Late discovery of slavery issue

de bene esse: literally, of well-being, morally acceptable but subject to future validation or exception


THE EDITOR, Sir: A FRIEND sent me the article 'Unmasking slavery's profiteers' (Sunday Gleaner, August 4, 2013) by Verene Shepherd, Daive Dunkley, Dave Gosse and Ahmed Reid.
What does it tell you about historians of slavery that these records, which have been sitting at the National Archives' open shelves for many years, have only very recently been scrutinised?
I think it is important to emphasise that these are only the records of those who claimed compensation in 1834. Therefore, those who had 'retired' from plantation ownership by then could not make a claim. Nor are others who profited from both the 'nefarious' trade and slave labour, but could not make a claim for the loss of enslaved labourers, such as shipbuilders, insurers, bankers, manufacturers of the goods exchanged for the enslaved in Africa, etc.
Readers should also note that the 1807 act of Parliament freeing the enslaved only applied to the Caribbean, Canada and Ceylon. India was specifically excluded. And, of course, the 1807 act making it illegal for Britons to trade in the enslaved was barely implemented until the 1840s.

MARIKA SHERWOOD
Senior Research Fellow
Institute of Commonwealth
Studies, University of London