The Philanthropic British?
 
From: bernhard1848@att.net
 
The writer below in replying to Hinton Helper’s “Impending Crisis,” chastises a philanthropic England for its hypocrisy in emancipating African slaves while still oppressing its Hindu subjects in India. John C. Calhoun in 1844 viewed British emancipation as combining philanthropy, profit and power, and believing that free labor would reduce overhead and increase profits. Their freedmen eventually bankrupted plantations by not being industrious; England then promoted wholesale emancipation to cripple or destroy her successful trade rivals.
 
Bernhard Thuersam, Director
Cape Fear Historical Institute
www.cfhi.net

The Philanthropic British?
 
“We are not yet through with the Testimony of England, who is always loudest in condemning our Slavery. We will give her a fair hearing. How closely she watches those poor Hindoos!
 
How effectually she keeps them down, whenever they express any dissatisfaction with the happiness she forces upon them!  She has instituted among those “half-naked barbarians” an awful solidarite’, by which the province is responsible for the labor of all its men and women. But still, England is philanthropic! She has carried rails and Bibles, free-schools and steamboats, telegraphs and libraries to India, all for the benefit of those half-naked barbarians!
 
And should telegraphs and Bibles not have the requisite effect of happyfying, opium will be administered to them, and to “all the world, and to the rest of mankind.” She will no longer permit those savage Hindoos to roast as witches wrinkled old women, for she knows too well from her own experience, the unfairness of such proceedings; nor does she, in these days, allow anywhere the Hand of Justice to cut the ears of those who speak against State or Church. Now, this is decided progress!
 
England is the civilizer and Christianizer of the world! To be sure, there is still robbing and flogging, murdering and starving enough in the “dominions of the Gracious Queen, where the sun never setteth;” but England, nevertheless, dislikes Slavery in general, and Negro Slavery in the United States in particular, and her lords and ladies are ever ready to eat and drink with the poor commoners of the West, eager of philanthropic royalty!
 
But England emancipated her slaves in the West India Islands! She expended 20,000,000

[pounds], we suppose, from sheer philanthropy, and may we ask: Whom did her philanthropic measure benefit? Jamaica, that brilliant island, saw her land and people degenerate, says H.C. Carey; the planter sold cheaply and left, the slave did not work. Such must be the effect of all revolutionary or sudden abolition; and, though the emancipated lands may gradually recover from the ill-advised blow, they can only do so with much loss of property and at the cost of much human misery.”
 
(The American Question, in its National Aspect, Elias Peissner, Negro Universities Press, 1970, pp. 64-65, originally published in 1861)