95
- 20
21
The Italian expert made the following statement:
"In order to make the matter quite clear, it is first of all necessary to refer to the first clause of Article 1 of the Convention reading as follows:
Slavery is the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised.'
If this article is strictly adhered to, the conclusion is that it is sufficient for rights of ownership certain rights, and not only one-to be exercised over a human being for him to be regarded as a slave. This interpretation does not correspond to the facts and is not sufficient to decide the question who are to be regarded as slaves. It is, however, the duty of the Committee of Experts on Slavery to give a clear definition, so as to prevent the spread and confirmation in the world of a conception of slavery which exceeds the facts and, conse- quently, of an idea of this problem which is exaggerated at the present stage of historical development. There is no doubt that, in addition to slavery proper, which admits the traditional conception of a master's ownership of a human being, serfdom also exists under which this conception is excluded altogether, since the serf, if he remains with his master, does so of his own free will. However, as in the case of all human manifestations, there are also intermediate cases which are very often due to a lack of understanding of the ties which bind the master to the person under his authority and vice versa. It is difficult, if not impossible, to include such cases in the category of slaves or serfs. They may, on the other hand, be regarded as an intermediate and transitional category, the existence of which is not of vital importance from the point of view of the solution of the problem, as that category is not a large one and is destined to disappear shortly as the result of the civilising influence of the colonising Powers, which is spreading more and more rapidly.
"For these reasons, the Italian expert agrees with the views expressed by his French colleague. Nevertheless, he wishes to make it quite clear that his views, which reduce the proportions of the problem of slavery, should not be interpreted as lack of interest in the problem. It is not the magnitude but the nature of the problem that calls for the most effective action on the part of all those who are anxious to realise the high ideal of civilisation, which is to eradicate this scourge."
The British member wished to emphasise the difference between the status of slave and of serf as defined by M. Delafosse. In the latter's view, as the Committee had already seen, a serf could not be the chattel of an individual. In the British member's opinion, it was hardly possible to generalise about the position of the serf, which varied considerably in different parts of Africa; however, there was a very great difference between hereditary serfs and slaves who were owned by an individual master. The latter had either been captured and sold as slaves or were the children of captured slaves. If they were in the house of a Moslem master, they were usually well treated and were rarely sold. Although the master was authorised to sell them in accordance with the law of the Koran, he would be censured by public opinion if he sold a slave who had been born in the house unless the slave had committed a very grave crime or was incorrigible. These domestic slaves were also employed in agricultural and other work; they constituted the majority of the servile class in East Africa and Nigeria. They were obtained by slave-raiding, and their numbers were maintained by slave-raiding.
The fact that a serf can leave his domicile if he chooses arises from the law of the European Power in control. Prior to that law (according to M. Delafosse), he could not leave the soil on which he was born and from which he was" intransferable and inalienable ".
The foregoing survey shows that, in this field, as in many others relating to certain legal institutions of primitive peoples, difficulties are met with owing to the lack of precision of our data.
61. The French, Italian and Portuguese experts having thus stated their views, the other four members of the Committee considered that, in accordance with the definition laid down in the 1926 Convention, slavery is not only the status or condition of a person over whom all the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised, but that slavery exists when any of such powers are exercised over an individual. In the case of the Powers parties to this Convention, the definition is compulsory so long as the Convention is not modified on this point. It might perhaps be advisable to re-examine this definition.
-
Thus, the only problem remaining to be solved is the question whether, in the various aspects revealed by the foregoing survey, the master exercises any of the powers of ownership. That is a delicate point, but it seems to these four members of the Committee that this is the case both as regards serfdom or slavery called "predial" as well as serfdom or slavery called "domestic
The Committee also unanimously found that the laws of all the colonial Powers do not recognise serfdom any more than they recognise slavery.
JJ
In the territories under the control of these Powers, neither status can exist any longer, except in fact, since both serfs and slaves are free, if they so desire, to shake off the bond of servitude.
The distinction between these two conditions would appear to be useful only from two points of view: First, in order to determine the approximate number of slaves properly so-called, and that of the other categories of persons in servitude (the Committee is not in a position to give an opinion on this matter); secondly, whether the servitude of both categories, even in practice, should be abolished with the same speed. In the Committee's opinion, the reply to the second
question should be in the negative. The policy adopted by Governments, as set forth in paragraph 3 of the present report, and which consists, not in the compulsory manumission of the serfs, but in refusing to take the master's side when he claims an alleged right over the person of a serf, and in leaving it to time to bring about the gradual disappearance of the former state of affairs, while encouraging this evolution as much as possible, is justified chiefly in the case of serfs over whom only certain powers of the right of ownership are exercised.
Under the influence of the same factors as those mentioned in paragraph 4 of the present report, this evolution is taking place rapidly. In most colonies, even the name given to this insti- tution by custom is disappearing. It is gradually giving place to a contract of service between the former master and the former serf.
The present report mentions in paragraph 5 the measures taken by Nepal, Burma and the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan to obtain the immediate abolition of slavery even in practice; it is quite possible that the persons effectively liberated by the authorities of those countries were simply serfs in the foregoing sense of the term-or at all events the great majority of them.
B. Suggestions.
62. As in the case of the question of the abolition of the status of slavery, suggestions for the abolition of serfdom-even if this exists as a separate institution from slavery in the restricted meaning attributed to it by the French, Italian and Portuguese experts-cannot be usefully submitted except as regards Abyssinia and certain of the Moslem States.
In this connection, the Abyssinian Government will be confronted with the same difficulties as have been encountered in connection with the abolition of slavery. It could not accordingly at present adopt measures for the immediate abolition of serfdom without exposing the country to the same dangers as attach to the sudden abolition of slavery properly so-called. As in the case of slavery, only progressive measures can be employed to abolish serfdom. The majority of the suggestions submitted in the present report, in the chapter dealing with the abolition of the status of slavery in Abyssinia, apply also to the abolition of domestic or predial serfdom.
63. As regards the Moslem States, the suggestions put forward concerning them in the chapter on the abolition of slavery apply also to the abolition of domestic or predial serfdom.
CHAPTER VII.
TRANSITION FROM SERVILE LABOUR TO FREE-WAGE LABOUR AND INDEPENDENT
PRODUCTION.
A. Survey of the Situation.
64. As stated in paragraph 4 of this report, natives who continue to live their traditional life rarely now have recourse to slavery or serfdom in order to obtain the labour they require. These systems are being gradually superseded by labour contracts, at all events in the territories subject to the authority of the colonial Powers. This evolution is in some cases even taking place rapidly.
65. In certain regions of Africa, it is, on the other hand, more particularly former slaves and serfs who take service in European undertakings or become soldiers, and this leads to their emancipation as pointed out in paragraph 4 of this report, but when they come to have henceforth an independent life, they continue to seek a livelihood in paid occupations, or, after having worked for a time as paid employees, they set up on their own account as artisans, shopkeepers or farmers in or near the centres in which, when they left their own villages, they had been engaged to work.
66. One point to be noted is that in many of these natives the slave mentality soon gives place to an exaggerated sense of freedom. This is due to the fact that, away from the villages in which old traditions linger, they escape the customary discipline which prevails there, but without finding in their new environment the right kind of" brake "which could immediately be applied to correct this tendency. This is a new and important problem for the colonial Powers in whose territories it appears. It lies outside the scope of this report to describe how they are endeavouring to settle it.
B. Suggestions.
67. The Committee has no suggestions to put forward regarding the situation described above. It merely expresses the hope that nothing will be done to check the effective liberation of former slaves or serfs from their old bonds, while at the same time pointing out that, if this development were to take place too rapidly, and particularly if it were the result of the removal of a large number of natives from their traditional environment, it would have very unfortunate effects on economic and social conditions in the native society in which it took place. It might even lead to political disturbances.
96
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.