PORTUGUESE SLAVERY AND THE LORDS' DEBATE. liv -E congratulate the Anti-Slavery
Society most heartily on the results of the debate in the House of Lords on Wednesday. That debate may be regarded as an effective antidote to the White Book put forth by the Foreign Office last March. The White Book was in effect, though not in name, an apology for slavery in Portuguese West Africa — an apology which followed the old lines of special pleading. It first con- tended that there was now no such thing as slavery in the Portuguese possessions, and then in substance went on to say or suggest that if there were—(1) It was being stopped by the loyal and devoted action of the Portuguese Govern- ment ; (2) it was quite impossible ever to stop it in West Africa because the black men there are such lazy, wife-supported creatures that they will not work without a certain amount of compulsion ; (3) it was not our business ; and (4) in any case the Anti-Slavery Society paid its interpreter, and therefore the reports of its secretary, Mr. Harris, were quite untrustworthy. Of course, we do not allege that the White Book put matters in such bald language as we have stated them. We do assert, however, that what we have said is the impression made by the White Book on an unprejudiced mind. It is an enormous relief to turn to the debate in the Lords, and to note the position adopted by Lord Morley on behalf of the Government. Lord Morley made no attempt to provide any ingenious sophistries or apologies for Portuguese slavery or to whitewash the Portuguese authorities. Though he was not willing to go as far as we think a British Government ought to go in. putting pressure upon Portugal, his speech was no lame apology for slavery when it is called by a nicer name. He did not, we mean, go back from the old position of this country as regards slavery, but merely recommended slow and cautious action. Lord Morley began by going almost as far as we have ever gone in general condemnation. Language, if it were rightly directed, could hardly, he declared, be too strong to describe the present state of things. But he added that it should. be measured by justice and by the facts—a proviso with which we are in the heartiest agreement. He went on, however, to declare that great disappointment and dis- illusionment in respect of the action of the British Government could not be justified. At the same time he admitted—and this should be noted as an absolute contradiction of the White Book—that " nobody denied that the conditions of labour under which these people worked were in effect bondage." The state of things, he continued, included slavery of a horrible kind, but it was in regions so remote that it was impossible for the Portuguese Government to put an end to it. Here we venture to say with all respect to Lord Morley that he has not been altogether well informed. What makes slave-raiding, and slave-trading so horrible inland is the fact that the slave raiders and traders know that if they can catch a, slave, even a thousand miles up country, and bring him down to the coast and put him on board a vessel for transference to the islands, the body of that slave is worth some £40 or £50. A woman or a child fetches a good deal less than a man. It is the existence of this market, and the firm prices that rule in it, which sucks the wretched slave out of his home in some remote village of the hinterland of Angola, or even in the Congo or the northerly and westerly parts of Rhodesia. What makes man-selling so lucrative a trade is the demand for virtual slaves in San Thome and Principe, a demand concealed of late, but one which none the less is doing its dreadful work, and which has not in reality been the least affected by the shop-window repatriations.
What are the nine hundred and fifty-six repatriations of which Lord Morley spoke compared to the hideous aggre- gation of slaves on the islands ? That awful hive of black bondmen numbers, it is believed, some 40,000. In all probability, too, these repatriations of the weaklings and the old—the mere wastage of the plantations—have been compensated for by the nominally unlawful, though actually tolerated, smuggling of men and women serfs into the islands. When Lord Morley went on to deal with the demand so often made by the Anti-Slavery Society, and supported so frequently in these columns, that Portugal should be told that the price of our continued alliance with her is a bona fide suppression of slavery, he met it with the following question. Was this the moment to choose for making that rather violent representation, when the Portu- guese authorities had given the very best evidence they could that they were trying to meet our views point by point, and when things were amending and looking brighter ? We do not want to be offensive to the Portuguese Govern- ment or people, but in the interests of truth as well as of freedom we are obliged to say that Lord Morley is being deceived by what sailors call " eye-wash." The Portuguese authorities have given no evidence that they are earnestly and sincerely doing their best to put an end to slavery. Things are not " amending " or "looking brighter " in the smallest degree, and if the Government could or would get unbiassed accounts of the actions of Portuguese West African authorities, they would, we are sure, find this to be the case. Lord Morley concluded his speech by the general statement that while sympathizing entirely with what had been said and recognizing the deplorable state of things, he submitted that there was no case for our taking further steps. Grateful as we are to Lord Morley for making no attempt to say that slavery is not slavery when it is carried on under the alias of contract labour, we are bound respectfully to deny his proposition that there is no case for our taking further steps. The secretaries of the Anti-Slavery Society show in a letter in our columns to-day that there is a case, and a very strong one. The cry of the slave rises as loud as ever. It is not a remedy to stuff our ears with the White Book of the Foreign Office. We wish we had time to deal with the admirable speech of the Archbishop of Canterbury and his bold, and we are sure perfectly true, statement that things instead of being better in these regions than they were when Dr. Livingstone visited them, are positively worse. Alluding to the scoff about the Englishman's ambition to police the world, he used the following very pertinent words : " When the scoff was made as to our policing the world, he would point to what had been done in the Congo and in the Putumayo district." He wanted to create and strengthen a widespread public opinion not only in this country but elsewhere as regards slavery. " He would like to see in our despatches a more definite brushing aside of humbug arguments." That is admirably said, and all who care for the good cause of freedom will feel a sense of deep thankfulness to the Archbishop. His speech was worthy of the best traditions of the National Church.
From the Unionist side of the House we are delighted to find very plain speaking indeed. Lord Cromer spoke with the manliness, good sense, and humanity which always mark his public utterances. Putting down slavery was difficult, he declared, but there was a great tendency to exaggerate the difficulty. But Lord Cromer never contents himself with mere abstract statements. He had something practical to suggest. " If it was true that British subjects were slaves in the islands, ships should be sent to bring them away." That is, we think, a perfectly sound suggestion, and if adopted it would, we believe, frighten Portugal into doing her duty. As to renouncing the treaty with Portugal if Portugal would not amend her ways, he declared that as a private individual he felt able to make that suggestion. He followed this up with another very sound and practical proposition : " The Government should let the Portuguese Government under- stand that if unfortunately it should happen that they desired our assistance in time of war, it would place this country in a very delicate position to be asked to use arms for a slave State." Yet if things go on as they are going this is a danger to which we are perpetually exposed.
The " crowning mercy " of a most useful debate, and one in strong contrast both for sincerity and plain speak- ing to the debate on the same subject in the Commons, was Lord Lansdowne's speech. Speaking with full responsibility, not only of an ex-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, but as Leader of the Opposition, he declared that the facts could not be explained away. No doubt be used guarded and cautious language, as it was right should be used by one in his most responsible position. At the same time, there was no doubt as to the meaning of his warning to the Portuguese Govern- ment. They would, he declared, be extremely short- sighted if they did not take to heart the warning language uttered on that and other occasions with regard to the condition of things in these islands and the adjoining mainland.
"The Portuguese Government should take this into account, that if they were not careful a condition of things might arise in which we should be confronted, on the one hand, by our treaty obligations, and on the other by a very strollg and almost irresist- ible outburst of public opinion in this country. That would be a most unfortunate contingency for Portugal particularly, and he earnestly trusted that by the manner in which they handled these and other questions they would avoid doing anything which might place the Government of this country in that most unfortunate dilemma."
Before we leave the subject of the Lords' debate we must express our thanks to Lord Mayo for his excellent speech, in which he drew attention to the subject, and demanded that the Government should publish papers in support of their contentions in the White Book— "(a) That slave-owning and slave-trading no longer existed on the mainland and islands of Portuguese West Africa; (b) that the recruitment and shipping of labourers from the mainland to the islands had ceased; and (c) the rate and conditions of repatri- ation from the islands and the administration of the Repatriation Fund. He maintained that slavery still existed, not only on the islands, but on the mainland. The repatriation provisions were only carried out in the case of old and infirm labourers, though there were large funds accumulated for the purpose of repatriating the labourers."
If the Government can bring sound testimony to prove these three points, no one will be more delighted than ourselves, and none more ready than we to say that we have done the Portuguese Government and their supporters in the Foreign Office an injustice in declaring that slavery is still not only allowed but encouraged in the Portuguese colonies.
Previous page
