1830.] Letters on the West India Question. *681 



" With regard to emancipation, I perfectly agree in what has been said, that 

 the idea of an Act of Parliament to emancipate the Slaves in the West Indies, 

 without the consent and concurrent feeling of all parties concerned, both in this 

 country and in that, would not only be mischievous in its consequences, but 

 totally extravagant in its conception, as well as impracticable in its execution, and 

 therefore I see no good in discussing that point." 



In continuation of the subject, Mr. Horton inquires 



" Has that change taken place in the condition and character of the slave, 

 which is insisted upon in these quotations as an indispensable preliminary to 

 any emancipation, much more to sudden emancipation ? If it has taken place, 

 then equitable compensation is a fortiori due to the West Indian proprietors, 

 under whose improved management this change, impossible under other circum- 

 stances, has taken place. If, on the other hand, it has not taken place, I would 

 ask you, whether the authority of Lord Lansdowne, Lord Grey, Lord Gren- 

 ville, Mr. W. Smith, and (last, though not least,) Mr. Fox, be not point-blanc 

 against the expediency of the sudden extinction of slavery, with exclusive 

 reference to the well-being of the slaves themselves." 



Mr. Horton proceeds to shew cause why a more rapid improvement 

 has not taken place since the Abolition of the Slave Trade in 1807. 



" An incredible number of Negroes have been legally or clandestinely im- 

 ported into the Slave Colonies of other powers, thereby affording a bonus on 

 the production of sugar in those foreign colonies, to the prejudice of our own. 

 The British planters have had a losing trade to carry on ; and the slaves have 

 partaken of the bad consequences which are inevitably attendant on a losing 

 trade." 



We have no hesitation in affirming, that if the present depressed state 

 of the planters continues, the negroes will undoubtedly suffer in the 

 ratio of that depression. 



It being undeniable that the abolitionists unanimously adopted these 

 unexceptionable resolutions of 1823, pledging the legislature to such 

 measures only as might be compatible with an equitable consideration of 

 the interests of private property, " to fritter away" that phrase by. a 

 mental reservation, that there can be no equitable interest in slave- 

 property, is a subterfuge below contempt. 



if He who owns slaves now," says Mr. Alexander, in a recent pamphlet, 

 " is surely not a more responsible party than he who owned them ten, or 

 twenty, or thirty years ago ; who converted them into money, and who now 

 lives in splendour upon the fortune he then acquired. If restitution is to be 

 made, it is not the present holders of slaves alone, but former holders, even in 

 the third or fourth remove, who ought to be compelled to make the sacrifice. 

 The greater part of the fortune of Mr. Fowel Buxton was derived from slaves. 

 He is consequently as responsible as Mr. Goulburn, or any other present pro- 

 prietor of slaves. Mr. Protheroe, of Bristol, is as responsible as Sir Thomas 

 Lethbridge or Lord Seaford. Mr. Zachary Macauley ought to contribute to 

 the compensation fund nearly three times as much as my Lord Chandos; Lord 

 Calthorpe is as responsible as the Marquis of Sligo. In short, there are very 

 few noble or eminent families in the country, who have not at one time or 

 another, possessed or inherited property in slaves. Surely these persons are 

 as much entitled to make restitution, and contribute to the sacrifice, as you, 

 the present embarrassed, contemned, and slandered proprietors and planters 

 of the West Indies." 



" If it be meant," says Mr. Horton, commenting on an election speech, 

 fc that, abstractedly speaking, man ought not to be the property of man, I 

 concur. If it be meant that in consequence of that abstract truth, the West 

 Indian slaves ought to be emancipated, without compensation to the planters 

 for any injury which mav result from such emancipation, I dissent. But this 



M.M. New Scritt.VoL. X. No. 60. 4 *R 



