c. degree a traffic so beneficial to the nation." But beneficial or not, there was growing up a power, which neither King, Parliament, nor State Departments could in the long run resist. It is impossible not to feel for the hard case of the West India Planters. By every means in its power, the Mother country had fostered and encouraged the growth of their staple product sugar. An Act of George II. had 6 G. II., endeavoured to give it the monopoly of the Home market: C. 13. and although, in accordance with the Mercantile system, the erection of distilleries in the Colonies was strictly forbidden, the practical grievance from this restriction was not great. At the time, however, with which we are now concerned, the West Indian interest saw itself attacked from two sides; from the side of morality, and from the side of economic theory. Could the British Parliament have found courage at once to say that the Slave Trade was an abomination in the sight of God and man, and must at whatever cost be abolished; that the system of slavery itself was an iniquity, only differing in degree from the Slave Trade; that its abolition was therefore necessary, but that, considering the position held for so long by England on the subject, adequate compensation should be paid, the planters' interests would have suffered probably less than what they did in the sequel. Instead of this, they were amused and cheated by false hopes and imaginary consolations. Thus, in Brougham's book on Colonial Policy (published in 1803), they were told that the effect of the abolition of the Slave Trade would be greatly to enhance the value of their property in slaves. After ineffectual efforts to tinker with the Slave Trade, its abolition, so far as England was con- 47 G. III., cerned, was enacted in 1807. Unfortunately the condition c. 36. of things in the West Indies was not such, as to make the bringing into force of a new system an easy matter. The House of Commons Committee, which sat in 1807, found that, since 1799 there had been a progressive deterioration in the situation of the planters, resulting from a progressive deterioration in the price of sugar, although at the same 1 Parl. Pap., 1807. time the duty and all the expenses attending its cultivation had been increasing. The main reason for this, as found by the Committee, is very striking. It was "the facility of intercourse between the hostile Colonies and Europe, under the American neutral flag." But the rule, requiring all goods to be imported into America in British ships, had, in fact, been relaxed to some extent in the interests of the West Indian Islands. It was in great measure due to such relaxation that the American shipping industry had developed, so that the suggestive picture was seen of an Act of Parliament issuing in the precisely opposite result from what had been intended. When in 1832 a Parliamentary Committee again1 considered the case of the West Indian planters, they found (as might reasonably have been expected) that the abolition of the Slave Trade had greatly increased the cost of production, by rendering necessary the maintenance of an increased number of non-effective women and children. The hard case of the West Indian Planter is put very powerfully in the Report. He "not only feels, with any other proprietor of land, the difficulty of altering the application of his capital . . . he is subject to a burden peculiar to himself, that of maintaining, be his profits what they may, the whole body of labourers and of their families, existing upon his land. He is compelled, by a law, of which public considerations forbid the repeal, to maintain them in industrious employment, and is thus under the necessity of producing and reproducing the very article, of which the superabundance depresses him." A striking picture of the feeling of distrust and uncertainty prevalent is given in the evidence of Mr Douglas, a leading West Indian proprietor. He expressly states, with regard to trade regulations, that partial alterations of the law were of no use to the colonists, and were employed as an argument against them they thus appearing to obtain benefits which, in fact, they did not receive. Meanwhile the difficulty with regard to slavery did not grow less by delay. The movement in favour of its complete abolition grew in volume and importance. 1 Parl. Pap., 1831-2. Statesmen were at their wits' end what to do. Let any one, who doubts this, read the confused and self-contradictory speech1 made by Canning, on Mr Fowell Buxton's Resolutions of 1823. The resolutions substituted by the Government well reflected the uncertainty and confusion. In accordance with them, Regulations were sent to the Colonies, prescribing a limitation of the hours of work, the payment of Sunday time, Sunday holidays, &c. But, inasmuch as the enforcement of these regulations lay with Colonial legislatures, who were profoundly out of sympathy with them, their effect was not great. The Colony, where they were most strictly enforced, was most probably the Cape, under its autocratic government. But in the Cape they appear to have been least required, and their most important effect was to promote Dutch dissatisfaction with the English Government. These regulations, following as they did earlier regulations with regard to the registration of slaves, &c., only served to keep in a ferment the minds of both masters and men, and to render more inevitable the final measure of 1833. That measure, strictly speaking, does not 3 and 4 belong to the present period, but it may be dealt with here. Wil. IV., That Emancipation was inevitable is, of course, now clear enough, but the prophecies of its advocates, that free negro labour would prove more efficient than slave labour, were soon proved woefully false, and much might be said on the question of compensation. It might, of course, be maintained, that the idea of property in one's fellow man is too revolting to natural justice to allow of any sort of compensation for its compulsory abolition. Considering, however, the past conduct of the English legislature, it hardly lay with it to use this argument. But if compensation was once allowed, one fails to see why it should not have been adequate. At first it was proposed merely to grant the planters a loan. Then it was decided that they should receive £20,000,000 in compensation. At this time it was intended that the masters should retain the services of the slaves, for three-fourths of their time, for twelve years. Finally, the twelve years were 1 Hans. N. S., Vol. IX. p. 275. c. 73. reduced to seven, and in the end the whole arrangement as to apprenticeship broke down. The property compulsorily taken away was worth at least from £40,000,000 to £50,000,000. In other words, amidst loud self-laudations and congratulations, the nation paid up conscience money to the extent of something less than ten shillings in the pound. |