Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

will be incurred at any other time than during crop, or for any work excepting that required about the mills. Neither is it clear that an owner, procuring his slaves to work on Sunday by persuasion, or by any other means than those of direct compulsion, would violate the law. I do not perceive that provision is made for those cases of unavoid. able necessity, which would create an exception to the general rule. Punishment inflicted by the domestic authority of the owner are not required to be made the subjeet of a report to any public officer, nor does the law require that any interval should elapse between the commission of the crime and the infliction of the punishment. The presence of free witnesses at the infliction of punishments is not de. clared necessary, nor would the law be broken, whatever might be the severity of the punishment, if it were inflicted by any other me. thod than that of whipping or imprisonment. The use of the whip in the field is not forbidden.

Wo

men are not exempted from punishment by flogging. Nor is any pre. sumption of guilt to arise, if the slave shall make a "probable, particular, and consistent" charge against his owner, confirmed by the exhibition of his person bearing the marks of recent and illegal punishment.

In all these respects the provisions of this act fall short of the recommendations of his majesty's government. It remains to notice other provisions upon the subject of punishment, which have been originally suggested by the colonial legislature.

The act appears to sanction an unlimited delegation of the power of punishment, so that even a fel

low slave might be intrusted with it, provided that the correction does not exceed ten lashes. In the presence of the owner or manager thirty-nine lashes may be inflicted by his authority--an extent of power which cannot be necessary, and which might probably be the source of serious abuse.

The 37th section of this act au. thorizes private persons to commit their slaves to prison in the public workhouses of the island, without the warrant of a justice of the peace; and the preceding section, the 36th, enables the gaoler, as well as the owner, to inflict pun. ishment by whipping in prison without trial. It is difficult to perceive the necessity for such an extension of domestic authority, and if unnecessary, it is plainly objec. tionable.

The fine of £10 for inflicting re. peated punishments for the same offence can scarcely be incurred in any case, since no record is to be kept ascertaining the grounds of any particular punishment, and the party accused may impute to his slave whatever offences he may think proper, without the necessity of proving them. The fine on a workhouse-keeper inflicting an excessive number of lashes, is £10—a punishment, which may, in some cases, be entirely disproportionate to so serious an offence.

The complaint, which the slave is authorized to make before any three magistrates, would not, I should fear, be a very effectual means of redress. As they must always be three proprietors of the same parish, there is a manifest danger of the influence of local partialities. As every groundless complaint is to be punished, it is to be feared, that many well-founded

complaints will not be preferred. The mere failure of evidence in support of a complaint is surely not enough to justify the punishment of the party complaining. The owner should be bound to prove that the complaint was malicious or frivolous.

On the subject of marriage, I observe that no security is taken against the possible case of the unreasonable or capricious refusal of the owner to consent. By confining the power of celebrating mar. riages to the clergy of the established church, every other class of religious teachers are deprived of the means of exercising a salutary influence over the minds of their disciples; and probably the Roman Catholic priests may be entitled to say, that such an enactment takes away from them a right which, by the common law, they enjoy in every part of his majesty's dominions to which the marriage act of George II. does not extend. The necessity of undergoing an examination by a clergyman of the established church, as to the nature and obligations of the marriage contract, is not very apparent, and might, perhaps, operate as a serious impediment to the formation of such connexions. It is dif. ficult to understand how the range of inquiry respecting the "obliga. tions" of the marriage contract is to be limited, since that expression may be supposed to embrace a large variety of moral and religious considerations, with which the slave population in its present state must be very imperfectly con

versant.

I observe that this act does not require that any registry should be kept of the marriages of slaves, nor even that any periodical returns

should be made of the number of such marriages.

On the subject of the separation of relatives, the word "family" is left without a definition. It is sus. ceptible of so many different meanings, that it would seem peculiarly necessary to ascertain the precise sense in which it is used. The rule laid down in this law seems also to require some better sanction. It is simply a direction to the provost. martial; but if he should disobey that direction, it is not provided that the sale should be void. A provision appears to be wanting, for enabling the officer to ascertain whether any particular slave is or is not a member of the family.

The property of slaves is left by this law in an unprotected state. No action is given to them, or to any person on their behalf, for the defence or recovery of it. The single case in which any remedy is provided, is that in which the property of the slave is taken away. No mention is made of that much more important class of cases, in which property may be withheld. The slave could not under this law recover a debt, nor obtain damages for the breach of a contract. The mode of proceeding by information for penalties before three justices of the peace, is a remedy to which hardly any one would resort, for the act does not give the amount of the penalty, if recovered, to the injured party, and the slave himself could not make the complaint, except upon the condition of receiving a punishment if the justices should deem it groundless. The slaves are also excluded by the terms of this law from acquiring any interest in land-a restriction which would appear at once impolitic and unne.

cessary.

On the subject of what has been termed the compulsory manumission of slaves, this act does not profess to adopt the measures suggested by his majesty's government. It is, therefore, needless to institute any comparison between those measures and the enactment of this law; but upon that subject, I may, perhaps, at no distant period, have occasion to make a further communication to you.

On the subject of gratuitous manumissions, and manumissions effected by voluntary contracts, this act requires that in all cases security shall be given for the maintenance of the slave. In the case of testamentary manumissions, the estate of the testator is to be liable to the payment of an annuity of £10 for the support of the slave, if he should become incapable of maintaining himself. These regu

lations must, of course, operate as a great discouragement to enfran. chisements in all cases. Without incurring this inconvenience, an effectual security might have been taken against the abuse of eman cipating slaves incapable, from their age or infirmities, of procuring their own subsistence.

It is to be feared that serious in. convenience may arise from the neglect of the proposal, to provide a method by which a slave could ascertain what particular person was entitled to receive the price of his freedom. In the case of plantation slaves, the title is usually the same with the title to the land itself, and cases are stated to have occurred, in which a slave has lost the whole earnings of his life by paying the price of his liberty to the wrong person.

On the important subject of the evidence of slaves, his majesty

is graciously pleased to signify his approbation of the advance which has been made towards a better system of law; but, in reference to this subject, I am to observe that this law appears to contemplate the admission of the evidence of slaves, in those cases of crimes only, in which they are usually either the actors or the sufferers, excluding their evidence in other cases,-a distinction which does not seem to rest on any solid foundation. There is not any necessary connexion betwen the baptism of a witness and his incredibility. The rule, which requires that two slaves, at the least, shall consistently depose to the same fact, on being examined apart, before any free person can be convicted on slave testimony, will greatly diminish the value of the general rule. In some particular cases, such, for example, as the case of rape, such a restriction might secure impunity to offenders of the worst description. The rejection of the testimony of slaves, twelve months after the commission of the crime, would be fatal to the ends of justice in many cases, nor is it easy to discover what solid advantage could result from it in any case.

If the owner of a slave is con. victed of any crime on the testimony of that slave, the court has no power of declaring the slave free, although it may exercise that power when the conviction proceeds on other evidence. Highly important as it is, to deprive a slave of every motive for giving false evidence against his owner, that object might be secured without incurring the inconvenience of leaving the slave in the power of an owner convicted of the extreme abuse of his authority.

In rejecting the proposal for establishing a record of the names of all slaves sufficiently instructed to be competent witnesses, the colonial legislature appear to have neglected the means of providing a cheap and effectual encourage. ment to good conduct, and of in-. vesting the religious teachers of the slaves with a powerful and legitimate influence over them.

The provisions for the prevention of excessive labour, contemplate the working the slaves for eleven hours and a half daily out of crop, and place no limit to the continuance of their work during croptime. Considering the climate in which the labour is to be performed, and that, after the work of the field is over, there will yet remain to be done many offices not falling within the proper meaning of the term labour," I should fear that the exertions of the slaves, if exacted up to the limits allowed by this law, would be scarcely consistent with a due regard for the health of the labourer.

[ocr errors]

His majesty has observed with great satisfaction, various provisions in this act for the improve. ment of the condition of the slaves, which originated exclusively with the colonial legislature. Among them I have particularly to advert to the clause requiring the gratuiThe crimes of murder and rape, tous baptism of slaves, and to the when committed on the persons of regulation by which slaves are al- slaves, are most properly made lowed one day in each fortnight punishable by death: but if these to cultivate their provision-grounds, enactments are to be understood, exclusive of Sundays, except du- not as declaratory of existing laws, ring the time of crop, the smallest but as introductory of new laws, number of days to be allowed in then it is obvious that there are one year being twenty-six. It other offences which might be permay, perhaps, however, be neces- petrated on the persons of the sary that some more effectual means slaves, against which the same should be devised for enforcing obe- punishment should have been de. dience to this law. nounced.

The enactment requiring a monthly inspection of the provision grounds, and the delivery of an adequate supply of provisions, when there is not a sufficient quantity of such grounds, is calculated to produce the most beneficial effects, and might be rendered still more valuable by some alteration in the terms of the oath, which are susceptible of a construction remote from the real intention of the framers of the law. Great advantage may be anticipated from the regulations for the support of the mothers and nurses of large families, and for the protection of old and infirm slaves.

The rules for the prevention of mutilation, and other cruelties, however just and valuable in prin. ciple, would, I should fear, lose much of their efficacy in practice, from the peculiar complexity of the process which is to be observed in bringing the offender to justice. In the cases supposed of the dismemberment or mutilation of a slave, fine and imprisonment would seem a very inadequate punish

ment.

The rules on the subject of runaways claiming to be free, and respecting slaves carried from place to place for sale, seem well adapt. ed to prevent the recurrence of

serious abuses. The provisions of the trial of slaves in criminal cases, would also appear to be a material improvement on the former law. I perceive, however, that the evidence of slaves in such trials is to be admitted against slaves. It is not said that such evidence shall be admitted for them, although, of course, this must have been the intention. It is to be regretted that no provision is made for securing the attendance of judges, regularly educated to the legal profession, on slave trials.

It remains to notice those parts of this act which provide for the punishment or the prevention of crimes committed by slaves.

The crime of harbouring runaways may be punished with much more severity, when the offender is a slave, than when he is a free man,— a distinction which reverses the established principle of justice, that the malignity of crimes is enhanced by the superior knowledge and station of the criminal.

In many cases, both the nature and amount of the punishment to be inflicted on the offending slave are referred exclusively to the discretion of the court. I am not aware of any necessity for so unlimited a delegation of authority.

Among capital crimes, are enumerated rebellion and rebellious conspiracy. As these are terms unknown to the law of England, it is not fit they should remain on the statute-book without some legis. lative definition of their meaning.

Felony seems to be generally declared capital, when committed by slaves. The case of the clergyable felonies is not noticed.

The enactments, by which assault, or offeringv iolence to a free person, are declared capital, are

framed with an extreme laxity of expression, and have an appear. ance of severity which I am per. suaded was not really contemplated by the framers of this law.

The definition of the offence of Obeah will be found to embrace many acts, against which it could not have been really intended to denounce the punishment of death. The definition of the crime of preparing to administer poison is also so extensive, as to include many innocent, and even some meritorious acts. Thus, also, the offence of possessing materials used in the practice of Obeah, is imperfectly described, since no reference is made to the wicked intention in which alone the crime consists.

The owner of a slave condemned to death or transportation is in all cases to be indemnified at the pub. lic expense for the loss of his property. His majesty's government have repeatedly expressed their disapprobation of this rule of law. It weakens the motives for maintaining good domestic discipline, and for preventing the commission of crimes by the authority of the owner. It is unjust to indemnify any man at the public expense, for a loss in which his own culpable neglect of duty may have involved him.

To the slave it is unjust to deprive his owner of all pecuniary interests in the preservation of his life; and when the crime of the slave is, as it often may be, the direct consequence of the owner's positive misconduct, it is in the highest degree impolitic to relieve the owner from the loss. The power of remitting the sentences of slaves condemned to hard labour for life, is to be exercised only when the slave evinces in every respect a complete reformation of

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »