By Dr Selwyn R. Cudjoe
August 21, 2024
Part IV
Slavery ended officially in 1834 while apprenticeship ended slavery in practice in 1838.
The 5,000 people who took part in the Revolt of October 1, 1849, were ex-slaves. The women were at the forefront in this battle. While the attempt to cut their hair ignited the revolt, there were other causes that led to their revolutionary activities.
Lord Harris in his letter to Earl Grey, the secretary of state, on October 6, 1849, outlined the proximate causes of the insurrection: the abolition of Sunday markets; the reduction of the labourers’ wages; the inflammatory reports of the newspapers, particularly The Trinidadian, which he said were “morally and politically wrong and inexpedient to permit the systematic publication of falsehoods, more especially amongst an ignorant and half-civilised race”.
He also believed “the ultimate and great exciting cause which gives an impetus to all the others is the desire to get rid of the white man. I say this more emphatically. That was the sentiment with which the mob on Monday last was imbued, and which was constantly expressed. I am happy to say almost universally in French”.
He also attributed the revolt by these ex-slaves to the “revolutionary spirit” they had cultivated through “their constant communication with the French islands and by visitors imported from thence”. He believed the visitors from the French West Indies were influenced by the French and Haitian revolutions.
Several of the “rioters”, including Sarah Fortune Goin, Felicite Jean Robinson and Maria Theresa, were charged with rioting and were tried in December of 1849.
Charles Warner, the attorney general, appeared as counsel for the prosecution whereas Alexander Fitzjames appeared as counsel for the women. Felicite was discharged because she was pregnant at the time of the hearing, while the other women were found guilty. Subsequently, they were pardoned for their offences.
Fitzjames, the son of African and European parents, received his legal training at Middle Temple in London, one of the four Inns of Court whose graduates were entitled to call themselves members of the English Bar. He was admitted to the Bar in 1847 and returned to Trinidad to practise law.
He was one of our outstanding fighters for justice. In 1839, he was one of the several “Persons of African Descent” (they so described themselves) who welcomed the transference of the administration of the colony’s affairs to the Governor of the Windward Island.
They argued that although the people of African descent consisted of four-fifths of the population, they had “virtually no influence over the legislature of our country, and no share in the making or execution of the laws, by which they were governed. The principle of the government of the colony as regards to ourselves, is that of a perfect oligarchy from which we are excluded”.
In 1846, in speaking of the inability of the people of colour to be treated fairly in his colony, he reminded Benjamin Hawes, undersecretary of state for the colonies, that all the unofficial members of the Legislative Council had “all been slave holders and now possess the same properties on which the then slaves were employed and are now in daily contact with the new labourers for their services. And that is no easy matter to divest themselves of principles inherent to slaveholders”.
He also believed the offspring of the enslaved had surpassed their rulers intellectually. In this bald-facedness (we call it bold-faceness) one could clearly discern the seeds of a JJ Thomas, Eric Williams or CLR James. Some years later, Fitzjames became the “Queen’s advocate” (or attorney general) of Sierra Leone in West Africa.
In 1849, a sense of nationalism was growing in this country.
On August 1, 1849, when the Friends of Freedom sponsored a dinner in Port of Spain to celebrate the anniversary of Emancipation, 250 of the most distinguished citizens attended. Michel Maxwell Philip addressed that gathering. He declared that he saw his task “as combating the error of those descendants of the African race who disclaim all sympathy with the slave upon the simple ground that they or their immediate ancestors were not slaves. (Loud cheers.)
“If these people want an example, I would point them to that great man, Alexandre Dumas. Does he deny that he is a descendant of a son or daughter of still degraded Africa? No! He prides himself upon it; and lest he should be mistaken, he nobly and exultingly points to his curly hair, and says, ‘Here are my credentials!’ (Loud cheers.)”
Later Philip became the solicitor-general of Trinidad (1871-1888). He was the son of an enslaved mother.
Hair matters. It demonstrates the pride that we took in our race. When these women revolted in 1849, they were showing the pride they took in their heritage. We should remember that lesson.