A BRIEF ACCOUNT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Kcsults of ©ranting (Compensation 
 
 to tfye tPcst 3nbia Slape=l?otbers A 
 
 AND THE 
 
 Continuation of Siam*}) unber tfye 
 
 Hamc of “ ^pprenticesfyip.” 
 
 By J. EASTOE T E A L L, 
 
 Assistant Secretary of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society. 
 
 ILonOon : 
 
 BRITISH A ND FOREIGN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY, 
 55, NEW BROAD STREET, E.C. 
 

£ Brief Account of tfye Results of ©ranting <£ont= 
 pensation to the IPest 3nMan Slane bolters, anb 
 tf?e (Continuation of Stanerg un6er tfye name of 
 " ^[pprenticesbip.” 
 
 In consequence of the unmistakable mandate of the nation, the British 
 Government, in 1833, introduced a Bill for the Abolition of Slavery through- 
 out the British Colonies, Possessions, and Plantations abroad, except India, 
 Ceylon, and St. Helena. 
 
 At that period the West Indians were a very strong political party, whilst 
 the Abolitionists, although in a majority in the House of Commons, had 
 obtained that majority by means of a stringent pledge, adhesion to which had 
 only been acceded to by many members under fear of defeat at the polls. 
 When, therefore, the Government were forced into action, immense pressure 
 was brought to bear upon them by the Slave owning interest, and the Bill 
 was essentially framed in their behalf. Their estates were, in great part, and 
 had been for several years (a| practically insolvent, and they knew that were 
 Slavery to be extinguished they would, in many cases, by the foreclosing of 
 mortgages, and by other process of law, be unable to stave off bankruptcy. 
 They therefore endeavoured by every means in their power to obtain the best 
 terms for themselves ; and in doing so, probably the argument raised by 
 them which carried most weight with the Government and the weaker 
 members of the Anti-Slavery party in Parliament, was that as the Legislature 
 had not directly interfered with Slavery the nation was responsible for its 
 existence in the Colonies, and, consequently, that the whole burden of its 
 removal should not fall upon the Slave owners. They therefore demanded 
 compensation. To this plea the Government readily listened, and in their 
 original plan paved the way for it by proposing a loan of ^*15,000,000 in 
 return for the abolition of Slavery, (i>) coupled with a scheme of so-called 
 “ Apprenticeship.” As will be seen, this “ Apprenticeship ” turned out to 
 be really a more vicious and more destructive system than the one which it 
 superseded, for having no vested interest to induce them to keep the negroes 
 alive beyond the term of their servitude, the planters were in many instances 
 indifferent as to their treatment and fate. 
 
 (a) Vide 
 Report of 
 Select Com- 
 mittee of the 
 House of 
 Commons on 
 Commercial 
 State of the 
 West India 
 Colonies, 
 1832. 
 
 ( b) Vide 
 
 Debate, 14th 
 May, 1833. 
 
4 
 
 Minutes 
 of the Anti- 
 Slavery 
 Society and 
 Anti-Slavery 
 Reporter, 1833. 
 
 <M Vide 
 Debate, 14th 
 May, 1833, 
 and Mr. 
 Sturge’s 
 work on 
 “ Compensa- 
 tion.” 
 
 W Vide 
 Debate, 14th 
 May, 1833. 
 
 (o) Vide 
 
 “ Life of Sir 
 Thomas 
 Fowell 
 Buxton. 
 
 «» Vide 
 Debates on 
 the Slavery 
 Abolition Bill, 
 
 1833- 
 
 <«) Vide 
 “ Life of Sir 
 Thomas 
 Fowell 
 Buxton,” the 
 Patriot , and 
 other contem- 
 porary news- 
 papers. 
 
 (a) Original 
 documents. 
 
 <fi Accounts 
 of Slave Com- 
 pensation 
 Claims, No. 
 215, 16th 
 March, 1838, 
 
 P- 334- 
 
 <e> Vide 
 Mr. Edmund 
 Sturge's 
 work on 
 * Compensa- 
 tion.” 
 
 (a) Vide 
 
 Reports of 
 Special 
 Jusiices, etc., 
 in Papers 
 ordered by 
 House of 
 Commons, 
 1839. 
 
 But the Slave owners were not yet satisfied, and soon after the Govern- 
 ment Bill had been introduced, the loan of ^"15,000,000 was changed into a 
 gift of a sum not exceeding £ 20,000,000 . 
 
 Two plans of a really Anti-Slavery character were laid before the Govern- 
 ment, one by the Anti-Slavery Society, (0) and the other by the late Earl 
 Grey* 61 (then Viscount Howick). The latter entered the Government as 
 Under-Secretary for the Colonies, being a strong believer in gradual 
 Abolition — he soon discovered, however, how futile any such scheme would 
 be, and became convinced that immediate Abolition was the only remedy 
 for the evils of Slavery ,* c) resigning office when he saw the inconsistencies 
 and injudicious provisions of the Government measure. 
 
 Mr, Buxton,*®’ and other Anti-Slavery Leaders in Parliament, were of 
 opinion that none but a Ministerial Bill could be passed that session, and 
 that were the one before the Legislature rejected no other would be 
 obtainable ; whilst some of them were inclined to fear the outbreak of a 
 servile insurrection were freedom delayed beyond that year. Whilst accept- 
 ing the Compensation Scheme on these grounds, Mr. Buxton endeavoured 
 to obtain the withholding of one-half of the money grant until the Appren- 
 ticeship had ceased/ 65 but in this he was unsuccessful. He, however, obtained 
 a reduction of the period of Apprenticeship by one half the term proposed. 
 The action of the Parliamentary leaders in accepting the Government Bill 
 did not, however, commend itself to the Abolition party as a whole/' 1 most 
 of whom objected to the Compensation Grant and Apprenticeship System 
 as a violation of principle. They would not have opposed measures of relief 
 to the planters subsequent to Abolition, if injury were proved to result 
 therefrom, but they most decidedly objected to anything like purchase.*" 1 
 
 The nation, however, paid a sum of _^T8,6oo,ooo (6) odd towards the 
 Abolition of Slavery, but it brought to large numbers of the Slave proprietors 
 no relief, for the money found its way into the pockets of the mortgagees and 
 others who had liens upon the estates, and thenceforth the cry was raised 
 that the West Indies had been ruined by emancipation. What ruined the 
 Slave proprietors was the competition of the products of British India and 
 Mauritius, when the home markets were opened to them some years before 
 Emancipation, (cl coupled with the exhausting system of absentee proprietor- 
 ship. Had the planters made better terms with the liberated negroes, instead 
 of driving them off the estates, as many did, by exorbitant rent charges and 
 other petty persecutions, *“ there would not have been so many ruinate 
 estates as was the case when, as a boy, I lived in the West Indies. 
 
 But the strongest argument against compensation will be found in the fact 
 that when Great Britain abolished Slavery in India, in Ceylon, in the Straits 
 Settlements, on the Gold Coast of Africa, and in Cyprus, no question of 
 compensation ever arose. By simply declaring that equality before the law, 
 to which all her subjects are entitled, Great Britain settled, once and for all, 
 the question of Slavery. 
 
No farther back than the 27th of September, 1896, the French Resident, 
 M. Laroche, abolished Slavery with a stroke of the pen in Madagascar. 
 Said the Decree : — 
 
 “ Tons les habitants de Madagascar sont personnes libres 
 
 This Decree was reaffirmed on the 1st of October, and the prevailing 
 feeling among the missionaries was one of surprise that the great event had 
 passed off so quietly. Writes one : — 
 
 “We used to plan in our minds various ways of bringing about gradual 
 emancipation, and here, by a stroke of the pen, the thing is done, and the fetters are 
 struck from about a million Slaves. The name of M. Laroche will be for ever 
 associated with this event.” 0 
 
 What can be done in Madagascar can be done equally well in Zanzibar 
 and Pemba. 
 
 The Apprenticeship System. 
 
 The Apprenticeship System, as established by the Act of 1833, was, briefly 
 stated, as follows : — 
 
 Subject to the restraint and obligations specified, the Act declared that the 
 negro should in every other respect be considered in the light of a freeman. His 
 restraints were that he should during the term of such Apprenticeship remain dis- 
 qualified from holding certain public offices, or exercising certain political and 
 municipal rights. His obligations were that he should labour industriously, but 
 without wages, in the service of his former master, now to be called his employer, 
 for 45 hours per week for the space of six years for agricultural labourers, and in the 
 case of tradesmen, domestics, etc., the duration of servitude was limited to four years. 
 
 The conditions to be observed by the master were that during the term of 
 servitude he should be bound to provide a full supply of food to each apprentice, 
 according to existing regulations, failing such regulations they were to be enacted ; 
 where the labourer was supported not by the delivery of provisions but by the 
 cultivation of allotted portions of land for his own use, the Act declared that such 
 land should be adequate in quantity and quality, and at a reasonable distance from 
 the labourer’s abode, and that a certain portion of time adequate to the proper 
 cultivation of such ground should be allotted out of the 45 hours per week otherwise 
 due to the master. 
 
 Any other “ maintenance or allowances ” to which the Slave was entitled should 
 be continued to the apprentice, who was to be supplied with adequate clothing 
 annually, and with medicine and medical care. 
 
 The apprentice was to have the right of redeeming himself on payment of a fair 
 equivalent for his remaining term of servitude, the appraisement to be made by an 
 impartial tribunal. 
 
 It was decreed that no employer of an apprentice should be authorised to punish 
 such apprentice by whipping, imprisonment, by adding to the hours of labour, or by 
 any other mode of correction ; but that all offences should be adjudicated on and 
 punished by Justices specially appointed for the purposes of the Act. No female 
 apprentice should be liable to the whipping or beating of her person by sentence of 
 any Judge, Court or Justice. 
 
 The apprentice was to be allowed the full and free use of all that portion of his 
 
 * Vide 
 the “ Chroni- 
 cle ” of the 
 London 
 Missionary 
 Society, De- 
 cember, 1896, 
 p. 272. 
 
6 
 
 * Minutes 
 of Anti- 
 Slavery 
 Society. 
 
 f Report of 
 the Meeting 
 held on the 
 14th October 
 1835, printed 
 by R. Hud- 
 son, Binning 
 ham. 
 
 J “ Life of 
 Joseph 
 Sturge,” by 
 H. Richard. 
 
 “ Mirror 
 of Parlia- 
 ment,” 1836. 
 
 time which was not by law claimable by his master, and lastly he was to be protected 
 from all wrong and injury, fraud, cruelty, or injustice, by the direct supervision of an 
 impartial arbitrator who was to be vested with summary jurisdiction, and enjoy full 
 protection in the discharge of his duties. 
 
 Such was the basis on which the apprenticeship system was framed, but the 
 details for carrying into effect the principles laid down were left to the Colonial 
 Legislatures, subject to the proviso that any legislation contrary to the spirit of the 
 Imperial Act should be null and void, and that any colony which refused or neglected 
 to frame enactments should not be entitled to receive any portion of the compensation 
 money. 
 
 The Act of Parliament came into force on the 1st August, 1834 — 
 Bermuda and Antigua voluntarily dispensing with the Apprenticeship 
 Clauses of the Imperial Act — and in all cases the event passed off quietly. 
 
 Rumours of hardships and gross cruelties perpetrated upon the appren- 
 tices reached England early in 1835, and inquiries were at once forwarded 
 by the Anti-Slavery Society to the West Indies.* A Parliamentary 
 Inquiry would have taken place but for the assurances of the Colonial 
 Secretary as to the intentions of Government. Reports from missionaries 
 and others, however, tended to increase the anxiety of the friends of 
 the negro, and particularly Mr. Joseph Sturge, who determined to appeal 
 to the country at large upon the question of Apprenticeship. He there- 
 fore summoned meetings in Birmingham to consider the condition of the 
 apprenticed negroes, at one of which a memorial to Lord Melbourne was 
 adopted, protesting against the attempts of the West Indian planters to 
 defeat the Emancipation Act, and expressing the conviction that nothing 
 but the abolition of the Apprenticeship would even materially alleviate the 
 oppressions of the system.! 
 
 The local Act in aid of the Imperial Act passed by the Jamaica Legis- 
 lature expired in December, 1835, and the House of Assembly refused to 
 renew it unless certain clauses, which had been previously disallowed by the 
 Crown, were inserted. The Government, however, stood firm and insisted 
 on the execution of the Act. 
 
 In February, 1836, Mr. Sturge summoned another meeting at Bir- 
 mingham with respect to the Apprenticeship ; and at this gathering he gave 
 copious extracts from the letters which had been received from the colonies, 
 revealing the cruelties perpetrated upon the apprentices, and a series of 
 resolutions urging the abolition of the system were passed. I 
 
 Mr. Buxton, too, in the House of Commons, obtained a Select Committeef 
 to inquire into the whole subject, but the Committee limited its inquiries to 
 Jamaica, and whilst it confirmed the principal allegations of the abolitionists, 
 reported that the apprenticeship was working not unfavourably. 
 
 But Mr. Sturge, whose intimate acquaintance with many of the 
 missionaries, and other well-informed individuals in the West Indies, had 
 given him peculiar opportunities of receiving accurate information, resolved 
 to take practical steps for arriving at the truth of the matter, and set sail in 
 
7 
 
 October, 1836, in company with Thomas Harvey, John Scoble, and Dr. 
 Lloyd for the West Indies. (o) Arriving in the new world at the end of the 
 year, Messrs. Sturge and Harvey visited Antigua, Montserrat, Dominica, 
 St. Lucia, Jamaica and Barbados (calling also at Martinique and Barbuda), 
 receiving in most of these places the aid of Government officials and other 
 persons qualified to give evidence. Messrs. Scoble and Lloyd visited 
 British Guiana. On the return of Mr. Sturge, in 1837, he was examined 
 for several days before the Select Committee of the House of Commons, the 
 reappointment of which Mr. Buxton had obtained. The Committee, how- 
 ever, came to an end, in consequence of the death of the king, without 
 arriving at any definite conclusion. 
 
 Petitions to the Oueen from the ladies of the United Kingdom were 
 also resolved upon, and duly carried out by the Ladies’ Negro Friend and 
 other Societies. The main work, however, of arousing the country fell upon 
 the shoulders of Mr. Joseph Sturge. Mr. Buxton was no longer a member of 
 the House of Commons, whilst noneof the Parliamentary Anti-Slavery veterans 
 were desirous of re-opening the question. Mr. Sturge knew that his only 
 chance of success lay in the awakening of the moral and religious feelings of 
 the country, and to those feelings he appealed. In the month of June, 1 837 , (t,) 
 the citizens of Birmingham entertained him at breakfast in the Town Hall, 
 and here he gave his first public account of what he had seen and heard in 
 the Colonies. His speech on this occasion made a great impression, and, 
 taken in conjunction with the narrative of a redeemed Jamaica Apprentice, 
 whom Sturge had brought back with him, did much to arouse the 
 nation. Town upon town was visited by Mr. Sturge, and his example was 
 followed by many others, including the well-known orator, George 
 Thompson. 
 
 In view of the amount of public feeling which had been awakened, the 
 Anti-Slavery Society held a meeting in Exeter Hall, on the nth July, 
 1837, under the presidency of H.R.H. the Duke oe Sussex, <c) and a series of 
 resolutions were adopted, calling upon the provincial Anti-Slavery Societies 
 to reorganise, and send to London the delegates who in 1833 had pledged 
 themselves never to relax their efforts till Slavery had been extinguished in 
 the British Colonies. An Address to the Electors was also issued, calling for 
 the return of an Anti-Slavery House of Commons. 
 
 The Government, however, and the Parliamentary leaders still remained 
 silent, but Mr. Sturge held on his way, utilising the great volume of public 
 opinion which he had awakened. In the month of October"* 1 a large gather- 
 ing took place at Bath, at which he was present, and resolutions were 
 passed condemning the system of Apprenticeship as but another form of 
 Slavery, and the meeting pledged itself to use every legitimate means for its 
 overthrow. Birmingham followed with a meeting of representatives from 
 various counties, and resolutions similar to those passed at Bath were come 
 to. (e) Mr. Sturge then proceeded to arouse the Metropolis, and, armed with 
 
 “ Life of 
 Joseph 
 Stukgf.." 
 
 «-) Ibid, 
 
 also Fourth 
 Report of 
 Glasgow 
 Emancipation 
 Society. 
 
 (c ) Minutes 
 of the Anti- 
 Slavery 
 Society. 
 
 (d) British 
 Emancipator , 
 1837 . 
 
 <*• Official 
 Report of 
 Meeting. 
 
8 
 
 </> Official 
 Report in 
 British 
 Emancipator . 
 
 <») British 
 Emancipator , 
 March 2lst, 
 and June 13th, 
 1838, also 
 referred to in 
 Return 15 th 
 August, 1839, 
 I0 7 (5) P-H3- 
 1*) British 
 Emancipator. 
 
 (0 Ibid. 
 
 U) Official 
 Report of 
 Meeting, 
 1837 - 
 
 <°> Fir/c 
 
 Papers 
 ordered by 
 House of 
 Commons, 
 
 9th March, 
 1838, Part V., 
 PP- 7-8. 
 
 the resolutions passed in the provinces, appealed to the country associations 
 to send delegates to London for the purpose of considering the best means 
 of extinguishing the Apprenticeship. To this summons the response was 
 prompt, and on the 14th November 140 gentlemen assembled at Exeter Hall, 
 from every part of the kingdom. 00 Every religious and political creed was 
 represented, and most of the delegates remained in town till the great 
 meeting, held nine days after. 
 
 In view of the activity of the abolitionists, but unknown to them at the 
 time, the Government became alarmed, and on the same day on which the 
 Anti-Slavery Delegates assembled the Colonial Secretary sent out a despatch 
 to the Governors of the Slave Colonies, recommending the Colonial 
 Assemblies and Councils to settle the question of Apprenticeship by voluntary 
 emancipation on the 1st August, 1 838 . (9,) 
 
 On the 17th November 0 * 5 the Delegates proceeded in a body to Downing 
 Street, where they were met by some 30 Members of Parliament, and laid 
 their views before the Premier (Lord Melbourne). The deputation was 
 assured that due weight would be given to their views, representing as they 
 did the amount of feeling in the country. On the following day the delegates 
 waited on Lord Glenelg, the Colonial Secretary, who guardedly avoided 
 giving any encouragement to the deputation, which retired under the con- 
 viction that only the pressure of public opinion would produce any effect 
 upon the Government. On the 23rd November a large meeting was held by 
 the Delegates in Exeter Hall, under the presidency of Sir Eardley Wilmot 
 — and resolutions adopted demanding the abolition of the Apprenticeship 
 system. 00 A Committee to sit in London, under the style and title of the 
 Central Negro Emancipation Committee, 00 was also formed by them to 
 actively carry on the work which had been so favourably started by Mr. Joseph 
 Sturge. Of this Committee the official organ was The British Eman- 
 cipator, which appeared at frequent intervals during the agitation. 
 Having sat for ten consecutive days the delegates, on the 24th, dis- 
 persed, and, three days after, Lord Glenelg’s reply to the Memorial of the 
 Delegates was received, declining to interfere with the Apprenticeship System, 
 but offering not to oppose the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire 
 into the matter. 1 ® 5 This meant delay, and was not acceptable to the 
 abolitionists. It was therefore resolved to send agents through the country 
 holding meetings and obtaining Petitions praying for the Abolition of the 
 Apprenticeship. George Thompson, John Scoble, and Dr. Palmer (an 
 ex-Special Justice for Jamaica, who had been dismissed for carrying out the 
 spirit of the Act of 1833, and who was now Secretary of the Central Negro 
 Emancipation Committee), were appointed lecturers, large numbers of 
 meetings being held in the course of a few weeks. The appearance in 
 January, 1838, of “The West Indies in 1837,” by Joseph Sturge and 
 Thomas Harvey, in which the true condition of the Apprentices was clearly 
 and impartially set forth, proved a powerful weapon in the hands of the 
 
9 
 
 Anti-Slavery lecturers, and tended to swell the rising tide of public opinion 
 against the system of Slavery known as Apprenticeship. 
 
 In February and March, 1838, the Petitions from the Ladies of England 
 (449,000) and Scotland (135,000) were presented to the Queen at Levees by 
 Deputations, while that from Ireland was presented later in the year. 16 ’ 
 
 The effect of the agitation was first felt in the West Indies in the Island 
 of Montserrat, where the abolition of the Apprenticeship was unanimously 
 carried by the legislature on the 18th January, 1838, and promulgated on the 
 20th February, decreeing the Abolition of the Apprenticeship on the 1st 
 August ensuing. (c) The movement received considerable impetus by the 
 adhesion of Lord Brougham and the Marquis of Sligo, late Governor of 
 Jamaica, who in his place in the House of Lords announced his intention of 
 liberating all his apprentices on the 1st August. A union of all sections of the 
 Abolition party was brought about, and Parliamentary action determined on. 
 A petition from the old Anti-Slavery Committee praying for the abolition of 
 the Apprenticeship was presented to both Houses, and the publication of 
 pamphlets on the Colonial Laws was undertaken. ,<() Notices of motion on the 
 question were given by Lord Brougham and Sir E. Wilmot. The former 
 brought forward a series of resolutions on the Slave-trade and the Appren- 
 ticeship, but the division was only taken on those dealing with the Slave-trade, 
 and they were defeated. <e) 
 
 The Government at length were forced into action, but this action merely 
 took the form of a Bill in the House of Lords for amending some of the 
 most glaring defects of the Abolition Act. Lord Brougham also introduced 
 a Bill for the abolition of the Apprenticeship, but this was dropped, in view 
 of proceedings in the Lower House. A large meeting was, however, held, 
 under his presidency, in Exeter Hall, on the 14th and 1 5th March, when a 
 resolution appealing to the Royal prerogative was carried with acclamation. 0 ”’ 
 
 The Anti-Slavery Committee, through Mr. Buxton, requested an inter- 
 view with Lord Glenelg for the purpose of demanding the abolition of the 
 Apprenticeship system, on the 1st August, on the ground of its violation, 
 and the passage of a Code removing any Colonial enactment which might 
 interfere with the negroes on their release, but they obtained nothing 
 definite from Lord Glenelg at the interview. 09 ’ 
 
 The Central Negro Emancipation Committee, in view of the projected 
 discussion in the House of Commons, summoned the delegates again to 
 London, and on the 27th March some 400 gentlemen assembled in Exeter 
 Hall, under the presidency of Mr. W. T. Blair, of Bath. (,i) Deputations were 
 at once appointed to wait upon the Premier and Colonial Secretary with a 
 Memorial, whilst to others was deputed the task of soliciting the support 
 of Members of Parliament in the coming debate. Illness prevented Sir 
 Eardley Wilmot proceeding on the 27th, and the motion was brought 
 forward two days later by Sir George Strickland. In the interim the 
 delegates continued their sittings, receiving the friendly support of Mr. 
 
 O) British 
 Emancipator . 
 
 < c > President 
 Hamilton to 
 Sir W. G. 
 COLEBROOKE 
 British Eman- 
 cipator , March 
 2 1st, 1838, 
 and Official 
 Papers pre- 
 sented 1839. 
 
 Minutes. 
 
 '*> British 
 Emancipator. 
 
 (/> I hid. 
 
 Minutes 
 of Anti- 
 Slavery 
 Society. 
 
 (ft) British 
 Emancipator. 
 
<» Ibid. 
 
 o') Ibid. 
 
 (*) Ibid. 
 
 (0 Ibid. 
 
 IO 
 
 Buxton. On the 28th the delegates proceeded to Downing Street, where 
 they were received by Lords Melbourne, Glenelg, and John Russell ; 
 but they retired much dissatisfied, and a petition to the House of 
 Commons was adopted, protesting against the policy of the Government 
 in meeting the resolution of Sir George Strickland by proposing the 
 second reading of Lord Glenelg’s Bill for Amending the Abolition Act. 
 
 On the 29th, Sir George Strickland moved : — 
 
 “ That the House is of opinion that the Apprenticeship in the British West Indies 
 as established by the Act of Abolition passed in the year 1833 shall cease and deter- 
 mine on the 1st August in the present year.” 
 
 Mr. Joseph Pease seconded the motion, and then Sir George Grey 
 (Under-Secretary for the Colonies) proposed the Government amendment 
 above referred to, and the second reading of Lord Glenelg’s Bill was 
 carried, on the following Friday, by 269 votes to 215. 
 
 In consequence of this defeat, the delegates at their sitting on the 31st 
 March at once resolved upon a public meeting at Exeter Hall, and the 
 Central Negro Emancipation Committee at once arranged for meetings in 
 the provinces. Adjourning over Sunday, the delegates sat again on the 
 2nd and 3rd April, transacting formal business, and on the 4th, under the 
 presidency of the Marquis of Clanricarde, a large public meeting 
 assembled in Exeter Hall, and resolutions denying the existence of any 
 contract which might restrain the British public from seeking the immediate 
 abolition of the Apprenticeship system were adopted. 01 
 
 On the 5th April the Delegates issued a strong protest against Lord 
 Glenelg’s Bill, on the ground of its unconstitutional character, its 
 injudicious policy, and danger to the peace, stability, and prosperity of the 
 Colonies. The majority then returned to the country, the others remaining 
 in town to take immediate action, if necessary. Meetings were also being 
 held throughout the kingdom by the various local Anti-Slavery Societies, 
 important gatherings taking place at Liverpool, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds, 
 etc. At a large town’s meeting at Birmingham, under the presidency 
 of the High Bailiff, the cause of the negro was again forcibly pleaded by Mr. 
 Sturge. w 
 
 Now that the country was thoroughly aroused, the Central Negro 
 Emancipation Committee resolved upon further Parliamentary action, and 
 to Sir Eardlf.y Wilmot was entrusted a motion for the 22nd May, to the 
 effect : — 
 
 “ That the Negro Apprenticeship in the Colonies shall immediately cease and 
 determine.” 
 
 Prior to the discussion, some 300 of the delegates returned to town,'" in 
 order to await the result of the motion, which, after a short, but spirited, 
 debate, was carried by ninety-six votes to ninety-three. Mr. C. P. Villiers, 
 who seconded the motion, is still a member of the House of Commons. 
 
Lord John Russell at once announced the intention of the Government 
 to move that the resolution be rescinded, and it became necessary that 
 it should be known in the West Indies that the House of Commons 
 had resolved on the abolition of the Apprenticeship system before the 
 tidings of a second, and possibly hostile, division should be received there. 
 Dr. Palmer therefore immediately despatched letters to all the ports from 
 which vessels were likely to sail, and some of these reached their destination 
 in the West Indies several days previous to the receipt of the Government 
 despatches. 1 '" 
 
 On the 25th May a crowded meeting, under the presidency of Lord 
 Brougham, took place at Exeter Hall, at which it was declared that Lord 
 John Russell’s threatened hostility loudly called for the renewed and 
 continued exertions of the friends of the negroes — exertions which would never 
 be relaxed until the negroes in the Colonies were released, and made equal 
 before the law. (nl 
 
 On the 28th May, Sir George Grey moved : — 
 
 “ That in order to prevent the injurious consequences which may follow from the 
 intentions of Parliament being left in doubt, and in order to maintain the peace and 
 welfare of the Colonies, it is necessary to declare that, in the opinion of the House, it 
 is not advisable to adopt any proceeding for the purpose of giving effect to the 
 Resolution of the 22nd May.” 
 
 Sir E. Wilmot moved as an amendment : — 
 
 “ That it is the opinion of this House, that the Resolution passed on the 22nd of 
 May should be carried into effect by means of a legislative enactment, due provision 
 being made to secure the peace of the Colonies, and to promote the welfare and good 
 conduct of the Negro Population, on their attaining the full enjoyment of their entire 
 freedom.” 
 
 On a division, the Government triumphed by 250 to 178 votes. 
 
 On the following day the delegates protested, in a series of resolutions, 
 against the action of the Government and their supporters, (0) and declared 
 that as the recent decision of the House of Commons, by disappointing the 
 hopes of the negro, had placed in imminent peril the safety of the Colonies, 
 it was necessary to declare their solemn conviction that, should any disastrous 
 consequence ensue, the responsibility would rest upon Her Majesty’s Ministers, 
 and that the nation having appealed in vain to the justice of her represen- 
 tatives on behalf of the oppressed, an additional obligation was created to 
 continue with increased energy the use of every lawful means, both in the 
 country and the Colonies, until Slavery in reality, as well as in name, was 
 utterly abolished. They therefore determined upon largely increasing the 
 number of Anti-Slavery Societies. 
 
 On the 9th June' 61 the Anti-Slavery Committee waited upon Lord Glenelg, 
 urging the abolition of the Apprenticeship by the Imperial Parliament on 
 the 1st August, but to this his lordship would not agree, neither would he 
 
 <*“> Memoir 
 of Richard 
 Allen. 
 
 («) British 
 Emancipator. 
 
 (a) British 
 Emancipator. 
 
 Minutes 
 of Anti- 
 Slavery 
 Society. 
 
12 
 
 accede to the appointment of a Commission to investigate the working of 
 the Colonial Laws, consequent upon the Act of 1833. 
 
 But whilst the Government in England were hostile, the local assemblies 
 were in no mood to face another Anti-Slavery struggle, and one after 
 another, on becoming alive to the seriousness of affairs, especially after the 
 vote of the House of Commons in favour of abolition, passed local Acts 
 abolishing the Apprenticeship on the 1st August, 1838, thus shortening by 
 two years the duration of the system as enacted by Parliament in 1833. 
 Mauritius alone took no action, and the Imperial Government were com- 
 pelled to issue an Order in Council, abolishing the system in March, 1839. 
 
 L. E. Nkwnham & Co., Printers, 12, Finsbury Street, E.C,