Abstract of the evidence for the abolition of the slave-trade (1791)/Chapter 15
That such an opinion prevails in the colonies is too evident. Dalrymple, Captain Wilson, Harrison, and Sir George Young, all affirm, that in their time it was thought by some planters to be cheaper to buy than to breed. The prevalence of the same notion is also confirmed by others. Mr. Rees was informed that the planters did not think it worth their while to breed more than they did. The buying system is said by Dr. Jackson to have been generally preferred. Captain Hall says, the planters esteemed the charge of rearing a child to maturity, more troublesome and greater than buying a slave fit for work, and the same opinion is described as prevailing by Fitzmaurice, Duncan, and Davison. As a farther proof of the existence of such a notion, we may refer to the calculations made upon these occasions. If a negro lasted a certain time, says Baillie, his death was accounted nothing. This time is described by Fitzmaurice to be seven years. Captain Giles also heard the term of seven years affixed for the existence of a gang of negroes, which he saw, and we find a man of the name of Yemman, by Captain Scott's account, reducing his calculation to four years, treating his slaves most cruelly, and saying that four years labour of a negro was enough for him; for that he then had his pennyworth out of him, and he did not care what became of him afterwards.
As this notion is so fatal to population, and is indeed evidently one grand source from whence the present evils in the colonial system spring, it will be proper to examine the evidence, to see if we cannot shew the reverse of it to be true.
There is one circumstance that leads us strongly to suspect that it is not so well founded as its general prevalence should warrant, which is, that one-third of all that are bought die in the seasoning. This seasoning is not a distemper, but is the time an African takes to be so habituated to the colonial labour, as to be counted an effective supply.
Some Planters, says Woolrich, who have bought lots of slaves, have informed him, that they have lost one-third of them or more in the first year of their seasoning.
Mr. Terry states, that very considerable losses were common among the newly imported Africans. One-third die within the first year. Of a lot of six, bought by himself, two died within the first year, and at the end of five years two only survived.
Mr. Forster recollects a planter, who bought thirty new negroes, and lost them all within the year.
Mr. Fitzmaurice, in the last four years he was in Jamaica, bought ninety-five new negroes. At the end of that time, he sold fifty-two, all that were then alive, and those not seasoned. Had he kept them till seasoned, he should have lost more, and for this very reason he sold them. He thinks, on an average, at least one-third of the new negroes imported, die in the first three years.
Though this circumstance would induce us to think that it was cheaper to rear than to buy a slave, (for in estimating the price given for one that is bought, not only the prime cost is to be considered, but a third more is to be added to it, with various other circumstances) yet, as sufficient data are not to be found in the evidence to enable us to come to a calculation, we must be content to abide by the facts that follow:
Those estates, says Forster, which bought the greatest number of new negroes, were not thought to be the most flourishing. It was exactly the reverse.
On an estate, which Mr. Coor knew, the proprietor was often buying lots of twenty, thirty, or forty slaves, and yet this man, by ill using them, (which ill usage is inseparably connected with the buying system) suffered a reduction both in the number of his negroes and the produce of his estate, so that from good circumstances his credit was in eleven years reduced to a low ebb.
Captain Scott was present at the sale of Yemman's property, the person mentioned to have adopted the system of buying in preference to that of breeding, and working his negroes up in the space of four years.
Lieutenant Davison believes owners of slaves are very commonly involved with Guinea merchants; for they often stay on the estates all the week, except Sundays, with their gates always locked.
The dependance on the imported slaves, says the Rev. Mr. Davies, certainly contributed to embarrass planters.
Mr. Woolrich, who is qualified to give the history of Tortola in this particular, says, that when he first went there, there were but few slaves, and that at this time the planters were in good credit, and none of them involved in debt. In about three or four years, however, after his arrival there, some Guinea ships came down with cargoes of slaves. The planters in general bought: many of the new negroes died in the seasoning, and Guinea shpis coming down time after time, the planters; bought to supply their places. This continuing, many of them got much into debt, by purchasing slaves on credit, and were obliged to mortgage their estates and slaves to merchants in England. He has never known a planter, who thus mortgaged, pay off the debt. Some in consequence have been obliged to have them sold by auction, much under value, and he has known others, even obliged to become overseers where they were proprietors before. Since he left Tortola, he has been informed, by means of correspondence, or seeing some person from the island, (which is generally the case once a year) of its annual state to the present time. The last information represented the planters to be in very distressed circumstances. Divers of their estates, mortgaged in England, had been sold at publick vendue upon very low terms, because few were able to pay for them, and the general credit so low with the planters, that but few could obtain the necessaries they wanted from the stores kept there by reason of their debts to the English merchants. It has been his opinion for many years, that the unnecessary purchase of African slaves has been the main cause of their embarrassments, and the accumulation of their debts. He is sure that seven-eights of them would have been in much better circumstances, if they had not bought any negroes during the time of his residence there, but had used those they had with humanity and care.
To the above accounts we may subjoin the following from Mr. Savage. In the year 1739, he observes, a duty was laid in Carolina on the importation of slaves, which amounted to a prohibition, and which continued to 1744. The purchase of new negroes having involved the planters greatly in debt was the reason why the Legislature laid it.
These are some of the circumstances, which are intended to shew, that the reverse of the notion or opinion mentioned, is true, that is to say, that it is cheaper to breed than to import. Others are, that wherever estates are mentioned in the evidence as flourishing, and the proprietors of them as clear men, it is where they have adopted the principle of breeding, and of treating the slaves they have had with humanity and care.[1] It may also be added here from the evidence, that the breeding of slaves was considered so profitable in some parts of America, that people held them for this purpose alone, independently of any prospect from the fruits of their labour.
- ↑ Many other advantages appear by the evidence to result from the system of breeding slaves and using them well. Suicide and rebellion are peculiar to the imported slaves. Hence the peace of mind and interest of the proprietor are materially concerned, and it fully appears that such slaves do much more work than others in the same time.