The Slavery Abolition Act 1833
The Slavery Abolition Act 1833 is the source of the majority of the material cited in the query. Because of the language used in the title, "CAP. LXXIII," and the substance, it is a legal document. Additionally, the document makes use of legal terminology that is uncommon in everyday discourse. The phrase "by such Acts of Assembly" is also mentioned in the document, indicating that it is a law that has been passed through the legislative procedure and is now in effect. ("Slavery Abolition Act 1833; CAP. LXXIII"). The letter is postmarked August 28, 1833. This occasion was significant because the British decided to outlaw slavery across all of their colonies. However, in terms of international human rights, millions of people from different parts of the world were either colonized in the home country or were working as slaves in foreign countries. According to Mandela, the European imperialism violated the rights of African and the other colored races by imposing their rule against their will (17). During the 19th century, the Europeans were letting go of the practice of slavery in their territories but they were not ready to give independence to the colonies.
The Creation of the Document
The British parliament created the document. During the period, the Britain had acquired numerous colonies across the world, in Africa, Asia, and the pacific islands. These were some of the areas largely affected by the practice of slavery. Thus, the laws enacted by the legislatures in England had authority over a large portion of the world. Thus, the United Kingdom Parliament had the ability to end oppression in many parts of the world where the Queen was the head through colonization. In this case, the law abolishing slavery targeted all the British colonies apart from the colonies that were operating under the East Indian company. Apparently, the areas that were under the East Indian company had other plans of abolishing slavery. The territories included Saint Helena and Ceylon, that is today known as Sri Lanka.
Important Clauses in the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833
The slavery abolition act of 1833 contained three clauses that made an important document for both the former slaves and owners. First, the Act made it clear that slavery was abolished in all the British colonies. The fact that the British territories in Europe did not engage in slavery meant that even the territories that they controlled should also stop using or trading slaves ("Slavery Abolition Act 1833; CAP. LXXIII") Secondly, the Act indicated that there would be compensation for the former slaves' owners who would have to release their slaves to become apprenticed laborers. The clause was a motivating factor for those with slaves to abide by the law and not cause undue resistance. In fact, the clause of making the former slaves apprentices was a compromise that shielded the slaves' owners from a sudden loss of their workers. Thirdly, the law also made it clear that the apprenticed laborers had an option of purchasing their immediate release if they were not willing to wait for complete freedom from their masters ("Slavery Abolition Act 1833; CAP. LXXIII"). Even though, it was still unfair for the former slaves, it offered an expensive option for them to secure complete freedom.
Reasons for the Abolition of Slavery
The abolition of slavery by the United Kingdom was enacted because of the several reasons. First, several legislations and court rulings had made it clear that slavery is illegal in the United Kingdom. The fact that the British were not allowed to trade or own slaves made it hypocritical for them to encourage the same in their territories across the world. Consequently, anti-slavery movement also emerged in the United Kingdom that gave pressure to the legislature to abolish the practice across all its colonies. Lastly, there was also pressure from some colonies such as Jamaica to end the oppressive practice of slavery. The rebellion by the slaves prompted the British parliament to critically look into the issue and decided to abolish it (Gates 71) The document explicitly indicates that it is just for all slaves serving under her majesty's colonies to be set free. More so, those slaves that found their way to the United Kingdom would have immediate freedom without going through apprenticeship. The clauses show the reason to write the document was to uphold the values of the United Kingdom.
International Human Rights and Colonialism
During the 19th century, International Human Rights was not existing for the third world countries. First, the whole practice of colonialism deprived people the right of free movement, self-rule, and ownership of their native land. Gourevitch argues that much of the problems facing African countries today was because the imperialism interfered with the social-political organizations of the locals (131). Even though the British at the time saw colonization as a just practice, it was a clear violation of the rights of the millions who served under their rule. Secondly, it is clear that during the period, slavery was still practiced in many parts of the world. Even worse than colonialism, it was evil for some people to use other races in their farms and industries without paying them. Everybody deserves freedom and the right to fair day's wage for work done. However, slavery denied people from certain races their freedom and the opportunities to advance economically.
Conclusion
In the conclusion, the United Kingdom parliament should have answered why they considered slavery unjust and not colonialism. The document clearly stated that it was "unjust" for the people in the British colonies to take up slaves or engage in slavery. Apparently, the British were willing to outlaw slavery because it was perpetuated by individuals but they were not ready to stop "state slavery" that was taking place in the form of colonialism. In his Autobiography, Mandela makes it clear that the colonialists exploited the Africans by forcing them to surrender their land, labor, and finances to the imperialists (47). The Europeans who engaged in colonization were not different from the slave traders because they acted on the premise of racial discrimination. They considered the non-whites as inferior such that they could control them and their resources without being remorseful. However, the British parliament was not ready to abolish colonialization because the country was benefiting from the raw materials harvested from the colonies. The resources were used to drive the industrialization agenda of the country. Therefore, the fact that the British failed to address the issue of colonization in the manner they dealt with slavery shows that they were not sincere in according all races equal rights and opportunities. Even the slavery abolition act was applied selectively with some places being excluded by the law.
Works Cited
"Slavery Abolition Act 1833; Section LXIV". 28 August 1833.
Gates, Henry Louis Jr., ed., The Classic Slave Narratives: The Life of Olaudah Equiano, The History of Mary Prince, Narratives of the Life of Frederick Douglas, and Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl. New York: Signet Classic, (2002). If this is a later edition, that will work.
Mandela, Nelson. Long Walk to Freedom: The Autobiography of Nelson Mandela. New York: Little, Brown and Company.
Gourevitch, Philip. We Wish to Inform You that Tomorrow We Will Be Killed With Our Families: Stories From Rwanda. New York: Picador. 1998.
