Unity by any means: Tobago’s political destiny

DR RITA PEMBERTON

One aspect of the history of TT which constantly attracts attention and has been subject to various interpretations is the creation of the unified colony of Trinidad and Tobago.

To some, the desperate economic situation caused Trinidad to save Tobago from penury, making it a ward of Trinidad. This posited the inaccurate notion of Trinidad benevolence which made Tobago a dependency of Trinidad.

For others it was simply a matter of administrative convenience based on geographical proximity and, more recently, the Belmanna War, which erupted in Roxborough in 1876.

While they may contain grains of truth, single-factor explanations normally cannot provide a full understanding of the web of causal factors.

Since 1833, Tobago had been part of the Windward Islands group with St Vincent, Grenada and St Lucia, with Barbados as the seat of government.

The union of Trinidad and Tobago must be seen against the matrix of political relationships from which it emerged, between the imperial and colonial administrations in the region, and that in Tobago, in which the economic state of the island was a critical factor; relations between the local colonial authorities and the imperial government; and between the colonial administration and the African population.

Tobago named a ward of Trinidad and Tobago

Unification, a two-stage process, ended with Tobago being named a ward in the united colony of Trinidad and Tobago, which was divided into eight administrative districts (wards), one of which was Tobago. It is therefore inaccurate to say Tobago was made a ward of Trinidad, which gives credence to the perception of the island’s mendicant dependency at the end of the 19th century.

British imperial policy was guided by the profit motive. By the beginning of the 19th century it was clear Tobago’s prosperity was short-lived. Planters struggled unsuccessfully to turn their fortunes around right to the end of the century. Imperial interest in the colony waned and policy was directed towards avoiding financial responsibility for it.

It is also true that the imperial government made the decision without consulting the parties involved, and there were opponents to union on both sides of the maritime fence. The relationship got off to a rocky start because there was no system to bring together the two entities, which, despite their proximity, had no history of relations beyond the trading relations of the First Peoples.

It was the tradition of the British imperial government to grant colonial plantation owners the rights of Englishmen to govern themselves. Hence they were allowed to have assemblies and island councils in which the large planters determined the administrative direction of the colony, under a governor representing the interests of the British crown.

The assembly is established

The first 28 land purchasers in Tobago requested the establishment of a council in 1767, shortly after the island was declared British and plans for settlement were made. This was granted by the governor in 1768 and in 1769 the assembly was established.

This occurred at a time when the British government found itself at loggerheads with the colonial assemblies in the region, whose members asserted their rights as Englishmen and denied they were empowered by the king.

When differences occurred, the assemblies would use their control of the purse to embarrass the imperial government. They refused to vote supplies, so that the top officials could not be paid and the business of government was stalled. These conflicts intensified during the 19th century when tensions rose over the termination of the trade in captive and enslaved Africans, Amelioration in 1823 and the movement to Emancipation.

Initially, the Tobago Assembly co-operated with the imperial government, because the planter community preferred to be under British rather than French rule. After 1815, when it was established that the island would remain in British hands, the relationship deteriorated.

The Tobago Assembly reduced the salaries of two governors, Sir Frederick Robinson and Major General Blackwell, when they failed to get imperial government support during the economic stresses of the 1820s. The Tobago Assembly became more obstructionist because the British government failed to address matters such as the adverse trading arrangements, with which planters were unhappy.

The embarrassing encounters made the British administration devise a strategy to disempower the assemblies without causing a furore. Its intent to avoid further confrontation with colonial assemblies was demonstrated in its new territories, which were administered as crown colonies, under direct rule.

African population’s fight for justice

The problems of Tobago’s sugar industry, evident by the beginning of the 19th century, became progressively worse as the century wore on. There was constant changing of ownership as the owners tried to cut their losses by selling out and new, more adventurous individuals tried their hands at sugar cultivation.

After Emancipation, the Treasury was impoverished and economic recovery was well-nigh impossible. Without generating profits, Tobago was not attractive to the imperial government.

The planting community became desperate to force the free Africans to continue to work for menial wages. Tensions raged over wages, the changing terms of metayage and the unfair impositions of planters and the legal system, restricted franchise and access to land. There were riots in 1852, an indication of the intention of the African population to fight for justice.

The 1865 Morant Bay Rebellion in Jamaica sent a strong signal of black intolerance of the continued exploitation. The rebellion terrified the colonial and imperial authorities, who used it as an example of the losses and destruction that would occur in the colonies if their powers were not surrendered to the British Crown. The fear-possessed, usually vociferous Jamaican Assembly meekly accepted crown colony government without a fight. This became the benchmark for the institution of crown colony government in the region.

After eruptions in Mason Hall in 1867 and the Belmanna War in Roxborough in 1876, Tobago planters accepted crown rule. The 1876 Constitution Act introduced crown colony government without ruling-class opposition.

The revolts on the island were costly additions to a declining economy and in particular, the Belmanna War led to a deficit of £3,386, which led the island to borrow to meet administrative costs and into a state of indebtedness.

This led to imperial concern about the island’s finances. Several options were suggested. In 1880 Governor Gore suggested union with Trinidad; in 1882, a recommendation for Tobago to be included in a union with Grenada, St Vincent and St Lucia was not accepted by the island governments and the Tobago Defence Association. In 1883, Tobago was included in a suggested Windward Islands group. An 1885 suggestion proposing uniting Tobago, St Vincent, St Lucia and Grenada was opposed by Tobago planters. In 1886, Governor Robinson reported Trinidad was in favour of the union, which was implemented in 1889 and 1899.

The union of Trinidad and Tobago resulted from a profit-based imperial policy with no room for colonies which did not generate profits. Because of its declining economy, the British administration was not prepared either to bear the costs of the island’s administration or to entertain requests for loans or assistance.

In that state Tobago and its problems were shunted from imperial responsibility. This was done by removing the powers of the assembly without any hostility, as in Jamaica, by stressing the negative outcomes further rebellions would cause, to introduce direct crown rule. Then, to complete the process, hitch the island to another by highlighting the mutual benefits that would accrue. Union was the answer. Belmanna facilitated the process.