 |
| Natasha L. Henry |
An Act for the Abolition of Slavery throughout the British
Colonies; for promoting the Industry of the manumitted slaves; and for
compensating the Persons hitherto entitled to the Service of such Slaves (also
known as the Slavery Abolition Act) received Royal Assent on 28 August 1833 and
took effect 1 August 1834.
An Act for the Abolition of Slavery throughout the British
Colonies; for promoting the Industry of the manumitted slaves; and for
compensating the Persons hitherto entitled to the Service of such Slaves (also
known as the Slavery Abolition Act) received Royal Assent on 28 August 1833 and
took effect 1 August 1834. The Act abolished enslavement in most British
colonies, freeing over 800,000 enslaved Africans in the Caribbean and South
Africa as well as a small number in Canada.
Several factors led to the Act’s passage.
Britain’s economy was
in flux at the time, and as a new system of international commerce emerged, its
slaveholding Caribbean colonies — which were largely focused on sugar
production — could no longer compete with larger plantation economies such as
Cuba and Brazil. Merchants began to demand an end to the monopolies on the
British market held by the Caribbean colonies and pushed instead for free
trade. The persistent struggles of enslaved
Africans and a growing fear of slave uprisings among plantation owners
was another major factor.
British abolitionists had actively opposed the transatlantic
trade in African people since the 1770s. (Several abolitionist petitions were
organized in 1833 alone, which collectively garnered the support of 1.3 million
signatories.) Such anti-slavery views spread to Upper
Canada, influencing the passage of the 1793 Act to Limit Slavery,
the first legislation that aimed to dismantle slavery in the British colonies.
(See Chloe
Cooley and the Act to Limit Slavery in Upper Canada.)
In the eastern colonies of Lower Canada (what
is now Québec), Nova
Scotia and New
Brunswick, previous abolitionist attempts had been unsuccessful. In 1793,
for instance, Pierre-Louis Panet introduced a bill to the National
Assembly to abolish enslavement in
Lower Canada, but the bill languished over several sessions and never came to a
vote (seePanet
Family) Instead, individual legal challenges first raised in the
late 1700s undermined the institution of enslavement in these areas. One
important case came in February 1798, when an enslaved woman named Charlotte
was arrested in Montréal and
refused to return to her mistress. She was brought before James Monk, a justice
of the King’s Bench with abolitionist sympathies, who released Charlotte on a
technicality. According to British law, enslaved persons could only be detained
in houses of corrections, and not common jails, and as no houses of correction
existed in Montréal, Charlotte could not be detained. She and another enslaved
woman named Judith were freed that winter. Monk stated in his ruling that he
would apply this interpretation of the law to subsequent cases. Another significant
1798 case came before the courts in Annapolis
Royal, Nova Scotia, when a local military officer Frederick William Hecht
sought to establish his title to an enslaved woman named Rachel Bross. After a
lengthy trial, the jury rejected Hecht’s claim, ruling instead that Bross was a
free servant.
Rulings in such cases did not always favour emancipation,
however. Only two years after the trials of Charlotte and Bross, an enslaved
woman named Nancy petitioned for her freedom in the New Brunswick courts.
Fourteen years earlier, Nancy had run away with her son and three others, but
they were caught and returned to her previous owner, a farmer and Loyalist settler
named Caleb Jones. The challenge filed by her attorneys was that slavery was a
socially accepted custom, but was not officially recognized in New Brunswick.
The judges’ decision was split, and Nancy remained enslaved.
Following from the 1793 Act
to Limit Slavery, Upper
Canada was already moving toward abolition. The Slavery
Abolition Act, 1833, did not reference British
North America. Rather, its aim was to dismantle large-scale
plantation slavery that
existed in Britain’s tropical colonies, where the enslaved population was
usually larger than that of the white colonists. Enslaved Africans in British
North America were far smaller in number and lived, according to Frank Mackey,
“scattered and isolated from one another.”
As an imperial statute, the Slavery Abolition Act liberated
less than 50 enslaved Africans in British North America. For most enslaved
people in British North America, however, the Act resulted
only in partial liberation, as it only emancipated children under the age of
six, while others were to be retained for four to six years as apprentices.
Twenty million English pounds (£20,000,000) were made available by the British
government to pay for damages suffered by owners of registered slaves, but none
was sent to slaveholders in British North America. Those formerly enslaved did
not receive any compensation either.This legislation also made Canada free land for enslaved
American Blacks. The image of Canada as a safe haven for enslaved African
Americans was born, and thousands of fugitives and free Blacks would arrive on
Canadian soil between 1834 and the early 1860s. (See alsoUnderground
Railroad.)
The passage of the Slavery Abolition Act gave
rise to a significant cultural event called Emancipation Day, which continued
to grow in popularity throughout the 19th century. Once a year, beginning in
1834, the liberation of enslaved Africans
and the idea of freedom are recognized in the West Indies and parts of the
United States and Canada. Members of the African
Canadian community along with white and Aboriginal supporters
gather at various locations across the country to commemorate the abolition of
slavery throughout the British colonies on 1 August. Celebrants parade through
main streets, and attend church services and speeches. Picnics, dances and
other festive cultural activities are held in celebration. Emancipation Day
commemorations also serve as a platform from which to challenge the racial
discrimination that has impeded Black Canadians’ ability to exercise their full
rights and freedoms.
The end of enslavement in most of the British colonies was
an important turning point in history, one that transformed the social
condition of African people in the Caribbean, South America and North America.
Racial inequality and anti-Black racism is
a legacy of enslavement and has been resisted by the Black civil rights agenda
internationally. Black persons in Canada were denied certain rights and
privileges and limited to menial jobs. Many Black parents were forced to send
their children to segregated schools. Black men and women were refused service
by many white-owned businesses and denied the right to purchase property in
certain areas.
One lingering issue from the period of African enslavement
is the matter of reparations. In 2013, the Caribbean Community CARICOM , an
organization of 15 Caribbean countries, formed a committee to pursue
reparations from Britain and seven other European countries that profited from
enslavement. The committee is seeking formal apologies and some form of
compensation for the benefit of Africans in the Diaspora.
The question of reparations for descendants of Africans
enslaved and systemically discriminated against in Canada has also been raised.
In 2004, the United Nations supported the demand for compensation for the
destruction of Africville by
the City
of Halifax. Like their Caribbean counterparts, African Canadians seek
formal apologies and a discussion with the different levels of government on
possible forms of compensation.
- Natasha L. Henry, Emancipation Day: Celebrating Freedom in Canada (2010)
- Natasha L. Henry, Talking About Freedom: Celebrating Emancipation Day in Canada(2012)
- Frank Mackey, Done with Slavery: the Black Fact in Montreal 1760–1840 (2010)
- Hillary Beckles, Britain’s Black Debt (2013)
- J.R. Kerr-Ritchie, Rites of August First: Emancipation Day in the Black Atlantic World(2007)
No comments:
Post a Comment