Star. — London, England, 1825-01-14 00:00:00

WEST INDIA SLAVERY• LETTER XII.—PART V. ;$ cormwATION FROM THE STAR OF WEDNESDAY. TO THE EDITOR OF THR STAR. h a ve already endeavoured to establish the pro. ,us i t i no , that, abstractedly considered, the present i tren nistances of the Negro population in the West In. 0, made it impossible to suppose that the Negro, if sud d en ly emancipated, would he induced, (by such wa ges as the Proprietor could afford to give,) to work fur bi te ‘ith the same degree of steady and conti soon,, though mojerate exertion, which is now re• sired and devoted to the cultivation of sugar. So veil for the theory of the subject. I now approach to the question of fact, as maintained by ANGLUS, and a rAied upon the evidence of Sir Ralph Woodford, g r . B. Hibbert, and Dr. Stobo. Asotos says, " Sir Ralph Woodford tells us, the • slaves in Trinidad may amass much beyond the wants of the utmost ambition or profligacy." These wcrds r e taken from an official letter from the Governer of Ttiaidad to the Under Secretary of State, dated 3d i g grht, 1817, and laid before Parliament on the 10th Joe, 1818 ; and in which letter it is farther said: The comforts of the Slaves depend on themselves and ' , their own industry : and their health upon their own •improdencies or the quantum of work they are re squired to perform. 'They can, if they chuse, with 'very little trouble, amass much beyond the wants of 'the utmost ambition or profligacy, but the idle and ' , drunken (of which there are many) will always be in opovetty and in rags. I have frequently known cases ' , of Negroes pi eferring to continue Slaves than with ample means to purchase their freedom, or even to "accept it. With a humane owner the Negro is most 'happy as a Slave, and when sick, lie always shares "the fare of the owner's table." This statement of a meritorious public officer, made ender a heavy responsibility, and made to his Majesty's Government, A Noun has not been able to disprove. I t appears from this statement, that all Slaves do not t ier, the same degree of industry, and that the idle ex perience the consequences of indolence, while the indus trious, on the contrary, benefit by their own exertions. "In this case, then," says Annuls, " a stimulus has been alrealy found of far greater potency than the Whip, • and yet the Reviewer seems to cleave to the whip as alone capable of rendering the labour of the Negro "beneficial to the Plantcro" To establish the favourite proposition of ANGLUS (for which object he has involved himself in this controversy) —that if the Slaves are at once emancipated, the Planter will derive as much work from them, by meansof wages, in their new state of freedom, as they now do by the co ercion of slavery—it was necessary to have supported his arguments by citing some instances, or at least one single isgance, of Slaves who had been in the habit of working industriously for themselves on the Saturday or Sunday, as well as during the other five days of the week for their Master, but who, on being emancipated, had consented to work for adequate hire, to their new character as free Negroes, these same five days in the week. Instead of adopting this fair mode of proceeding, he adopts a course, the fallacy'and unfairness of which, it shall be my particular care conclusively to demonstrate. Referring to Sir Ralph Woodford's statement, &c. as having strewn that Slaves worked for themselves on Saturday and Sunday, he contemptuously challenges the Reviewer " to convince reasoning men in this coun 4, try, that if a Negro will work industriously, from morel motives, on a Saturday or Sunday, he will not “ also be influenced, by the same motives, to work in-1 dustriously on the other five days orthe week:' It it were true, that Sir Ralph Woodford's statement had sheen that the Negroes were influenced by " moral N, otives, the Reviewer might have had a more diffi cult task to execute. Let us pause to analyse the' motives of this asserted volantary industry on the Saturday and Sunday. It will be found to proceed from the necessity of cultivating provision grounds, by the produce of which the Slave is fed, and from the superabund9nce of which produce, he is enabled, by selling it, to gratify his desire of ob taining certain necessary comforts. If this analysis be correct, we are entitled to argue that, in la state of free dom, the Negro in the West Indies will cultivate pro visions sufficient for the support of himself and family, and even in a still greater quantity, in order to provide against the chance of scarcity, as he can exchange the mess of those productions beyond the consumption of his family, for such comforts as habit has rendered ne cessary. But, if these objects can be obtained, and his necessities and limited desires gratified, by two days labour, where is the security or probability that he will be induced, by wages,_ to work the other five days, or to forego th e l uxur y o f indolence for the attraction of any superior comforts which his money wages may be . able to procure for him ? I can detect no "moral motive, which will at first sticceeni in overcoming his enjoyment of abstinence from labour altogether. Then what does true policy require as a necessary preliminary to any general system of emancipation, if it be not the creation of an adequate " moral motive," improving his condition, both moral and physical, and by rai.ing his scale of wants and making him de pendant on a greater degree of personal exertion for their gratification? With whatever difficulties this problem of altering the Negro character, and at the same time consulting Lis fair inte rests o f t h e M aster , may b e surroun d e d, Ls creation of a moral motive is the only satisfactory !elation of it which can combine the objects of the Int perate Abolitionists with the interests of the West India capitalists. The Reviewer appears fully to have felt the difficulty nt inducing men freely ant voluntatily to labour for natural rate of wages, for the mutual benefit of i nnwiselves and anot h er , un d er t h e pecu li ar c i r cumstances !climate, civilization, and habits of a people, where Belabour of a few hours in a day will procure sub -47.ce fur a week. ANcLus, I am aware, meets this difficulty by his re -11 mendation to give " adequate wages;" but, in this 4 1 :et the capit a li st can on l y a ff or d to g i v e such wages sill enable him to bring his sugar to market at the ome price as other people do, who, having Slaves, rgive the natural price of wages for their labour. ' th e many cases already shewn, wages and high al -1 ky ucu to free N egroes were insu ffi cient to stimulate t ,, 11 ° ant'ary exertion to cultivate sugar. In the East 4, 1 1 5 % a gate of oppression existed among the agricul• CI"Se St which made th e m labour for a less sum, (44 ithln the Slave in the West Indies acquires fon ii Port and maintenance; and, thererore, the case ‘ l shut i apply to that of f ree N egt oes , or ibe Indians of r$ in the West Indies. 111 the cases examined, we only find the stimulus 111, ed of necessity, and not the " Moral motive," which .ks- GLUS has assumed to be the prime mover of the exer tion used, but without affording any reason to support the truth of his assertion, although the whole argument depended thereon. In England, where the stimulus to labour, from ne cessity, is so very great and so very powerful, it would be -difficult to point out the quantum of exertion that arose exclusiyely from a " moral motive ;" yet, in the West Indies, where necessity forms so moderate a sti mulus, A NOLUS assumes that the " moral motive" alone produces the little voluntary exertion which is seen in that country. As A NOLUS has not followed up his own argument, by shewing that free Negroes, who are entire masters of their own time, continue their agricultural industry 'during the other days of the week, to obtain the re wards atteudant upon such industry, I am induced to inquire into the subject, in the absence of all infotma- Lion from him of a specific nature. The testimony of a Gentleman who had resided in Colombia, and now actually employs free labourers in Trinidal, gives a clear idea of the extent of this stimu lus, on that class of persons, in West India agriculture; and 1 quote this, as being the most successful experi ment of any of the numerous failures which I have in vestigated. The Gentleman says, in August, 1824, from Trinidad, " When 1 commenced my agticultutal " pursuits, about twenty years ago, on the Spanish " Main, I had a small gang of Slaves, and the country " abounding in Peons (the country name for free la " bourers), I flattered myselt that I-could extend my " cultivation to any extent; but I was undeceived, by " discovering that the quantity of labour by one man 41 executed in Europe, or the Eastern States of North " America, in a month, required five Peons in these " countries : thus, to get the work of ten men, I was " obliged to have fifty men. When the Colombian Re " volution drove me to this Colony, I was followed by " many - of my former Peons, and bought a small plan " cation, with a few Slaves, and settled my Peons " around me, possessing Slaves to keep the work of the " plantation in constant progression. The Peons as " sisted, quantum valeat ; and, as they were only paid " for the labour actually performed, they were profitably " employed IN AID OF THE SLAVES. " About four years ago, I took a fertile lot of land " on the Conubia, and• proposed, as far as practicable, " to cultivate it in cocoa and coffee, by free labour only. " I was, however, obliged to send Slaves to make " trenches, for the free people refused, absolutely, to " work with spade, or shovel, or hoe." The following statement is deserving of great attens Lion :—" I have fourteen field slaves, male and female, " who maintain 100 acres of cultivation in cocoa, and "make the crop, and the task of the Slaves (for they " work task work) is so light that it is always finished " about two o'clock ; and it would be strange to see a " Negro working on the Estate after that hour, except " for himself. On the Conubia Estate, I have ten free "labourers, who work all day, when they do work at " all, and maintain, in a slovenly manner, twenty-five " acres without making any crop, except previsions, "this is the most that 1 can persuade them to do, and "it is, ptelrhaps, more than any of my neighbours can "effect: these facts may be corroborated by reference " to my annual returns, and I am ready to substantiate " them in the presence of a Magistrate. " In reference to my book of labour, I find I have "credited for the year past— " Gregory lif days in flu whole year. " Toval 98 ditto. " Garcia 130 ditto. " Eisente 80 - ditto. Herrara 78 ditto. " Juan 90 - - ditto." These persons remained all the year with the same Gentleman, and worked nowhere else ; others remained only broken periods of the year, and their quantum of exertion was still less in proportion. The facts pre sented by these details shew ,that the free labourers only worked about one-third of the year, and that their exertion during that time, was far below the exertion of Slaves working by task-work, and finishing it daily about two o'clock; it - appears also, that the free la bourers refused to perform some parts of the work re quired, even on cocoa and coffee cultivation, connected with the trenches. I have already mentioned the dis tinction I make between the testimony of West Indians, as to facts, and as to opinions. The evidence of any man, as to a fact, is valuable, but the mere expression of an opinion, whether by AtioLus; the Reviewer, or a West Indian, must be received with reference to the facts upon -which such opinion is founded. ANOtUS avoids the statement of detailed facts, which renders his opinions in this case of little weight, and in opposing them by other opinions, it is only meant to be shewn, that the one is fully as deserving of attention as the other. The Trinidad Gentleman, speaking of his" free "blacks," says, "the motive that they have for not work " ing is,that they have an abundance of farinaceous food " at hand, the rivers abound with fish, and the woods " with wild meat." If this assertion be not true, it can easily be disproved ; but reasoning on this assertion, and the other facts given, he says : "We may adduce, from these facts, " that any wot k that requires a steady aggregate farce " of any given number of men, cannot be done by free " blacks. Coffee, cocoa, and cotton, have been pro " duced (with difficulty) by free labourersjor if the " crop is not gathered to-day it may be to-morrow, and 41 if the gra's is not cut this week, it may be done next " week ; but to catty on the combined labour of a " sugar estate, where the least procrastination is ruin, " with free labourers, in this country, is in my opinion " hopeless." This, I admit, is merely the opinion of an individual; and every reader will exercise his own discretion in adopting or not, the inferences drawn from the facts stated. The Reviewer Merely adopted the fact, that sugar had not been profitably' cultivated by free ne roes ;- but he did not express the opinion, that such an event never could take place. His opinion on this point he reserved, asd recommended that the facts adduced on either side should be fairly discussed, between the Abolitionists and the West Indians. I proceed, there fore, to notice the case just cited, by which it appears this evidence, collected from -Trinidad, ‘oncurs with all hitherto produced, in shewing that a stimulus has not yet been found capable of rendering the voluntary exertions of the free labourers in the West Indies, for ,wages, more beneficial than that of the Slaves to the Planter owning the soil, the buildings, and machinery of a sugar plantation ; and that this -circumstance does not in the least discredit the statements made by Sir Ralph Woodford to his Majesty's Govert.mmt, shewing the productiveness of the soil, when . the_Negroes (whether slave or free) choose to cultivate it. With respect to the evidence of those whom ii „ NGL . IIII designates as " Mr. R. Hibbert's a ffi davit men, I find k unnecessary .to notice what can only be con.ideredl as an insinuation, on the part of A xcLus, that these affi davits do not state the truth, as to the point under en quiry. It cannot reasonably be expected of me to sup port by argument, the evidence given on oath," tmle,is such evidence be opposed by some reawns stronger than mere insinuation. With Dr. Stobo, ANocus appears to be dissatisfied for a most extraordinary reason : viz. the " parade of " minute statistical research." Had Dr. Stobo merely given opinions i lt would not have been necessary to have defended them, but minute statistical researches must refer to fict,, and these must be valuable on this question, whatever opinions the person may entertain who has collected them. If Dr. gtobo, or ANOLUS, under the influence of a biassed judgment, should not give a fair statement of statistical facts on this question, then it would be most desirable to expose the et rocs, and skew wherein they consisted, and how far they affected the,conclusion ar rived at in this investigation.• 4NoLus has not at tempted to impugn the fairness of Dr. Stobo's state ments, and, as they are important, 1 shall proceed to investigate them. These researches were_ published hut June and July, in the True Patriot, and exhibit a statistical account of the property possessed by the industrious portion of the Slaves in Tortola, a poor Colony, and yet they also tend to confirm the statements of Sir Ralph Woodford, when speaking of the Slaves in a Colony remarkable for the fertility of its soil. There is also a similar statistical statement of the property possessed by a cer tain number of adult free Negroes, in Tortola, who sup port themselves as the Slaves flo, chiefly by cultivating land belonging to themselves, and solely for the'r own benefit ; so that the question is seen under different cir cumstances from the flee blacks in Trinidad, who worked for hire. Instead of being too minute, however, it is to be re gretted, that Dr. Stobo diJ not enter into more details, particularly as to the number of persons composing the families of the seventy-eight adult free Negroes, who cultivate their own land, for their individual benefit, &c. &c. The result of a comparison of- these statistical re turns, however, leads to this conclusion, that a number of Slaves, emancipated many years ago, by their for mer owners (who also left the Negroes now free, both money and land), exercise so little agricultural in dustry for their own benefit, that in point of wealth and comfort, as in Trinidad, they do not appear to be better off than the industrious Slaves in the same Island; and yet these Slaves, as ANGLUS justly ob serves, have only a "fragment of time allowed to them " by their Masters," to be employed in raising similar productions to those raised by the free Negroes, who had all their time at their own disposal. It appears also, that the law of St. Vincent, quoted by ANGLUS, does not prevent the Slaves in Tortola from raising cotton, as Dr. Stobo refers to this branch of their industry, but unfortunately does not estimate its amount, nor the value of the esculents and fruits disposed of by the Slaves. In Mr. Stephen's work en titled The Slavery of thei British West India Colonies Delineated, page 300, it is indeed, said, that a law exists in Tortola, prohibiting Slaves from owning cattle ; yet, according to Dr. Stobo's statistical account, it appears that the Slaves in Tortola, own thirty•eight horses, and 931 horned cattle, &c. hich, in a small Wand like Tortola, could be so easily reckoned, that it is not likely any great error exists, either as to the fact itself, or to the number of cattle. A HOLDS, who brings for ward matter from the records of Tortola, to answer Mr. M'Queen, is perfectly silent as to this fact, stated by Dr. Stobo; and therefore the fair•inference is, that the main points of the statistical facts in the statements of Dr. Stobo are correct, for ANGLUS has not even at tempted to disprove them. It becomes, therefore, an interesting subject of en quiry, to ascertain why the Negroes, when free, and under the powerful stimulus of bettering their own cow: dition, and that of their families, do not, in a soil like Tortola, as well as in a richer one, like Trinidad, exert that degree of industry in agriculture, (even when they in their own right possess land),-which would infallibly accomplish an object so desirable ? When free coloured persons better their condition by owning Slaves ac quired by inheritance, favour, or mechanical industry, and these Slaves are forced, by the free persons, to labour in agriculture, as is very common in the West Indies, it is obvious this class of free coloured persons act under the same motives as white men, under similar circum stances; and afford no data for the comparison be tween free and Slave-labour in West India agriculture. Atiows confounds this class of free coloured Pro. prietors of Slaves, with those free coloured persons who themselves 'actually labour in agriculture, and thus misleads the reader. In his Second Letter, ArroLus introduces to the Reader's notice in the est Indies, " many thousands " of emancipated Slaves and their descendants &s toil " ing industriously, accumulating property, ice.' If this were the fact, as to the personal labour of these individuals in agriculture, the mere proof of the fact would have been a satisfactory answer, shewing, is their case, that an adequate stimulus had been found. But when I asked ANGLUS where these persons lived, and required such particulars as would enable the public to judge as to the fact, he preserved a profound silence, because he could not prove his oxen assertion, in the meaning it conveyed. Instead of the inform ,tion required, ANoLUS gives, in an Appendix to his Letters, some information, shewing —not the personal industry of the free black and coloured people, but their growing prosperity from the number of Slaves they possessed, a point on which no doubts had ever existed. In Tortola, ANGLUS says, in 1818, the number of free black and coloured persons who possessed Slavesovas 81, and the number of Slaves owned by them was 546. But, in 1822, or four years afterwards, the number of free black and coloured persons, who possessed Slaves, was 120, and the number of Slaves owned by them was 1766. If such circumstances had arisen by their individual industry in agriculture, the result would have been most satisfactory ; but, on exa mining the facts of the case, it appears, that during the.e four yearssome white individuals died,making their free coloured children heirs to considerable property in plantations and Slaves; circumstances which no more affected the question at issue, and on which enquiries were made, than if the Slaves had been bequeathed to white, instead of coloured persons. The cases of other persons made free, appear to have been equally in applicable, as not one is brought forward. A troLus having no case to support his own assertions, changes the inquiry and introduces a new subject, which certainly is very interesting, and requites some notice, • Vide facts verified upon oath, in contradiction to the Report of the Rev. Thos. Cooper, bcc. published iu-1824. .. . _ ;~~ I AS it is the only statement opposed to the stativtical facts of Dr. Stobo. ANOLUS says, Mr. Nottingham, a benevolent Quaker, emancipated a certain number of Slaves in the Island of Tortola, the number of whom, in the year 1793, was twenty ; but, in 1823, they had increased to the number of fbrty-four. " The increase, therefore," says ANG LUZI, " had been at the rate of 120 per cent. in thirty•three "years,' or 3 seven. elevenths per cent. per annum. And in the fifth letter of ANGLUS, relative to the increase of these free people, he says •‘ 1 An increase which is the more remarkable,beeause the surrounding slave popti -44 lation has decreased in the slaw' time, nearly in the ig same proportion in which the Nottinghams have in " creased." The decrease on the neighbour ing estates, however, is not given, for. the reader. to judge of the truth of this assertion.. But the general decrea:e of the island is given, on data which he quotes, and which decrease amounts only to a small fraction exceeding one per cent. per annum. In quoting the data, A N0i.(711 avoids all mention of the hurricane in 1819, with re- ference to the decrease ascertained, from the ilegi.ter's returns, between 1818 and 1822, although one of the persons whose slaves he mentions as having decreased three per cent. per annum (Mr.Hetherington), died t roar the injury he received in that tremendous st..rof, and his . wife was killed outfight by his side. When such was the result to p - roprietors, the effect on Slaves may be easily conceived ; but ANGLUS ought to have stated that the event had occurred. Nor does he give the reader the ages or diseases of those who died, that a proper judgment might be formed from facts , how far the decrease arose lrom the three caus es assigned by ANGLUS, viz. " severity of treatment, excess of la " boor, and scantiness of ft,od." For example, were it known how many of those who died were children, and they should form a considerable number, certainly se voiity of treatment and excess of labour could not tea- sonably be assigned as the cause of their death. Mr. Nl , Dunnel, in his able work entitled, Considerations on Negro Siavtry, page 177, shew 3, even in Denierary, where the planters are compatatively wealthy and food abundant, that six per cent. mote of Negro children died there than in Paris. ANGLUS giving no information on these points, I return to Dr. Stobo, and perhaps the reader will soon discover-why ANoLus sneered at the " minute statis tical details" of that Gentleman. When Arrows told us that the persons emancipated by Mr. Nottingham had increases' at the rate of 120 per cent. in thirty:three years," he observed his usuvl method of avoiding minute details. These Dr. - Stobo has supplied, by giving the names of the twenty-five Slaves manumitted by Mr. Nottingham, on the 30th of April, 1784. To these persons fifty acres of land were given, and Mrs. Hannah Abbott, sister of Mr. Notting ham, afterwards added a gift of 8161. 16s. sterling, to . be divided amongst them, which was done by Dr. Dawson. Although ANGLUS gives the dates of records, he omits to mention this important fact, relative to the pecuniary aid given to those free Negroes. Dr Stobo, in page 286 of the True Patriot, pro: teeth to give not only the names of the persons who had children, but the names of the fathers and soothers, as well as those of the children themselves ; and instead of all the females emancipated having children, only five of the original number appear to have I had offspring, and they were by different lathers, who were not of the Nottingham party of free Negroes ; some were Slaves. . Among the male Nottinghams, he gives the names of those also who had offspring by -females why wzre alogether unconnectted with the Notting. hams; consequently half the increase must be am t bu-ted to other clan es of pe: sons; The Reader will now pe:ceive, how very different the question stands as to the ratio of increase from what ANGLUS had misrepresented it, from his mode of sup pressing those details which Dr. Stobo had supplied. If Dr. Stobo be correct, the Nottinghams have not in creased, and ANGLUS asserts they have increased at the rate of 120 per cent. in thirty-three years. Dr. Stobo gives minute statistical details in support of his state- • ments, which ANcLus does not attempt to confute, but gives other statements, without those details which are necessary to form a correct opinion on the subject. The Reader is left to form his own opinion as to whether Manus or Dr. Stobo is right j or whether they may not both be . incorrect. One fact stated by Dr, Stobo respecting these persons, and not noticed by ANGLUS, is the present value of their property, amounting to 2381. 13s. whereas they were left, many years ago, 3161. 16s. by Mrs. Abbott, besides the land given to them by Mr. Nottingham. The amount of the land also is included in the sum of 2381. 13s. sterling. So that whilst the industrious slaves of Tortola have accumulated capital, by the labour of a portion of their week, not exceeding two days, these free coloured people, having land of their own, have become poorer,with the entire command of their own time during the whole week. If this be true, and ANGLUS has neither denied nor disproved it, the inference, in their especial case, is too obvious to re quire farther reasoning. It also appears, that the two good houses in their vil lage were built b y a Slave and a free man, both of whom were only connected with the Nottingham: by marriage; and, moreover, that the Slave hires other Slaves, occasionally, to work the grounds belonging to his wife and siz children, who are all free. It is foreign to my object to give a similar examination of other statements made by A Nolan, but I trust I have shewn the necessity of receiving statements made by hint with great caution, as he appears to rely too much ou the credulity and ignorance of the Reader, and to depend too much on the effect of declamation ; and appeals to the feelings, on a question whereon he takes the po pular side. I have now cleared the question, as to the comparative agricultural industry of the Slate and free Negro po pulation of Tortola, from the confusion into a hich ANGLUS had brought it, by representing the increase of capital bequeathed to free coloured persons by their white parents, as a proof of increased industry ; and have shown that he is not justified in a.serting, that the agricultural class of free Negroes have encreased their numbers by natural means, in the ratio assumed by him. The argument which I shall use, will now be more clearly understood by the Reader ; and on referring to the statistical statements of Dr: Stobo, it will be ob served, that he confines himself to the property of free black people,who had been Slaves themselves s or theit an• cestors, and who had been freed by benevolent masters and mistresses; who, also, besides freedom, had be queathed to their Slaves land and money, to enable them to support themselves. And it was the result of their in dustry, having all their time to themselves, that I wished to compare with the result of the labour of Slaves, who bid only, as AtsoLos justly says, a f. agment cf the time allowed to them for cultivating their own grounds. It appears, during that fragment, the industrious Slaves , • \..,4!. I I ' f. ' lb.- • - . •