roman law, which taught that all slaves were to be considered as _cattle_. ”Partus sequitur ventrem,” says this law, or the ”condition or lot of the mother determines the condition or lot of the offspring.” It is the same law, which we ourselves now apply to cattle while they are in our possession.