The Sun.
London, England, 1828-01-19 00:00:00

Government. It remans to notice other provisions
upon the subject -Of punishment, which have been
originally suggested by the Colonial Legislature.
The Act appears to sanction an unlimited delega-
tion of the power of punishment, so that even a fel-
low Slave might be intrusted with it, provided that
the correction does not exceed ten lashes. In the
presence of the owner or manager 39 lashes may be
inflicted by his authority ; an extent of power which
cannot be neeessary;and which might probably be
the source of serious, abuse.
The 37th section of this Act authorises private
persons to commit their slaves to prison in the
public work-houses of the island without the war-
rant of a Justice of the Peace; and the preceding
section, the 36th, enables the gaoler, as well as the
owner, to inflict punishment 'by whipping in prison
without trial. It is difficult to perceive the neces-
sity for such an extension of domestic authority, and
if unnecessary, It Is plainly objectionable.
The fine of 10/. for inflicting repeated punish-
ments for the same offence can scarcely be incurred
any case, since no record is to be kept ascertain-
ing the grounds of any particular punishment, and.
the party accused may impute to his slave whatever
offences he may think proper, 'without the necessity
of proving them. The tine on a work-house-
keeper inflicting an excessive number of lashes is
101., a punishment which may, in some cases, be
entirely disproportionate to so serious an offence.

Thy complaint, which the slave is authorised

make before any three Magistrates, would not, 1
fear, be a very effectual means of redress.—
As they must always be three proprietors of the
oi.lne parish, there is a manifest danger of the influ-
ence of local partialities. As every groundless com-
plaint is to be punished, it is to be feared that many
well-founded complaints will not be preferred. The
mere failure of evidence in support of a complaint is
surely not enough to justify the punishment of the
party complaining. The owner should be bound
to prove that the complaint was malicious or fri-
volous.

On the subject of marriage, I observe that no se-
curity is taken against the possible case of the unrea-
sonable or capricious refusal of the owner to con-
sent. By confining the power of celebrating mar-
k iages to the clergy of the Established -!hurch, every
other class of religious teachers are d prised of the
means of exercising a salutary infi mice over the
minds of their disciples : and probaoly the Roman
Catholic priestg may be entitled to say, that such an
enactment takes away from them a right which, by
the esnsiinon law, they enjoy in every part of his
liejesty's dominions to which the Marriage Act of
George 11. does not extend. The necessity of un-
dergoing an examination by a clergyman of the Esta-
blished Church, as to the nature and obligations of
the marriage contract, is not very apparent, and
might, perhaps, operate as a serious impediment to
the formation of such connexions. It is difficult to
Iniderstand how the range of inquiry respecting the
obligations" of the marriage contract is to be li-
mited, since that expression may be supposed to em-
brace a large variety of moral and religious consi-
derations, with which the slave population in its
present state must be very imperfectly conversant.
I observe that this act does not require that any
registry should be kept of the marriages of slaves,
nor even that any periodical returns should be made
of the number of such marriages.
On the subject of the separation of relatives, the
word " family" is left without a definition. It is
susceptible of so malty different meanings, that it
would seem peculiarly necessary to ascertain the pre-
cise sense in which it is used. The rule laid down
in this law scans also to require some better sanc-
tion. It is simply a direction to the Provost-Mar
shal; but if he should disobey that direction, it is
not provided that the sale should be void. A pro-
vision appears to be wanting, for enabling the officer
;!o ascertain whether 'any particular slave is or is not
a member of the family.
The property of staves is left by this law in an un-
protected state. No action is given to them, or to
any person on their behalf, for the defence or reco-
very of it. The single case in which any remedy is
provided, is that in which the property of the slave
is taken away. No mention is made of that much
more important class of cases in which property may
besvithheld. The slave could not under this law
recover a debt, nor obtain damages for the breach Of
a contract. The mode of proceeding by information
for penalties before three justices of the peace, is a
remedy to which hardly any one would resort, for
the act does not give the amount of the penalty, if
recovered to the injured party, and the slave himself
coup not make the complaint, except upon the con-
dition-of receiving a punishment if the justices should
deem it groundless. The slaves are also excluded by
the terms of this law from acquiring any interest in
land,—a restriction which would appear at once im-
politic and unnecessary.
On the su/ject of what has been termed the com-
pulsory manumission. of slaves, this act does not
profess -to adopt the measures suggested by his
Majesty's Government. It is, therefore, needless to
institute any comparison between those measures
and the enactments of this law; but upon that sub-
ject I may, perhaps, at no distant period, have occa-
sion to make a further communication to you.
On the subject of gratuitous manumissions, and
manumissions -effected by voluntary contracts, this
act requires that in all cases security shall be given
for the maintenance of the slave. In the case of
testamentary manumission, the estate of the testator
is to be liable to the payment of an annuity of 10/.
for the support of the slave, if he should become in-
capable of maintaining himself. These regulations
must, of course, operate as a great discouragement
to enfranchiscinents in all cases. Without incur-
ring this inconvenience, an effectual security might
have been taken against the abuse of emancipating
slaves, incapable, from their age or infirmities, of
procuring theirs own subsistence.
It is to be feared that serious inconvenience may
arise from the neglect of the proposal to provide a
method by which- a slave could ascertain what parti-
cular person was entitled to receive the price of his
'freedom. In the case of plantation slaves, the title
is usually the same with the title to the land itself,
and cases are stated to have occurred in which a
-slave has lost the whole earnings of his lite by
paying the price of his liberty to the wrong person.
On the important subject of the evidence of his
elaves, his Majesty is graciously pleased to signify
his approbation of the advance which has been made
towards abetter system of law ; but, in reference to
this subject, lam to observe that this law appears
'to contemplate the admission of the evidence of
,Slaves in those cases of crimes only in which they
are usually either the actors or the sufferers, exclud-
in other cases, —a distinction
ing their evidence
which does not seen] to rest on any solid foundation.
There is riot any necessary connexion between the
baptism of a witness and his incredibility. The
rule, which requires that two slaves at the least shall
consistently depose to the same fact on being exas
person can be convicted
mined apart, before any free
on slave testimony, will greatly diminish the value of
the general rule. In some particular cases, such for
example as the case of rape, such a restriction might
secure impunity to offenders of the worst descrip-
tion. The rejection of the testimony of slaves twelve
months after the commission of the crime would be
fatal to the ends of Justice in many cases, noris I
easy to discover what solid advantage could result
from it in any case.
If the owner of a slave is convicted of any crime
on the testimony of that slave, the Court has 110
power of declaring the slave free, although it unlY
exerc se that power when the conviction proceeds
on other evidence. Highly important as it is to
deprive a slave of every inotiye for giving false evi-
dence against his owner, that object might be se-
cured without incurring the inconvenience of leaving
he slave in the power of an owner convicted of the
extreme abuse of his authority,
In rejecting the proposal for establishing a record
of the names of all slaves sufficiently instructed to
lie competent witnesses, the Colonial Legislature
appear to have neglected the means of providing
cheap and effectual encouragement to good conduct,