Part 18

“That the diminished supply of labour is caused partly by the fact that some of the former slaves have betaken themselves to other occupations more profitable than field labour; but the more general cause is, that the labourers are enabled to live in comfort, and to acquire wealth, without, for the most part, labouring on the estates of the planters for more than three or four days in a week, and from five to seven hours in a day; so that they have no sufficient stimulus to perform an adequate amount of work.

“That this state of things arises partly from the high wages which the insufficiency of the supply of labour, and their competition with each other, naturally compel the planters to pay; but is principally to be attributed to the easy terms upon which the use of land has been obtainable by negroes.

“That many of the former slaves have been enabled to purchase land, and the labourers generally are allowed to occupy provision grounds subject to no rent, or to a very low one: and in these fertile countries, the land they thus hold, as owners or occupiers, not only yields them an ample supply of food, but in many cases a considerable overplus in money, altogether independent of, and in addition to, the high money wages which they receive.

“That one obvious and most desirable mode of endeavouring to compensate for this diminished supply of labour, is to promote the immigration of a fresh labouring population, to such an extent as to create competition for employment.

“That for the better attainment of that object, as well as to secure the full rights and comforts of the immigrants as freemen, it is desirable that such immigration should be conducted under the authority, inspection, and control of responsible public officers.

“That it is also a serious question, whether it is not required _by a due regard for the just rights_ and interests of the West Indian proprietors, and the ultimate welfare of the negroes themselves, more especially in consideration of the large addition to the labouring population which it is hoped may soon be effected by immigration, that the laws which regulate the relations between employers and labourers in the different colonies, should undergo early and careful revision by their respective legislatures.”

This document is a very important and valuable one, more especially when considered in connexion with the subsequent measures of the government. It bears out unequivocally all the statements which we have already made regarding the decay of the colonies, the cessation of the emancipated negroes from work, and the necessity of some large and comprehensive scheme for promoting immigration. It does even more; for the tenor of the last paragraph clearly shows that, upon a calm and dispassionate review of the case, an impression had forced itself upon the minds of the committee, that the work of emancipation had been carried out too precipitately, or that some effectual means for regulating and sustaining labour should have been taken by the legislature, at the period when they violently curtailed the stipulated term of apprenticeship. Indeed, subsequent experience has shown, that some such measure ought to have been enacted, if only for the sake of raising the condition of the negro in the social scale.

As after events have shown, the report of this committee, though fair and impartial in its views of the case, was calculated grievously to mislead the planters as to the course which the Parliament of Great Britain was likely to pursue, in dealing with them and with their interests. They saw an admission recorded of the hardship of their case, coupled with a recognition of their right to some effectual remedy; and the natural consequence was, that they again took courage, and did every thing in their power to redeem past losses by renewed exertion and expenditure. It did seem that at last some portion of that sympathy, which had been so early promised, but so woefully neglected, was likely to be accorded to them by the mother country; and in that delusive belief they determined to struggle on. Had they at that time obtained the slightest inkling of what was to follow, their course would have been widely different. Whatever might have become of the estates, an enormous amount of new capital, embarked on the faith that Government would at least deal with them in a just and open manner, would have been saved, and the ruin which is now impending over many families, not only in the colonies but here, would have been averted. But with Parliament urging and stimulating them to fresh exertion, how was it possible to refuse? What possible grounds had they then for suspecting that the protection which had been accorded to them in the most solemn manner, and for which they were bound to give an equivalent, would be withdrawn; that Britain, who had forced the Emancipation Act upon her own colonies, and who had announced, in a voice of thunder, her future determined opposition to the existence of the traffic in slaves, would at once descend from that position and become the customer of less scrupulous countries, the largest encourager of that odious traffic in the world, and that to the detriment and ruin of her oldest and most valuable colonies, which she had forcibly deprived of their labour?

The reciprocal relations which existed between the mother country and the West Indian colonies were these. Up to the year 1844, the rate of duty levied upon colonial sugar was £1, 4s., while that imposed upon sugar grown in foreign countries, was £3, 3s. Thus a protective balance of thirty-nine shillings per cwt. was left in favour of the colonies. In return,—and we adopt this statement from _The Economist_, a journal bitterly opposed to the West Indian claims,—“1st, They were confined to the British markets for their supplies of lumber, food, and clothing; 2dly, They were prevented importing fresh labour, under what we always deemed an unworthy suspicion—that immigration would degenerate into a slave trade, and immigrant labour into slavery; 3dly, They were precluded the privilege of sending their produce to Europe in any but British ships, which not unfrequently entailed an extra cost of two to three pounds a ton upon their sugar; 4thly, And at home, out of regard to the landed interest, their rum was subjected to a high discriminating duty in favour of British-made spirits, and their sugar and molasses were entirely excluded from our breweries and distilleries.” These sentiments are coloured by the peculiar views of the talented journal from which they are drawn, but in the main they are true; and the writer ought to have added, that the West Indian planters were also subjected to high protective duties in favour of the home refiner.

Such was the system of reciprocity established between the mother country and these colonies, until the spirit of innovation, which so peculiarly marks the present age, and which, if persevered in, must sever the last remaining ties which have hitherto kept the integral parts of the British empire united throughout the world, was brought to bear upon these devoted countries.

The first innovation was made in 1844, when free labour sugar only was admitted upon more favourable terms than before. To that measure, coupled as it was with a distinct assurance that the Government would continue steadily to oppose the introduction of slave-grown sugar into this country at competing prices, no opposition was offered. Another slight alteration of the duties took place in 1845; but it was not until the succeeding year, 1846, that the Whigs, in their zeal for free trade, and with the view of gaining, at any cost, a little temporary popularity at the outset of their accession to office, determined, without warning and against remonstrance, to give the _coup-de-grace_ to the colonies, and to throw the markets of Britain entirely open to the kidnapper and the oppressor of the slave!

The act of 1846, as we have already said, provides a differential scale of duties on the imports of sugar, by which, for the present year, the colonist has to compete with the slave-master at a nominal advantage only of six shillings, and at the expiry of four years the duties will be entirely equalised. Here, then, are the final results of that _sympathy and protection_, which were promised by an official of Lord Melbourne’s Government to the deluded West Indians in 1834! Here are the fruits of that agitation, and toil, and sacrifice, which Britain cheerfully undertook, in the cause of Christianity and truth, and, to the honour of our race, for the emancipation of the negro, and the utter suppression of the odious traffic in human flesh and blood! Here is the denouement of that series of international treaties by which Britain proclaimed herself the champion paramount of freedom, and the vindicator of the African liberties! Was there ever, we ask, upon record, a similar instance of defalcation of principle and of perfidy? Of violated principle, because, disguise it as they may, the results of the late measure must tend, and have already tended, to an enormous increase in the exportation of slaves from Africa; and Britain, so long as this law remains on her statute-book, dare not again claim credit on the score of her vaunted humanity. Of perfidy, because, in carrying out emancipation in her own colonies, then utterly free from the imputation of participating in that unholy trade, a distinct pledge was given on the part of Britain, that, whatever might be the result, free labour should not be subjected to undue competition with the compulsory efforts of the slave! View the case in any light you will, and the inconsistency and treachery of the authors of the measure become more odious and apparent.

In order that we may understand the true position of the colonies, and the situation in which they have been placed, confessedly by no fault of their own, it will be necessary to ascertain what is the present cost of production of sugar there, under the curtailed and crippled system of free-labour, as compared with that of the slave-growing colonies. We apprehend that it will not be denied by any, that the soil, climate, and natural position of Jamaica and of British Guiana are in no way inferior to any in the known world for the growth and cultivation of the sugar-cane. No statement to the contrary has ever yet been hazarded; and so far as the application of capital can go in rendering production cheap, the British colonies have unquestionably the advantage of the others. Let us look then to the matter of cost.

According to one authority, the Planter of British Guiana, it would be as follows,—

Cost of production in slave £13 0 0 countries per ton,

Cost of production in British 25 0 0 Guiana,

Difference per ton in favour £12 0 0 of the slave market,

In other words, slave-grown sugar can be produced at _twelve shillings per cwt._ less than in free colonies, besides the additional advantage of uncontrolled and unlicensed transport.

The above probably may be taken as the extreme case, because the cost of production has always been great in Demerara, owing to the smallness of the population; but the general hardship will be sufficiently shown and understood, by the following extract from the resolutions of a meeting of St David’s parish in Jamaica, on 2d October last.

“The great influx of slave-grown produce into the home markets has, in the short space of six months, reduced the value of sugar from £26 to £14 per ton; while, under ordinary circumstances of soil and season, the cost to us of placing it in the market is not less than £20 per ton.”

“From many calculations,” writes a highly intelligent and experienced correspondent, “the lowest rate at which sugar _can_ be produced, is about twenty shillings per cwt. on the average, or twenty pounds per ton. No doubt some estates may, and do, grow it cheaper than others. They may have advantages of situation both in regard to weather and command of labour, but one thing I am certain of, that no number of estates taken collectively, can grow it much under twenty shillings.”

With regard to the additional argument against the navigation laws, which certain free-trade journals have adroitly contrived to extract from the statement of the planters’ grievances, our correspondent writes,—“A long article has been written to show that we have got all that was demanded some years ago, with the exception of the abolition of the navigation laws. This I hold to be a very minor consideration, as, even were these abolished to-morrow, a saving of one shilling per cwt. freight would be the very outside. No doubt a letter appeared in the _Times_, stating that last year’s freights were six shillings per cwt. from Demerara, which was quite true,—but what are they now? The great rise was caused by every bottom being employed to import grain, which raised freights in America to nine shillings per barrel for flour, which are now one and sixpence,—so that shipping of every denomination was dear. These men forget, or will not remember, that we asked for measures which we hoped might benefit us, at a time when we could reasonably calculate upon this country keeping faith with us. But had we _then_ been told that in 1846 slave sugar would be introduced at a _nominal_ differential duty of seven shillings per cwt., to decrease annually till all sugars were admitted at the same rate, our demands would have been very different. Indeed I have no doubt that many would at once have abandoned their estates; and, though a desperate course, it would yet have been the wisest, and those who might have pursued it would have saved a further loss.

“I mentioned a _nominal_ differential duty. What I mean by that is, that the slave sugars are all so much better manufactured, which the great command of labour enables them to do, that, to the refiner, they are intrinsically worth more than ours. In short, they prepare their sugars, whereas we cannot do so, and we pay duty at the same rate on an article which contains a quantity of molasses. _So that, if the duties were equalised, there would virtually be a bonus on the importation of foreign sugar._ I have a letter before me in which is written,—‘Whilst at Jamaica, offers came from the Havannah to supply sugar all the year round at 12s. per cwt.,’ as I said before, in no Jamaica estate can it be grown much under 20s., and assuredly by none at 12s. The refiners estimate the value of Havannah, in comparison with West India free sugar, as from three to five shillings per cwt. better in point of colour and strength. The reason is, that these sugars are partially refined or _clayed_.”

If these are correct data, and we do not anticipate that they will be impugned, the result will be this;—

Cost of production in slave £12 0 0 countries per ton,

Add duty £1 per cwt. 20 0 0

Cost, irrespective of freight, £32 0 0

Cost of production in free £20 0 0 labour colonies,

Add duty 14s. per cwt., 14 0 0

Difference of value between 3 0 0 slave and free sugar, at the lowest estimate, or 3s. per cwt.,

Cost, irrespective of freight, £37 0 0

Such is the amount of _protection_ at present enjoyed by our colonists—a protection which, be it remarked, is every year to decrease! In the present, or second year after the passing of Lord John Russell’s bill, we find that slave-grown sugar can be brought into the market at a cost of production less at least by _five pounds per ton_ than that of our own colonies! We can now easily understand how it is that, within a very short period, Cuba has increased her exports of sugar from 50,000 to more than 200,000 tons; and we can readily believe that, with such a stimulus as has been given, she may, in as short a period, succeed in doubling the latter quantity. No doubt, in order to effect this, the importation of slaves from Africa must go on with corresponding celerity; but that is a matter which we need not regard, as our present rulers are actually giving an enormous impulse to the trade.

In a matter of this sort, in which the element of British honour is largely implicated, it in reality matters not who the parties are, whom, by an unjust and inconsistent course of legislation, we are thus oppressing and defrauding. But if self-interest is at all to be taken into view, it may be as well that we should know, that at least three-fourths of the capital now jeopardized in our West Indian colonies, is the property of fellow-citizens in this country. The disastrous effects of the Mauritius failures, primarily caused and frightfully accelerated by the abolition of the old, and the operation of the new system in that island, were immediately felt by the commercial circles here, and tended greatly to increase that depression which has been experienced in every branch of our trade. If, as is now seriously meditated, and as must be the case should the Whig Cabinet prove equally obstinate as rash, our West Indian plantations should be abandoned, and the capital already expended as completely sunk as though it had been dropped into the depths of the ocean, we may look for another crisis at home, which will assuredly appal the boldest. Let our financial authorities tell us whether we can, under present circumstances, afford to part with an invested capital of two hundred millions, or to throw back into a state of nature and pauperism, colonies which, a very few years ago, consumed annually no less an amount than three millions and a half value of our manufactures? And yet to such results, unless some strong remedial measure be immediately applied, we are most decidedly tending. The depreciation of the value of property in the colonies has been going on for years at a most alarming rate, and we shall now state a few facts upon that point, which we think will convince the most sceptical. We shall begin with Demerara.

In 1838, the value of the estates, owing to the want of labour, had fallen from one-third to a half. The following is the account of some of the estates:—

Price in Former 1838. Price.

Anna Catherina Estate, £30,000 £50,000

Providence, 38,000 80,000

Thomas, 20,000 40,000

In 1840, the depreciation became greater. Here are a few examples:—

Rome and Houston Estate, £40,000 £100,000 Success, 30,000 55,000 Kitty, 26,000 60,000 William, 18,000 40,000

In 1844, the Groenveldt estate, formerly valued at £35,000, was sold for £10,000. In 1845, the Baillie’s Hope estate, formerly valued at £50,000, was disposed of for £7,000. And in 1846, the Haarlem estate went for £3,500, whereas its previous value was not less than £50,000!

We have been accustomed of late to fluctuations of property, but it would be difficult to find in any other list of prices such instances of ruinous declension. The above were cases of private sale; let us now look to the estates which were sold by execution in the country, and we shall find a still greater decadence. In the following list, which is that of 1846, the Kitty estate, disposed of in 1840, appears again.

Kitty Estate, £3,000 £60,000 Nismes, 5,000 55,000 Vryheid’s Lust, 6,000 55,000

Let those persons who think that the planters were amply compensated by the sum of £20,000,000 at the time of emancipation, consider the above figures carefully: and they may arrive at a different conclusion. Let us adopt the argument of the Planter, and take the case of the Kitty estate, of the original value of £60,000. Suppose that upon this estate there had been £18,000 of debt, and a clear vested remanent interest to the proprietor of £42,000. Let us further suppose that the property had not changed hands until 1846, when it was brought to sale, and the result will be, that the compensation money, estimated at £15,000, and the price which the estate fetched in the public market, would barely have sufficed to buy off the mortgage, and the proprietor’s £42,000 would have utterly disappeared!

We are enabled from a private source to carry out the history of one of these Demarara estates. “We bought it,” says our correspondent, “or rather we took it over as a bad debt for our mortgage (upwards of £12,000) for £5,000. Of course no person would have had any thing to do with it but under the circumstances stated. And to show you that property is now of no value, we may mention that we took an estate over, valued in the year 1825 at £60,000, as a bad debt; and though the estate has been advertised for sale or lease, we cannot get an offer of any kind, and have accordingly determined and sent out orders to abandon it. The works are in first-rate order, and every thing complete; therefore you may judge of the sacrifice; which, however, is only imaginary, as the cultivation of this estate, since 1842, has cost us £13,000 more than the produce has yielded. This does not include interest, but the actual wages and expenditure to make crops which have sold for £13,000 less than they cost us to produce. I could enumerate many others, but one is as good as a thousand. The situation of some of the estates is much in their favour, and this was another reason that induced us to take the one alluded to on any terms.

“The West Indians have been often taunted with not adopting the improvements which are introduced in the slave colonies. At the cost of about £2,000 we sent out last August machinery for that estate, and since then have written out not to unpack it, and, in the serious contemplation of abandoning the estate, have asked the makers of that machinery to take it off our hands, as they have a good many orders for foreign slave-growing countries. I believe, if we determine to sacrifice it, that they will send it to Porto Rico or Havannah.”

The following letter, written by a highly respectable gentleman in this country, who is also a Jamaica proprietor, and referring to the present depreciation of property in that island, has been placed in our hands. The reader must judge for himself as to the hardship of the case which it portrays.

“Any information that I can give in reference to the present alarming and distressed situation of Jamaica, is, I believe, nothing more than what might be afforded by every one connected with that once flourishing, but now all but ruined island.