, 1872-02-17

so called free labourer ; therefore it was
found necessary to deprive him of it. And
why ? Because, as has already been remark
ed, "Slavery contractseven the dearest affec-
tons of it's victim to the narrow bounds Of
his selfish and obdurate masters views ;"
therefore the "Labour Act" follows direct
ly in the wake of It's prot0type-slavery.
Paragraph fourth, by its stringent word
ing, processes to furnish a safeguard against
the 'tanpering' with a labourer who has
not given illegal notice of removal'' from
his last employer. But who is there among
US that does not know how demoralizing
this very paragraph has proved Have
not many planters and many labourers
given aud received their many dollars, so
as to evade the very principle which this
paragraph provides against? But If the
natural rights of the employer and the en-
pIoyees were Justly equaliz9d by the law
IN other words, if each party could choose
for himself, the one, whom to employ, and
the other, by whom to be employed, this
decentralization would be radically removed,
That enactment which tends to demoraliz4
the people is an evil one, and every moral
and liberal government will speedily ex-
punge it from It's code.
Passing over paragraph fifth, it is notice
able how eVasively the sixth paragraph
deals with the beginning and ending Of the
working hours. To have o fixed hour to
begin and end the days labour would be
more orderly, and would appear to be more
compatible with equity and fair legislation
if the Iabourer is to have proportionate pay
for proportiooate hours Of labour, as we'll
as for the planter, who expects a certain
amount Of work for value received by the
Iabourer. Instead Of this, however, the
work is ordered 'to at sunrise,
and to be finished at sunset" Now, every
body knows, that this variation either in
creases or dimiuishes the working hours Of
a day according to the season, and it is not
difficult to perceive the possibility Of its
creating dissatisfaction on the one side or
the other but this will invariably end TO
the credit of the employers and not to the
labourers.
Paragraph seventh does away with the
old slavish custom of throwing grass and
wood during extra hours. If all the other
relics of slavery had been as faithfully blot
ted out as this one, it would certainly have
been more beneficial for both planters and
labourers at the present day. VIII is there
that has the least acquaintance with the
aforementioned custom, that did not re-
joice to see the day Of its abolishment,
when he remembers what a fruitful source
of evil that was. The detestable driver
going his round to each labourer's bundle
of grass, and according to the amount of
favour or spleen which he entertained for
each party, so he would report to the man
ager the size of this or that bundle and
the miserable delinquent who during the
day had strained every nerve, by force of
his merciless coercion, to satisfy the exac-
tons of his savage taskmaster in the field.
but in the evening, for want of strength
and time had failed in gathering as large a
bundle as his neighbour, was Immediately
consigned to the foul dungeon, and ~invaria-
bly, received his quota of tamping the next
morning. The remainder of this paragraph
and the whole of the eigth regulate the
employment of the labourers about the
works during the crop, and contain nothing
very remarkable or Immediately requiring
comment.
A further inquiry into the nature of the
remaining paragraphs of the law will next
engage attention.