THE key word used in the indictments against Dundas is “gradual”. But he had to try to steer the bill through a parliament overloaded with vested financial interests rooted in the status quo. And the watered-down act of 1807 only prohibited the future TRADE in slaves within the empire, not the existing practice. The entire business was not ABOLISHED until 1833 (20 years after Dundas had left politics). In the interval the law was widely flouted and thousands more slaves were transported. Gradualism indeed!
So beware as ever the dangers of scapegoating. There were many, many, others far more culpable.
Take an example close to home: for we Scots were up to our oxters in this outrage.
In King Street in Leith there is a wee plaque registering the site as the birthplace of John Gladstone(s) and noting that his son, William Ewart, became prime minister four times. John’s family were successful ship chandlers but with his father’s blessing in 1787 John moved to Liverpool, the then foremost port dealing in sugar and slavery. He was enormously successful. At the time of abolition he was the biggest individual slave owner in the Caribbean but particularly Jamaica (hence the preponderance of Scottish surnames there).
The 1833 legislation was only enabled by the passing of the Slave Compensation Act, which accepted that slaves were assets. It put a price on every head according to their labouring capacities. John Gladstone was the biggest single beneficiary but there were hundreds of claimants.
So huge was the total outlay (exceeding that of the recent banking crisis) that the government had to raise the money by loans from private banks such as the Rothschilds. It was only expunged from the national debt in 2015.
So while the principle of emancipation eventually prevailed, it entailed bribery on a grand scale. Leading up to 1833, William Ewart had become an MP and is on record as a foremost proponent of the case for compensation.
But the slave owners were not sated. They then began to recruit “indentured servants” from India and the East Indies (hence many of the surnames in Trinidad and Guyana). They were hardly better treated and still in effect forced labour. This continued for several decades. Now there’s gradual for you! Should that plaque be removed?
Leslie Smith
Leith
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel