On the 29th of July died William Wilberforce, the distinguished philanthropist, memorable especially for his exertions in the abolition of slavery. He was buried on August 4th, in Westminster Abbey, the pall-bearers being the Lord Chancellor, the Speaker of the House of Commons, Lord Bexley, the Marquis of Westminster, the Right Hon. Charles Grant, Sir Robert Inglis, Mr. W. Smith, and His Royal Highness the Duke of Gloucester. Among the mourners were the peers, at the head of whom were the Dukes of Sussex and Wellington, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and most of the bishops, and, lastly, the members of the House of Commons.
It seems hard that he was denied the pleasure of seeing that come to pass, the forwarding of which had occupied so great a part of his life, viz. the abolition of slavery. In 1807 the importation of slaves into our colonies was decreed; but men's minds were exercised as to the lawfulness of keeping slaves at all, and an Anti-Slavery Society was established in 1823, the principal members of which were Wilberforce, Buxton, Zachary Macaulay, Lord Suffield, and Dr. Lushington, and in that year a movement was made in Parliament in furtherance of this object, but for some years the cause made little progress, until 1830, when it was again taken up. But, in 1833, the Government took it seriously in hand, and the abolition of slavery was carried with comparatively little opposition. True, Mr. W. E. Gladstone, in a debate thereon, on June 3rd, defended his father as a slave owner—he having an estate at Demerara, called Vreeden's Hoop—but he had a bad cause to back up, and his speech was practically nullified by Lord Howick's reply.
The opponents of the Bill talked of the helplessness of the negroes, who had always had everything found them, and prophesied that they would starve; indeed, an anonymous artist produced the accompanying picture of "An Emancipated Negro," who is reduced to catching butterflies for food.
The Bill passed the House of Commons on August 7th, and received the Royal Assent on August 28th. It is 3 and 4 Gul. IV. c. 73, and is entitled "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 services of such slaves." It is a long Act, but the following is a synopsis.
All children under six years of age, or born after August 1st, 1834, are declared free: all registered slaves above six years become, from the same date, apprenticed labourers, divided into two principal classes, prædial, or those engaged in agriculture, and the non-prædial; the apprenticeships of the former to expire August 1, 1838; of the latter August 1, 1840. The hours of the prædial apprentices not to exceed forty-five in any one week, and for which they were to be paid either by being boarded and lodged or by receiving a sum of money weekly. By this transition into the apprentice state, the slave immediately entered into the chief immunities of a free man; he could not be arbitrarily punished by his master, and became eligible to give evidence in criminal and civil courts, to serve on juries and in the militia. One of the chief difficulties to settle, was in determining the compensation to the owners of slaves for the loss of their compulsory services. A very small party in the Commons was in favour of the immediate and entire emancipation of the negroes, and that without any compensation whatever; the ministers at first proposed advancing a loan of £15,000,000 to the West India proprietors; subsequently this loan was transmuted into a gift of £20,000,000, by which liberal donation, Mr. Secretary Stanley said the whole plan would ensure the cordial co-operation of the planters and colonial legislatures. On this basis it was settled, and an end put to a question which had formed almost the exclusive subject of public interest and agitation by the religious portion of the community during the last half century.
To change from grave to gay. The "New Woman" was already beginning to assert masculine functions, though hardly in such an æsthetic manner as to-day. In 1787 Rowlandson portrayed a cricket match played in that year by women, at Ball's Pond, and several satirical prints immortalize the lady cricketer; but it was reserved for the Times of September 4, 1833, to chronicle—
"A Rowing Match among Women.—The proposed wager among women came off yesterday. It was said that the contest was for a purse of sovereigns given by the ladies and gentlemen of Lambeth; but it is believed the proprietor of a public-house near Lambeth Palace was the donor. The females were the wives and daughters of fishermen. The canaille mustered in shoals, and never did we see a rowing match so attended. The purlieus of Westminster and St. George's Fields had poured forth their population, and Billingsgate had supplied its oratory. To attempt to describe the rowing, or to give the names of Sal this, or Mary that, as they were bawled from the shore in a tone of encouragement, would be a gross insult to the understanding of our readers; but the lady who wore a blue bow in her cap as large as a sunflower, and who had her garments tied round her legs with a rope, had the distinguished honour of being declared the victor."
We are used to hear each newspaper vieing with another as to its circulation, but the following list is authentic, as every newspaper had to be stamped by the Inland Revenue, and the numbers as officially declared must needs be correct. It also supplies an authentic list of the ephemeral publications of the day. It covers from January 1, 1832, to June 30, 1833.