AS statues of slave traders and those connected with this wicked trade are torn down and councils re-evaluate them, I was struck that while these are inanimate objects, we have a generous contingent of living individuals who are members of a key part of our legislature and who have derived their prominence in part via the slave trade.
Within the House of Lords sits, 92 hereditary peers, their roles unearned and like their colleagues unelected by the public, but yet playing a key part in the legislative process.
Francis Baring, 6th Baron Northbrook (an opponent of Lords reform) is descended from Francis Baring, the anti-abolitionist and banker, who profited from slave-derived commodities. He dismissed as exaggerated the “physical sufferings of the negro”.
READ MORE: History is about our perception as well as research
The Conservative peer Douglas Hogg, Viscount Hailsham, descends from Charles McGarel, a merchant compensated £129,464 (which has been estimated at more than £100 million today) for 2489 slaves.
Another Tory peer, Lord Carrington, in the Lords since 2018, leads us to an earlier Baron Carrington, who received £4908 in compensation for the loss of 268 slaves.
Consider also the 14th Lord Fairfax of Cameron, a Conservative peer, whose slave-trading ancestor, the 6th Lord Fairfax of Cameron, owner of vast plantations in Virginia, reportedly enjoyed what he called “bedding down with a negro wench”. What we would now call rape.
If we regard some statues as indefensible, it seems odd to then have unelected individuals who derived vast fortunes off the back of slave labour not having their unearned positions questioned, and for them to still continue to influence the political agenda today.
Alex Orr
Edinburgh
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