The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-09 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

PROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.

GLOBE.—Our restrictions on the import of sugar
have long afforded to every humane and liberal mind
a subject of thought of high and varied interest. Its
intimate connexion with the state of slavery and the
slave trade throughout the world, alone gives it a large
claim to the attention of the philanthropist ; while, if
he looks at home, he sees the greater part of our popu-
lation limited in the use of a most valuable article of
food to a rate of consumption considerably less than
what is deemed fit for the inmates of our workhouses.
To the political economist it offers the most complete
example on record of the last and worst results of the
principle of monopoly. And to the moralist it affords
the anomalous spectacle of high-minded, con-
scientious, and intelligent men, who have earned the
lasting gratitude of their race by their untiring
efforts to suppress slavery, yet deliberately and per-
severingly acting upon the opinion that the scheme
of Providence is such as to offer to the nations
of the earth a high and permanent premium on
the commission of one of the blackest of crimes.
The apparently irreconcileable differences of opinion
existing upon the most important points of the
subject, would appear to prove the existence of great
errors somewhere. Where, exactly, these errors lie,
time alone can show. Meanwhile, every fresh fact
brought to bear upon the question has its special
value. It is to such a fact that we would direct the
attention of our readers. But as its bearing and value
have particular reference to past events and dates,
which few may bear in mind, it may be useful to give
a short general resume of the subject as it now
stands. The old policy of England was to monopolise the
trade of her colonies. Hence the origin of the West
India monopoly. When we led the way in sup-
pressing the slave trade, the West Indians cons-
plained that, in restricting their supply of labour,
we enhanced their cost of production, and gave them
a special claim to protection against competition with
other producers not so restricted. The claim was
very generally, though not universally allowed, and
has been made the basis of a monopoly, more or
less stringent, down to the present hour. In
1834 we went a step further, and abolished
slavery altogether. Soon after the supply of
sugar from the West Indies fell far short of the home
demand, checked as that was by unnaturally high
prices, and the operation of the monopoly was felt here
with unusual severity. In 1836 we opened our market
to free labour sugar from the East Indies on the same
footing as that from the West Indies. The immediate
result was a considerable increase of the imports from
that quarter ; but since that period they have been
nearly stationary or declining. In 1838 the measure
of West Indian emancipation was completed, by put-
ting an end to the term of apprenticeship ; and about
one-third of the negro labourers, chiefly women, old
persons, and children, ceased to work, or ceased to
work continuously, in the cultivation of sugar.
Partly from this cause, and partly from others con-
nected with the change, the produce fell off con-
siderably in quantity. In 1838 we received 4,126,105
cwts., and in 1840 only 2,747,842 cwts. For many
years previously, indeed from the very commencement
of the system of monopoly, the planters had been in a
complaining state, and each of these changes had
been preceded by prophecies of utter ruin, and fol-
lowed by increased complaints. The outcry from
the West Indies now became louder than
ever. Various schemes.of relief were suggested, but
none found that general support which was necessary
to carry them into execution. But now the planters
were not the only complainers. The short supply was
followed by an enormous increase of prices in this
country. Having hitherto paid about twice as much
for our sugar as the people of the continent, we were
now called upon to pay three and four times as much.
In 1841 the late Government proposed to reduce
the duty on unrefined foreign sugar from 635. to 363.
per cwt. This, leaving the duty on colonial sugar
at 245., would still have afforded it a protection oS
12s. per cwt., or 50 per cent. The contest that en-
sued is well remembered. The proposition was re-
jected in the Commons by a majority of 36. In
1842 a Select Committee was appointed to inquire
into the state of the West India colonies ; and the
witnesses were unanimous in stating that sugar could
not be produced there for less than from 20s. to 30s.
per cwt. on the spot. The recent measure of the
present Government has the effect of admitting
unrefined foreign sugar, ascertained to be the
produce of free labour, at a differential duty of
10s. M. over that charged upon the produce of cur
own colonies. It is now to be remembered, that
from the date of the Emancipation Act the grei t
party leagued against slavery, and through whose in-
fluence this measure had been promoted and finally
carried, had manifested a strong and even praise-
worthy desire, as we are willing to admit, to main-
tain the existing protection upon our West Indian
sugar as the produce of free labour, in orler to
secure the final triumph, as they hoped, of the
great work they had achieved. They conceived
that the operation of the Act of Emancipation was to
subject the West India proprietors to an hjurious com
petition with the producers of sugar by slave labour.
lint upon the proposal of the Whig measure in 1841
a difference of opinion developed itself in the Anti-
:3l:ivery body. Some of its most influential members
avowed themselves favourable to a reduction of the
eitTerential duties in favour of our own colonies, in
order to bring our new free-labour system of cultiva-
tion fairly into competition with the slave- labour sys-
tem oNhe foreign colonies. And in this they were
netuated by the conviction (founded upon a view of
the question most ably stated and supported in a
pamphlet by Mr. Beldam) that free labour is essen-
tially superior to slave labour, n ,t only morally,
but economically ; and that it could not fail, in
alliance with British capital and skill, to prove itself
. so. Why, then, it may be asked, if this opinion be
correct, have not our colonies felt and exhibited this
superiority of free labour ? The answer is, because,
though slavery is now abolished, many of its conse-
quences remain; and still more, because no labour of
any kind ever has been, or ever can be, fully effective
under a system of monopoly. In reference to all that
has yet been done, it is to be considered that we can-
not expect, by simply changing an erroneous policy,
to get rid, all at once, of its ill effects. It is of the
very nature of error to carry its fruits into the future.
,Slavery and monopoly are two great evils; but they
are not now to be looked at in the abstract. The
wound is not cured by withdrawing the weapon that
made it. The whole system of production in our
West India colonies has been affected—poisoned—by
these vicious influencies. It has been, and as yet,
almost entirely continues to be, of such a nature as
could only have come into being under the narrow and
short-sighted policy which As e have pursued towards
_these colonies ever since we have had them. Better
influences are now at work—and what wonder if an
artificial system totters to its fall when its artificial
supports are removed!