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.
have already endeavoured to establish the pro.
,usitino, that, abstractedly considered, the present
itrennistances of the Negro population in the West In.
0, made it impossible to suppose that the Negro, if
suddenly emancipated, would he induced, (by such
wages as the Proprietor could afford to give,) to work
fur bite ‘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
arAied upon the evidence of Sir Ralph Woodford,
gr. 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
re taken from an official letter from the Governer of
Ttiaidad to the Under Secretary of State, dated 3d
iggrht, 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.
It appears from this statement, that all Slaves do not
tier, 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 the luxury of 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 interests of the Master, may be surrounded,
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
innwiselves and another,under the peculiar circumstances
!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
41:et the capitalist can only afford to give 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.
'the many cases already shewn, wages and high al-
-1
ky ucu to free Negroes were insufficient to stimulate
t,,
11
° ant'ary exertion to cultivate sugar. In the East
4,115%a gate of oppression existed among the agricul•
CI"SeSt which made them labour for a less sum,
(44
ithln the Slave in the West Indies acquires fon
ii Port and maintenance; and, thererore, the case
‘lshuti apply to that of free Negt oes, or ibe Indians of
r$ in the West Indies.
111 the cases examined, we only find the stimulus