Lord Dudley and Wardsaid, he rose to present a petition of considerable importance. It was the petition of the Board and Council and House of Assembly of the island of Antigua; but it 203 was signed in the name of the legislative body by the Speaker only. He did not know, therefore, whether the petition could be received as from the whole assembly or not, but he might observe not only on the statements of the petitioners, but what he believed to be other good authority, that the island from which this petition came was amongst the best in the West Indies, as to the moral condition of the slaves—one in which their situation would best bear comparison with that of free blacks, and in which the nearest approach was made to free labour. When, however, the petition came to be read at length, which he intended to propose it should be, their lordships, perhaps, would be of opinion that the petitioners had indulged in expressions which might be considered too harsh, against the persons in this country who took an active interest in the abolition of negro slavery. He wished that all discussions on this subject should be conducted with good temper and moderation; but this, at least, might be said for the petitioners —that no language used by them could be harsher than that which had often been applied to the colonists themselves by the anti-slavery party in this country. But these considerations did not affect the great object of the petition, which he should shortly state. The petitioners prayed, that if any measure for the abolition of slavery, likely to be injurious to their interests, should be carried into effect, they should be allowed full and fair indemnification. In presenting this petition it was not necessary for him to state what his own views on this question were; but this much he might say, that while negroes remained the slaves of the planters, he did not think that what was done merely to ameliorate their condition, could form a ground for such a claim. The moment, however, that another important step was taken—the moment, however prompted by humanity, and with whatever prospect of success, measures were taken to set the slaves free from their masters, the nature of the case was completely altered, and the owners were justly entitled to indemnification. Where slavery ended, compensation began. This appeared to him to be the fair state of the question. That one man should be the property of another was a proposition which none would now maintain; but such had, for more than 150 years, been the law of this country. The colonists had only been 204 parties to the maintenance of that law in common with the rest of the people of England, and therefore should not be the sole sufferers by its abrogation. The practice which was now discovered to be unjust, had been warmly fostered by our ancestors, and the whole price of repentance ought not to be paid by those who were only sharers in the guilt and impolicy of the transaction. Such, certainly, had not been the course hitherto followed, with respect to many claims not better founded than those of the planters. It was even the practice of the legislature to pay attention to the claims of property which had grown up without being sanctioned by law. Cases which occurred when the Union with Ireland took place, afforded instances in point. What, indeed, could be more contrary to justice and the spirit of the constitution, than that persons should be indemnified for yielding up an influence which they possessed over the legislature? If a man who said, "I have a vote, and have an influence in returning so many members to parliament, therefore, pay me 15,000l. down, or I will vote against you," could be listened to, surely the legislature would not refuse to hear the planters. The West-India proprietors had claims to indemnification, which stood upon far better grounds as to right and justice, than any which those gentlemen who trafficked in political influence could set up. In many of the petitions which prayed for the abolition of slavery, the principle of compensation had been admitted; but he had his doubts whether considerable discrepancies would not be found, when the application of the principle came to be in question; and it seemed to be wished to carry it into effect with haste and precipitation. At first sight it certainly might appear to many of the abolitionists, that nothing was more easy than to substitute free labour for slavery; but if they chose to reflect, they would find, that such a change was not to be accomplished with all the facility they anticipated. He did not mean to agree with his brother colonists in maintaining, that there was something in the nature of the region they inhabited which rendered free labour impracticable. This was an opinion in which he could not concur, when he saw how very little profit or remuneration sufficed to induce men to labour in the most insalubrious situations, and at works which were obviously injurious to health. But he must agree 205 with the petitioners, that the sudden transition from slavery to freedom, which seemed to be the object of the abolitionists, was an experiment of great hazard. How to convert 300,000 or 400,000 men all at once from compulsory into free labourers, was obviously a proposition of very difficult solution; but if this violent experiment was to be made, the expense of making it ought to be borne by the country, and not by the planters. He was aware that it had been thrown out, that in considering the question of compensation, the colonists were not entitled to the full value of their property, as it might be estimated on their profits, since part of those profits arose from the possession of an unjust monopoly. This was, however, an argument which would surely receive no countenance in parliament. If it were admitted, it was difficult to see whither its application might not be carried. If on compensation being required for a canal or road passing through arable land what would noble lords think, if that arrangement were applied to the owner of the estate? Suppose he were told, "Yes, you shall have compensation; but it shall be minus the unjust profit you derive from the monopoly of the corn-laws," would not their lordships revolt at any attempt to establish such a principle as this? In fact, he had no doubt that, on a fair view of the question, the right of the planters to be indemnified would be admitted to stand on precisely the same ground as other claims to compensation which had been allowed by the legislature. And here he must observe, that his own interests in the question would not have led him to interfere at all in its discussion; but he was induced to come forward in the hope of obtaining justice to others. He was anxious to call their lordships' serious attention to the subject to which the petition referred; and he implored them to consider well before they gave into views, which seemed to threaten, in the name of humanity, to sweep away all the ordinary principles of justice. At the close of the petition, a suggestion was thrown out which might appear to their lordships somewhat extraordinary. It was proposed that this country, or the abolitionists should purchase the whole property of the planters—that they should take the island of Antigua to themselves. They might then make whatever experiments they liked as to free labour. Those who were 206 for rash experiments might have the opportunity of trying them; but he thought it was by far most desirable that the experiment of free labour should be made by degrees, and on a small scale.
The Earl of Liverpoolwished the petition to be received as the petition of the body of the House of Assembly; but doubted whether that could be done, as it was only signed by the Speaker.
Lord Dudley and Wardthought it would answer every purpose for which the petition was intended, if it was received merely as the petition of the Speaker.
The Earl of Liverpoolwas desirous, that the question should not be decided, until it was known what had been done in similar cases. He did not see how it was possible to avoid receiving petitions, in some way or other, from the colonial assemblies. If the right of parliament to legislate for the colonies was maintained, there must be some means of receiving petitions from them. He therefore thought that inquiry should be made. Some precedent, perhaps, would be found of petitions of the same kind from the American colonies.
The Earl of Lauderdaleobserved, that if inquiry was to take place in order to do justice to one party, he hoped that justice would be done to others. Petitions which were presented from the moderators of the general Assembly of the church of Scotland for the whole of that body, and from the moderators of synods, legally signed according to the law of Scotland, were still only received as the petitions of the persons who signed them.
Lord Calthorpevindicated the abolitionists from the charges made against them. They did not call for rash and precipitate measures, but were desirous that caution and deliberation should accompany every step taken for the emancipation of the slaves. They were also sensible of the blame which attached to themselves in having suffered the evil of slavery so long to exist. He could not help agreeing with those who considered that the colonial legislatures had acted very improperly; but he should certainly rejoice to see the imputations against them disproved.
Lord Dudley and Wardremarked, that very bitter censures had been pronounced on the colonial assemblies at the meetings in support of negro-emancipation. As to 207 the wish for precipitation on the part of the abolitionists, a sufficient foundation for that charge was to be found in a speech made by the noble lord himself at one of those meetings. That speech was printed in the papers; and it appeared that the noble lord had stated it to be the object of the society to bring about emancipation before the death of an individual who had greatly distinguished himself in support of that object. Now, if the abolition was to be effected during the life of that most respected individual, his advanced age gave ground to suppose that they would endeavour to accomplish their object with more haste than deliberation.
Lord Calthorpeobserved, that what he said on the occasion alluded to, was, that it would be desirable that some visible approach to the emancipation of the negroes should be made during the life-time of the illustrious individual whose name was so intimately identified with that question. It was merely observed, that if that individual lived to see such an approach to abolition as would give more certainty as to the period of the accomplishment of that object, it would afford him great satisfaction and consolation.
After some further conversation on the question, whether the petition should be received as the petition of the House of Assembly of Antigua, it was agreed that it should be referred to a committee of privileges, and that the petition, in the mean time, should be withdrawn.