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

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 opinionsilt 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.


.. . _

;~~