THE BAHAMA ISLANDS 443 



these recommendations,™ it was represented that there would be great disap- 

 pointment in England if the Colony failed to act as it had been nrged to do. 

 In 1835 the House of Lords came to the aid of the Ministry by approving its 

 conduct." 



When concessions were made by the House of Assembly, full acknowledgment 

 was made that there was a disposition on the. part of the Colony to improve 

 the condition of the slaves.'" It was represented that whatever improvemenU 

 the local Assembly might make would be on the initiative of the Colony, and 

 ought not in that case to be objectionable to the colonists themselves.™ The 

 repeal of objectionable features was as strongly insisted on as was the enact- 

 ment of advanced provisions. The colonists pleaded that the custom of the 

 community secured to the slaves most of the guarantees for protection on which 

 the home government insisted. The Ministry, unwilling to trust to such an 

 indefinite response, insisted on a statutory recognition of these alleged beneficent 

 customs.''' In this way alone could it be assured that the slave system was to be 

 freed from the abuses which slaveholders themselves admitted to exist. AVest 

 Indian proprietors residing in the mother country were consulted as to the 

 practicability of the measures proposed, and the colonists were told that the 

 recommendations met with the approval of this class." Finally in pressing 

 the matter upon the attention of the Assembly an appeal was made to the feeling 

 of gratitude, which the colonists must have felt towards the mother country, 

 for the benefits of British rule.'" 



own freedom, or that of their wives or children; manumissions by private contract 

 were to be in writing and made to the protector. Slave evidence was to be admitted 

 to the courts in all cases; and ministers of religion were to certify as to the qualifi- 

 cations of slaves to be put on oath. Cruelty to a slave was to cause the right of the 

 owner to hold the slave to be put at the discretion of the courts; a second conviction 

 involved the right of the owner to hold any slave at all; or of the manager of a 

 plantation to hold the position of a manager of slaves. In slave trials the burden 

 of proof was on the master. The protector was to make an annual report of the 

 conduct of his office, the number of cases that came under his jurisdiction, etc. 

 H. V. for 1824, pp. 38-70. 



'"H. v., 1824, pp. 36-37; 1825, p. 32, and 1826, p. 2. 



'•^Loc. cit., 1826, p. 2. 



'- H. v., 1824, pp. 36-37. This was small encouragement to a body of slave- 

 holders who desired to be excused from acting at all. 



"H. v., 1824, p. 34. 



"H. v., 1824, pp. 34-35. 



•= H. v., 1825, p. 32. 



'"hoc. cit. 



