The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-30 00:00:00

brought forward their case, the friend of the negro appren-
tices flinched from his duty—( Hear, hear, hear)—glossed
over each, and that all wile silence ; affil knowin, this, 1
am compelled in some sort to enter upon the distussion
of this question. And, first, I will express my gratitude
to my Noble Friend near me (Lord Seaford) that the skill
which he displayed was by no means proportioned to his
zeal in the cause ; for nothing can be more decisive in favour
of' the demands which I have made, nothing can be more
in favour of the views which the petitioners have taken,
than the statement of the Noble Lord, that there is no
pretence for saying that there is a compact, or that theie.,
ever was a contract. I never yet heard stronger ad-
missions made by any speaker, not made once, but two or
three times over—not in the hurry of debate, but after deli-
beration—when he said that there was no compact ; that a
compact there cannot be—(Cheers)—because there was no
contracting party to make it. Observe, my Lords, how
the case stands, and I hope that this proposition will have
its due effect elsewhere, in any vote which may be come
to upon this subject, that this most important admission had
been made by the planters, by one of the most influential
of their body, by their chief representativc—( No, no,
from Lord Seaford)—at all events, by their main sup-
porter, who for many years (and this must not be forgotten)
was the Chairman of the West Indian body, a great planter
himself, and the leader of the body for many years in the
other House of Parliament—the zealous opponents, the bit-
ter opponents, of emancipation.—(No, from Lord Seaford.)
If it were possible to find a more bitter opponent—a more
strong, a more vehement, if the Noble Lord preferred sweeter
words—( A laugh)—but a more strong, a more vehement, a
more unhesitating opponent than his Noble Friend had
that night proved himself to be—grounded, as I fancied, on
his (minions against emancipation, till the hour shall have
struck twelve on the night of the 31st July in the year
1840—I have never heard either within the walls of Parlia-
ment, or without the walls of Parliament. And what
,has
been the admission which has been made upon this high au-
thority, which will put an end to all difficulty ? That as for
any compact, any breach of faith, any contract, any bargain
being made, there was none ; he says that what was done by
Parliament was done by itself—( Hear, hear)—and that it had
no authority to make the compact; and the Noble Lord drew
this corollary from his own statement, bearing out his view
of the case—therefore to talk of a breach of faith was
preposterous, because there was no faith plighted ; there
was no breach of compact, because no compact was made ;
there was no breach of contract, because no contract was
struck ; and, after this statement, I should like to see
the man, as a curious specimen of human boldness, who
could step forward and say that the negro has no right to his
freedom, and that every apprentice ought not to be free, as
there is no longer any argument that there was any compact,
that there was any bargain, that there was any contract, that
there is any breach of faith, when the representative of the
planter, when the chosen advocate of the planters, avows that
of bargain there was none, of compact there was none, of
contract there was none, and that therefore of breach of
faith there was none - and who would say that there ought
to be one moment's delay in granting that immediate liberty to
the slave which they had found in every colony in which it
had been tried to have been usefully, safely, and peacefully
carried into effect.—( Hear, hear.) Then, continued the
Noble Lord, as to the argumeut of his Noble Friend on the
benches opposite (Earl St. Vincent), of whom he (Lord
Brougham) wish to speak with the greatest possible respect,
that they must give time to prepare the negro for emancipa-
tion--to prepare the negro ! Would the Noble Earl just be
pleased to answer one question which his speech had sug-
gested ? He (Lord Brougham) would treat the Noble Earl
more kindly than Noble Lords had on this occasion treated
him. He would not require the Noble Earl to answer the
question now, but would give him the whole of the recess
to find an answer to it, though he could not consent to
let the Noble Earl write over to the West Indies for It ;
that would be rather too long a delay. But let hint take the
next month, and then answer the short and simple question
which his speech had suggested. The Noble Earl's argument
was this; " you cannot emancipate the negro apprentices
now because you have not given them time to be prepared
for the enjoyment of complete freedom." He (Lord
Brougham) would not ask what time was given for that
purpose in Antigua or in Bermuda; or what preparation
• was made for the event which occurred the other day only
in Montserrat, and which thing was very nearly happening
in the great slave Colony of Barbadoes. But the question
he would ask the Noble Earl was this, \chat preparation had
been made for the ultimate freedom of the negroes during the
last four years? Because he supposed that if the six years'
apprenticeship were intended by way of preparation, the
preparers had not stopped till four y ears of that term had
elapsed, and then begun the preparation at tile commence-
ment of the last two years. And, moreover, since that pre-
paration was, in the opinion of the Noble Earl, so necessary.
what steps, he ( Lord Brougham) would ask, had been taken
at this moment to begin, the sexennial preparation having been
entirely neglected ? That was one question which he would
thank his Noble Friend to answer, and to which he would take
leave to add another. The prsedial apprentices would cease
to be such in 1840: but were there no non-prmdials ? They
would cease to be apprentices on the Ist of Angust, 1838.
Did they require no preparation? He knew that the non-
prwdials were not, by a great deal, so respectable a class of
men as the prredials. The predials were more respectable
ten to one, in habits and character, than the non-prmdials.
But all the non-predials, " unhouselled, unannealed," were to
rush into freedom on the Is: of August, 1838, without any.
thing like preparation. In Jamaica there were 350,000
negro apprentices, of whom no less than 50,000 were non-
prmliale. But his Noble Friend bad said nothing of thorn,
they were not one tittle prepared, nor had anything been pro-
jected for preparing them for that state of emancipation which,
nevertheless, all knew and admitted they were to enjoy on
the Ist of August, 1838. Then, with respect to the
speech of his Noble Friend near him ( Lord Sea-
fOrd), if their Lordships were willing to grant his
Noble Friend all his premises, and were willing to
shut their eyes to those parts of the case which made against
him, then indeed his Noble Friend might be said to have made
out a strong prima fade case. But, said his Noble Friend,
" You must have a Poor-law Bill, and provisions against va-
grants.' Here again he ( Lord Brougham) would say nothing
of Antigua. There was no Poor-law there ; but, if a Poor-
law were necessary there, he made no doubt that it would
come in good time, and that it would be passed by the same
wisdom that had already emancipated the slaves of that colony.
But he would not refer to Antigua, lest it should be said that
Jamaica and Antigua stood in different circumstances. But
was there no vagrancy law, no Poor-law wanted, no prepara-
tory law required with respect to the 50,000 non-predials ?
And yet, without any one such law having either been pro-
jected, propounded, or even thought of, they were to be eman-
cipated on the Ist of August next. Then these petitioners
even made the matter a question of currency.—(Laughter.) I
was very much diverted (said Lord Brougham) at observing
that the two great questions which have vexed this country for
so many years—which have tired the one party and tortured
the other with vexation, and of both of which your Lordships
have certainly had your share—one, the currency (question,
or Mr. Peel's Bill.—( Hear, hear, from Earl Stanhope.) Oh
yes, I expected that cheer from my Noble Friend. —( Laughter. )
Because I know my Noble Friend is just as strong upon Mr.
?e l's Bill as upon the Poor-law Bill, and I believe ( I say it
with all courtesy) just as right upon the one as the other._
(Laughter.) We have head much of ono other, or both of
these subjects ; and accordingly to-night we have heard almost
as much of the Poor-law Bill as of the emancipation of the
negro apprentices. But now we have also the unexpected, I
will sot say pleasure, but the unexpected variety of the cur-
rency question. These petitioners say, " you cannot emanci-
pate the negro apprentices." Why ? Because you must have
a new currency. It is made a question of coinage, and not
of contract, not of compact. But what has become of the
twenty millions? Surely they might have set aside a little
bit of that for a new coinage ! My Noble Friend opposite
(Earl Stanhope) seizes upon the Poor-law ;he exclaims,
" This is an unexpected pleasure ! I do not care any
thing for that stupid subject, slavery ; but I now find
that this subject is as good as a Poor-law Bill."—( Laughter.)
Yes, the question of negro apprenticeship has been so treated
by the petitioners ; a little so by my Noble Friend opposite
( Earl Stanhope) ; and very much so indeed by my NoltleFriend
behind me (Lord Seaford). But I will not bo dragged into
the question of a Poor-law. I will have nothing to do with
it ; and as to the monetary question, I must say anything
inure ridiculous and more absurd (and I speak it with all re-
spect to the people of Liverpool) than the making this mo-
netary, a currency question, I never yet heard of in the whole
history of digressions. How, it is asked by the petitioners,
will wages be paid When the negroes are free labourers ?
Why, the same means will exist for paying wages
then as
exist now. How are the goods to be bought? Goods areimported now—imported by the transactions of the colonies
with this country. The free negroes will have to buy
those goods which are now purchased by the master for
the
slaves. But when they become free the masters will pay e
slaves in money, and then the free negroes will purchase th
goods themselves. All this will be carried on by the same
circulation, without the necessity of one single farthing, or
the fraction of a farthing more being required after the first
of January than before. But if 350,000 slaves
require
for their transactions a considerable increase of currency,
it is a rule of three question how great an increase fifty
thousand will require; and yet you make no provision for
them, while it is clear that the non predials will require
more currency than the predials, because the former are not
payable by means of provision grounds, but in hard cash,
and their wages also are higher. The predial slave works
for a small piece of money compared with what carpenters
and artizans receive ; and yet no provision of a monetary
nature, no Peel's Bill, has been propounded to accommodate
ths fifty thousand non-predials who will he emancipated upon
the Ist of August next, My Lords, I begin to relent
when I come near the body and bulk of this question,
and really feel that I owe it to your Lordships not
to be dragged, whether I will or not, any further into
this premature discussi we Yet I beg distinctly to say
that it is not from any apprehension of not being able
to meet my Noble Friend, for a set of more flimsy
reasons I never yet heard offered on any side of a ques-
tion than what have been advanced ; but because it is in-
convenient to go out of the course I had prescribed to my-
self, not to debate this important question on petitions, anti-
cipative of what is soon to arrive—the opportunity of dis-
cussing the whole merits of this question at a proper time,
and in the light stage, namely, the second reading of my Bill,
which will raise the question of the principle of the Bill. My
Noble Friend opposite (Earl St. Vincent) is a planter; and
my Noble Friend near me (Lord Seaford) is also a planter.
Now, I eels them, are they quite sure that the question is any
longer in their hands? Are they quite sure that they have the
option of now refusing the emancipation of the apprel&ces on
the Ist of August next ? lam treading upon tender ground ;
I am going to touch upon still more tender ground;