_Sect._ 2.—Debauchery and Crime encouraged 53 _Sect._ 3.—Virtuous Union of the Sexes impeded 56 _Sect._ 4.—Task-work prevented 57 _Sect._ 5.—Invidious Feelings excited by prompting to a general Rush for Freedom 60 CHAPTER V. _Safety of the Colonies endangered_ 64 _Sect._ 1.—Cultivation superseded 65 _Sect._ 2.—Rebellion instigated 66 CHAPTER VI. _No just Analogy in the Precedents adduced by Government_ 70 _Sect._ 1.—Trinidad 70 _Sect._ 2.—St. Lucie 73 _Sect._ 3.—Berbice 74 _Sect._ 4.—Cape of Good Hope 76 CHAPTER VII. _Responsibility attaching to Ministers if they enforce Compulsory Manumission_ 78 COMPULSORY MANUMISSION. CHAPTER I. WEST INDIA PARTY DISINGENUOUSLY TREATED. The West India Question is gradually narrowing to a point. There seems now to be little difference of opinion in regard to all safe and practicable measures tending to ameliorate the condition of the slaves, though the time and manner of their adoption may be dependent upon local considerations. The question of emancipation, or that measure commonly designated Compulsory Manumission, alone remains at issue. The paramount importance of this clause, and the alarm felt in every West India colony at the threat of government to enforce its adoption, has caused the proceedings of the colonial department to be closely scrutinized, and it has in a variety of publications been charged with precipitation. A pamphlet has lately appeared in vindication, under the title of “Remarks on an Address to the Members of the New Parliament, on the Proceedings of the Colonial Department with respect to the West India Question.” It is avowedly “written by a Member of the late Parliament,” and bears internal evidence of being the production of a gentleman connected with the Colonial Office. This pamphlet calls for a reply, for two reasons: First, because the writer indulges in recrimination, and brings accusations against the West India body, which, if passed unnoticed, might produce a very erroneous impression on the minds of the moderate and disinterested portion of the legislature. Secondly, because the writer discusses the compulsory manumission clause, and acquaints us with the nature and strength of the reasoning employed by government to justify the adoption of that measure.