The planters, say they, flog their apprentices, and then, to prevent their complaining to the magistrate, threaten them with severe punishment, or bribe them to silence by giving them a few shillings.  The attorney-general mentioned an instance of the latter policy.  A planter got angry with one of his head men, who was a constable, and knocked him down.  The man started off to complain to the special magistrate.  The master called him back, and told him he need not go to the magistrate—­that he was constable, and had a right to fine him himself.  “Well, massa,” said the negro, “I fine you five shillings on de spot.”  The master was glad to get off with that—­the magistrate would probably have fined him L5 currency.]

In view of the local situation of Jamaica—­the violent character of its planters—­and the inevitable dependency of the magistrates, it is very manifest that immediate emancipation was imperatively demanded there.  In no other colony did the negroes require to be more entirely released from the tyranny of the overseers, or more thoroughly shielded by the power of equal law.  This is a principle which must hold good always—­that where slavery has been most rigorous and absolute, there emancipation, needs to be most unqualified; and where the sway of the master has been most despotic, cruel, and LONG CONTINUED, there the protection of law should be most SPEEDILY extended and most impartially applied."[B]

[Footnote B:  Since the above was written we have seen a copy of a message sent by Sir Lionel Smith, to the house of assembly of Jamaica, on the 3d November, 1837, in which a statement of the deprivations of the apprentices, is officially laid before the house.  We make the following extract from it, which contains, to use his Excellency’s language, “the principal causes, as has been found by the records of the special magistrates, of complaints among the apprentices; and of consequent collisions between the planters and magistrates.”

“Prudent and humane planters have already adopted what is recommended, and their properties present the good working of this system in peace and industry, without their resorting to the authority of the special magistrates; but there are other properties where neither the law of the apprenticeship nor the usages of slavery have been found sufficient to guard the rights of the apprentices.

First, the magistrates’ reports show that on some estates the apprentices have been deprived of cooks and water-carriers while at work in the field—­thus, the time allowed for breakfast, instead of being a period of rest, is one of continual labor, as they have to seek for fuel and to cook.  The depriving them of water-carriers is still more injurious, as the workmen are not allowed to quit their rows to obtain it.  Both these privations are detrimental to the planter’s work.  Second, a law seems wanting to supply the