Abstract of the evidence for the abolition of the slave-trade (1791)/Preface
IN consequence of the numerous Petitions which were sent to Parliament from different Counties, Cities, and Towns of Great Britain, in the year 1788, for the abolition of the slave-trade, it was determined by the House of Commons to hear Evidence upon that subject.
The Slave-Merchants and Planters accordingly brought forward several persons as witnesses, the first in behalf of the continuance of Slave-trade, the latter in defence of the Colonial Slavery. These were heard and examined in the years 1789 and 1790.
Several persons were afterwards called on the side of the petitioners of Great Britain, to substantiate the foundation of their several petitions, and to invalidate several points of the evidence which the others had offered. These were examined in the years 1790, and 1791.
This Abstract then is made up from the evidence of the latter, in which little other alteration has been made than that of bringing things on the same point into one chapter, which before lay scattered in different parts of the evidence; and this has been done to enable the reader to see every branch of the subject in a clear and distinct shape.
The evidence for Africa and the Middle Passage, on the side of the Petitioners of Great Britain, is given by persons, who have been to almost all the conspicuous parts of Africa, from the River Senegal to Angola. Many of them have had great opportunities of information, from having been resident on shore, or having been up and down the different rivers, or from having made each of them several voyages. Among these, as well as among those who have only had the opportunity perhaps of a single voyage, are to be reckoned several respectable persons of education, observation, and leisure, and it is to be observed, that the information of the whole goes to things at different periods from the year 1754 to 1789. The evidences again for the West Indies and America are numerous and respectable. Many of them have had the advantage of being resident there for years, and the information which they have given, extends to things as they were at various times from 1753 to 1790. Of all these it must be said, that they are totally disinterested persons and therefore can have had nothing to biass them either one way or the other in the evidence they have given. The editor, on the other hand, feels it incumbent upon him to acknowledge, that some of them came up as evidences, from a sense of duty, and this against their own apparent interest, and under the threats and prospect of suffering considerably for such a conduct.
Of the Evidences, on the other hand, brought forward by the slave-merchants and planters, there are few indeed who are not deeply interested in the testimony they have given, and the event of the decision. In the African part of the question, all but two are immediately concerned in the slave-trade, and in the West-Indian, the Admirals only can be fairly excepted. And of what does their information consist but of round and general assertions, without any specifick facts? These assertions, however, are in behalf of the planters, and tend to prove the comforts and happiness of their slaves.
We have no right to suppose that persons of their character had any intention of misleading the publick in a question of so much importance to the interests of mankind; but we may suppose, that in their situation they had little or no opportunity of observing the treatment of the slaves; and this is actually the fact. The Admirals, when on shore, were almost entirely in the towns. Now all the evidences for the petitioners of England are unanimous in asserting that the slaves in the towns appear to be better treated than those in the country. Hence the Admirals may have been in some measure warranted in saying what they have done, but they ought to have observed that their evidence related to but a partial and not the general body of the Slaves, and that their opportunities of information were exceedingly limited and confined.
When, however, they went into the country, their situation again precluded them from getting the same information as other men. Mr. H. Ross, examined among others, says that as to the information which may have been gotten by those holding high commands in the West Indies, he cannot speak decidedly; but if it be meant to know whether such, on occasional visits to estates, were likely to obtain a thorough knowledge of the treatment of slaves, he thinks they could not. He has often accompanied Governors and Admirals in their tours there. The estates visited, belonging to persons of distinction, might be supposed under the best management, Besides all possible care would be taken to keep every disgusting object from view, and on no account by the exercise of the whip or other punishments, to harrow up the feelings of persons of such distinction.
The above accounts shew that the rank and situation of the Admirals precluded them from seeing as much as others, or in other words, that their opportunities of information were not as great as those of other men. Many other circumstances may be cited to prove the same thing. Among these are the preambles and clauses of certain laws, and extracts from the West Indian publick prints. To begin with the former.
Bahama Islands.—So lately as in 1784, it was enacted there, that "if any slave shall absent him or herself from his or her owner, for the space of three months successively, such slave shall be deemed an outlaw, and, as an encouragement to apprehend and bring to justice such runaways, any person or persons who shall apprehend any such runaway, either alive or dead, shall be paid out of the publick treasury twenty pounds, for every slave so apprehended and taken," &c. [1]
St. Christopher's.—"An act to prevent the cutting off or depriving any slaves in this island of any of their limbs or members, or otherwise disabling them,"—passed March 11th, 1784."
"Whereas some persons have of late been guilty of cutting off and depriving slaves of their ears, which practice is contrary to the principles of humanity and dishonourable to society; for prevention whereof in future, be it enacted by the Governor, &c. That if any owner or possessor of any negro or other slave in this island, shall wilfully and wantonly cut or disable, or cause or procure to be cut out or disabled the tongue; put out, or cause or procure to be put out, an eye; slit the nose, ear, or lip, or cut off a nose, ear, or lip, or cause the same to be done; or break or cause to be broken, the arm, leg, or any other limb, or member of any negro," &c. The penalty is 500l. currency, or about 300l sterling, and six months imprisonment. [2]
Barbadoes—"An Act to prevent distempered, maimed, and worn out negroes, from infesting the towns, streets, and highways of this island." Passed Jan. 18, 1785.
"Whereas it has, for some time past, been the cruel practice of some persons possessing negroes, who, from their old age and infirmities, are incapable of further service to their inhuman owners, to drive them from their plantations to beg, steal, or starve, which said unhappy objects are daily infesting the publick streets of the several towns in this island," &c. The penalty to such owner is 5l. currency, or about 3l. 12s. sterling; and the act ordains that those unhappy objects shall be taken home to their masters[3].
Grenada, 1788—"Whereas the laws heretofore made for the protection of slaves have been found insufficient; And whereas humanity and the interest of the colony require that salutary and adequate regulations and provisions should be adopted for rendering their servitude as limited and easy as possible, and for promoting the increase of their population, as the most likely means of removing, in the course of time, the necessity of further importations of negroes from Africa; And whereas these desirable ends cannot be so effectually obtained as by prescribing reasonable bounds to the power of masters, and others having the charge of slaves, by compelling them sufficiently and properly to lodge, feed, clothe, and maintain them," &c.
As to the extracts from the West Indian publick prints, the following, among many others, may suffice:—
From the Jamaica paper, called the Cornwall Chronicle, of December 29, 1787, it appears, That an addition to the Consolidated Slave-law was proposed in these terms:—
"Whereas the extreme cruelties and inhumanity of the managers, overseers, and book-keepers of estates, have frequently driven slaves into the woods, and occasioned rebellions and internal insurrections, to the great prejudice of the proprietors, and the manifest danger of the lives of the inhabitants of this island; for prevention whereof, be it enacted," &c. "And whereas also, it frequently happens, that slaves come to their deaths by hasty and severe blows and other improper treatment of overseers and book-keepers, in the heat of passion, and, when such accidents do happen, the victims are entered in the plantation-books, as having died of convulsions, fits, or other causes not to be accounted for, and to conceal the real truth of the cause of the death of such slave or slaves, he or they is or are immediately put under ground," &c.
The member (Mr. Gray) who introduced the above, premised, "That to his own certain knowledge, very unnatural punishments were often inflicted on negroes; and that, in several instances, he had been obliged to interpose as a magistrate, to prevent actual rebellion from such inhuman treatment."
In the Jamaica paper, called the Gazette of St. Jago de la Vega, dated October 11, 1787, we number 97 runaway slaves advertised, viz. 45 "branded" and 52 without "brands." Among the former is "William marked on the right shoulder R A, heart and diamond between, and on the left R A, heart at top," also "Batty on both shoulders H P in one," and "Guy marked, on the right shoulder W D, and on the left I H."—In the same Gazette, dated November 8th, 1787, there are notified 23 runaways marked, and 44 unmarked. Among those marked is "Apollo W S, on his face and breast,"—Robert R P on each cheek, and Kingston marked Yorke on each shoulder and breasts."—We find, in the Cornwall Chronicle, of Jamaica, dated December 15, 1778, "84 runaways advertised 13 of whom only are branded." Among these are "Pompey, a creole negro man, marked on both shoulders and breasts M L, diamond on top," James a carpenter "branded on both cheeks," and Billy belonging to the King, marked "broad arrow, on the shoulder."—In the Kingston Morning Post, of April 8th, 1789, seven runaways, from one owner are advertised, namely "a fisherman, a taylor, a shipwright, a sempstress, and three other wenches." In the same paper we find "an old grey headed Coromantee man," a runaway; also another taylor "marked on both shoulders I T, and right shoulder R G."—In the Cornwall Chronicle of Oct. 10, 1789, a runaway is advertised named "Prince, branded on the back, with a cattle mark TH."—In the Kingston Morning Post of Nov. 4, 1789, we find again, seven runaways from one proprietor, viz. "an old woman with her two sons and two daughters, one of them very big with child," also a field negro and a carpenter. In the supplement to the Cornwall Chronicle of Nov. 7, 1789, there are 135 runaways advertised, viz. 48 with, and 87 without brands. Of the former some have two, three, and four brands on the face, breasts, and shoulders. One in particular is "marked D E on both cheeks and left shoulder." Among those not branded is "a woman with a wooden leg." One man is distinguished by having "both ears cropt" and another by "his nose and ears being cut off."—In the Jamaica Daily Advertiser of Feb. 11, 1791, we find six runaways advertised by one owner, viz. two men and four women, besides a girl child of one of the latter. Both the men and two of the women are of one family, being an old woman, her brother, her son, and her grand nephew (marked R D C) and who absented themselves at different times.— An advertisement in the Jamaica Daily Advertiser of Feb. 24, 1791, begins thus :—" Feb. 22, 1791, Escaped on Sunday last with a chain and collar round his neck, a negro man of the Mandingo country, marked TY 4 on top," &c.
In the Barbadoes Gazette of Jan. 14, 1784, the reader will find this advertisement— "Absented herself from the service of the subscriber, a yellow skin negro wench, named Sarah Deroral," whose person and surmised place of concealment, being very particularly described, the advertisement ends with these words "Whoever will apprehend the said wench alive or dead, shall receive two moidores reward from
The clauses, preambles, and advertisements just cited will, it is presumed, without any farther extracts, bring additional conviction to the mind of the reader, that the Admirals could have known little or nothing about the treatment of the slaves during their residence in the islands: for they shew, first, that the slaves have been insufficiently fed, lodged, and clothed; that they have been under the power of the master and overseer to an unreasonable degree; that they have been often turned adrift, when incapable of labour, "to beg, steal, or starve;" that their ears and noses have been slit and cut off; that they have been also otherwise disfigured as well as deprived of limbs and members; that they have been suddenly murdered and buried; and that in some cases where they have run away, rewards have been offered to indifferent persons to bring them to their owners alive or dead. They shew, secondly, that these different circumstances have happened, and that many of them must have been notorious (or why were laws introduced by the colonists themselves for their prevention?) Since the year 1783, for the dates of the several acts or adververtisements are in 1784, 1785, 1787, 1788, 1789, and 1791. But if they must have been notorious since the year 1783, it is clear (the treatment of the slaves having improved though not kept pace with the improvement of the age) that they must have been equally notorious previous to the year 1783, that is to say, at the very time the Admirals were in the different islands with their respective fleets. Now the Admirals are as silent about these notorious facts in their evidence, as if they had never existed at all. If they knew them and concealed them (which we cannot believe) their evidence is unworthy of respect upon this occasion; and if they did not know them, it only confirms what has been said before, that they had not the same opportunities as other men, and that they were therefore incompetent as evidences upon so great a question.
The Admirals again have shewn themselves egregiously ignorant of a most notorious law, a law too, which exists at the present day, namely, "that the evidence of a slave is not valid against any white man." Had they been acquainted with this, they would have perceived instantly that it was in any master's power to [4] torture or even murder his slave with impunity, and this in the sight of a thousand black spectators, provided he only took care that no white person beheld him. Had they known this, they would have perceived the unprotected state of the slaves, and would never have spoken as they have. It is impossible therefore that they could have become acquainted with this law, and this only brings us to the same conclusion as before, viz. their incapacity as evidences on the subject of the treatment of the slaves.
Before the Preface is closed, it may be necessary to anticipate, that some one may ask the Editor, why he has given in this Abstract the Evidence on the part of the Petitioners only, and omitted that which has been adduced on the other side. To this the Editor might reply, that it is the business of the Slave-merchants and Planters, if they think their case defensible by the evidence they have produced, to do it, but he would rather wish to reply, that it is unnecessary: for admitting the witnesses on the part of the Slave-merchants and Planters never to have deen among them all even one single instance of enormity, either in Africa, or on the Middle Passage, or in the West Indies, (which none of them will pretend to assert) this negative evidence can make nothing against the numberless positive and specifick facts mentioned in this Abstract to have fallen under the eyes of the witnesses on the other side. These positive and specifick instances must therefore still stand uncontradicted and true. They must still stand as having positively happened: and if but a small part of them only did ever happen, this small part would be a sufficient reason for the Abolition of the Slave-Trade.
- ↑ Privy Council's Report, part III.
- ↑ Ibid.
- ↑ Privy Council's Report.
- ↑ Though the reader has seen laws enacted to prevent masters from cutting off the ears and noses of their slaves, and being guilty of other cruelties, he is not to imagine that the master cannot do them now as heretofore; for it is clear, that while a slave's evidence is not admissible against a white man, he may do them with impunity at the present day.