, 1885-02-18

ed on estates the prices of articles for
labourers' food are very high too; hence,
in reality the lahOurers are not better off,
although nominally in receipt of higher
wages; but they are placed in an unfortu-
nate position and if a man see himself
charged higher for an article one place
than another, he naturally concludes that
there is fraud. In England, where this
system is styled the truck SYSTEM" this
is looked upon as very Objectionable, in
fact it is, if he is not mistaken, prohibited
by law. But to pay a man the half of his
wages in provisions, is quite a different
thing, and he had already in 1867 when on
a visit here, admired the system but he
objected to a system of running accounts
between the employer and labourer. The
chief thing for which he had risen was,
however, to say that he did not think that
the honorable 3rd Membe for Frederik-
sted's Country District ii. WILSON, was
correct in his conclusion.
3rd Member for FrederikSted'S Country
District ri. Wilson, said it could be mere
ly a difference of opinion; to give articles
OF provision at a certain rate, to be paid for
from the wages, is simply selling. There
could always be a question If planters are
allowed to deliver such articles ON such
conditions, except they have licenses.
2nd Member for Christiansted LemmingI
said his idea is that no planter would wish
to get a huckster license; none would like
to apply for such a license or to be called
a huckster; therefore to say that by
means of such license the object aimed at
would be attained, is not in itself a prac-
teal view. 1t is furthermore his idea, that
if in future provisions are to be sold by no
one except on a license, then planters could
not pay labOurerS with provisions, which
must be considered as a sale.
LIST Member for ChriStilnSted (WtIGrd
said, the idea might have GOT into persons
minds that provision shops are sources Of
revenue to the planting proprietor if such
q view were he'd, it ought certainly to
have been dispelled by honorable Mem
berS who had listened to %previou' discus
sions in this Council, when on all sides it
was admitted and expressly stated that
employers should not be at liberty to col
lect any part of labourerS' wages for any
advances OF any credit given labourcrs. II
u proprietor give a labourer credit, it is on
his own risk.-Anyhow, if shops are kept
or all estates, a labonrer would have but a
short way to the next estate, if he found
that he was charged too much at home,
and he need not pay more for his provisions
than they are worth. He would not like a
system by which a labourer got credit fora all
what he had earned in the week, and even
now, he believed that wherever private
selling is carried on, it is prohibited or
!. forbidden the seller to interfere when pay
mentS of wages are made to labOurerS.
End CroWnmember (HGnScheW said, that
when he had previously observed that in
his opinion the Government had in reality
met the wishes of the Council expressed a
couple years ago and afterwards repeated
by the Commission, he had understood
such wish to he, on the one hand, that la
bourers should not have the excuse for
leaving the estate work to go to town to
buy provisions, a regard which certainly is
in the favour of the estate and proprietor,
as. then the work for which they have con
tracted will not be taken from the estate
on any pretence and OH the other hand,
as far as he had understood the Com
mission, that, so to speak, common hu
mainly called for or required that Id
bourers should have a place at hand
where they could get the necessarieS
of life. This he believed wonld be Sc
cured by the measures proposed now
by the Government, in keeping with at
least a part of the Commission, that has
had the entire matter under its considera-
ton. For, by giving authority to the
Government to grant licenses for carrying
on huckstering trade on estates, the
demand for supplies on estates to satisfy
A. 1881. 49, .@L -