NEVER MIND that Mauritius is one of the very few countries in the world with the highest number of national public holidays based on religious criteria, beating even India with its population of almost one billion, its myriads of religions and ethnic groups, its 6,400 castes and sub-castes and 52 major tribes. Yet, we can boast of being perhaps the only country in the world to commemorate the abolition of slavery by proclaiming a national public holiday on 1 February.

The celebration of the abolition of slavery is by itself a tribute to those millions of African people, who were stolen, rounded up like animals and crammed in slave ships to unknown destinations to dig in mines, clear land, plant and harvest sugar in order to build the prosperity of their masters. Ever since the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Nicholas V, issued a papal bull on 8 January 1455 authorising the Portuguese ?to subject to servitude, all infidel peoples?, that is, to treat all those who were not adherents of Christianity as slaves, slave traffic from Africa was undertaken on a large scale by the Portuguese and the Spanish, two European powers at that time. The British, French and Dutch followed in their footsteps almost two centuries later. But the European traders alone could not be blamed for this mass uprooting and putting people in servitude. They received the support of African tribal chieftains and Arab traders against rewards mostly paid in goods, cloth, liquor, guns and swords. Many families would not hesitate to sell their own children to slave traders. The concept of servitude gradually became part and parcel of African life that it was surprisingly to linger on in several pockets of Africa until quite recently. For example, in Mauritania, it was abolished only in 1980.

However, the ruling of Lord Mansfield in Britain in 1772 to the effect that a run-away slave there could not be forced back by his master to the West Indies was regarded as crucial because it was to trigger a new line of thinking in Britain. This decision, a turning point in the history of slavery, caused a stir mostly in the British colonies as it was interpreted as confirming that there could be no slavery in Britain in future. This idea was vehemently drummed up by the Abolitionists grouped under the umbrella of the Anti-Slavery Society which exerted terrible pressure on the British government.

In America which had been massively importing Africans since 1619 for its development, the probability of slavery being done away with created a wave of fears so much so that the Americans to avoid being ruined wanted to take their destiny in their own hands rather than leave it to the British. It is argued that one of the reasons that led America to claim independence from Britain was Britain?s intention to stop the slave trade. Indeed, what was feared happened. In 1807 Britain announced it had banned the slave trade.

But the traffic in slavery continued unabated despite the Abolition Act. For example, in Mauritius, Governor Robert Farquhar admitted in a report to the Colonial Office that slave trade was carried out on such a huge scale that it was impossible to end it. The free population of Mauritius was composed mostly of Whites and their brilliance, if not their power, was visible everywhere !

The Jeremie saga explains the power exercised by slave owners in Mauritius and their determination to make slavery flourish. Indeed, when the time came for a Procureur and Advocate General in Mauritius to be appointed in 1832, the Colonial Office appointed a staunch abolitionist and member of the Anti-Slavery society, John Jeremie. Like the Americans, the white planters in Mauritius were all opposed to the abolition of slavery with the only difference that they did not claim independence from Britain although their young and dynamic leader, Adrien d?Epinay, had negotiated with the British government and obtained the first Constitution for Mauritius in 1832, thus laying the foundation for the island?s constitutional reforms. D?Epinay also founded the newspaper, Le Cernéen, in 1832 which went on to live for 150 years.

The self-proclaimed colonel

News of the arrival of Jeremie spread like wild fire and threw up consternation. The slave owners decided to deal with him in the same manner as they had done with Baco and Burnell in 1796 when they chased the representatives of the French Directoire in the streets of Port Louis and fired gun shots to scare them off from the island.

In the morning of 3 June 1832 when Jeremie came ashore, a large crowd of slave owners led by Henri Adam thronged the Chien de Plomb shouting slogans hostile to Jeremie. Adam mounted a voluntary corps of 3,000 armed men to suppress any revolt by the slave population, for the events at Saint -Domingo where slaves had revolted and killed many slave owners were still reverberating in the minds of everybody. Styling himself as Colonel, Adam wrote a petition to the Governor who was compelled to leave the refreshing confine of Le Réduit for the heat and dust that clouded Port Louis.

Sir Charles Colville, after seeing the furious crowd, went to Government House amidst applause and shouts of ?Vive Sir Charles Colville? prompted by Adrien d?Epinay. The Governor was given a petition in which the slave owners pleaded that Jeremie be sent back from the island at once as his presence could be a cause of unrest and bloodshed could take place.

Meanwhile, Jeremie under heavy escort was able to reach Government House. As confusion reigned supreme, an American ship berthed in the harbour was selling guns to whoever wanted to procure one. One eye witness wrote: ?Every third person in Port Louis was armed.? It was decided that, so long as Jeremie would remain in the island, a state of inertia would prevail, a general lock-out with activities in all walks of life paralysed. When Jeremie turned up at the court for the swearing-in ceremony, hiding behind a scavenging and night soil cart to escape the attention of the crowd, Judge Virieux himself was absent, thus defying the instructions of the Governor.

In the Council of Government, a motion, tabled by Adrien d?Epinay and seconded by Colonel Draper, the founder of the Mauritius Turf Club, demanding the immediate expulsion of Jeremie was voted. The lever of control had slipped from the Governor?s hand. His successor, Sir William Nicolay, was to react by suspending d?Epinay and Draper from the Council, issuing an order of deportation against ?Colonel? Adam and disbanding the volunteer corps.

The demand of the white population was so vociferous that Sir Charles Colville could not but cave in, for , on 29 July 1832, Jeremie boarded the ship bound for England. While Adrien d?Epinay organized a big party to celebrate his triumph over Jeremie at his residence in Edith Cavell Street, Port Louis, the slave population could not but lament the departure of their saviour rendered in the pathetic song, ?Missié Zéremie ou allé, vine vitement.?

This song reflects an expression of the call for freedom. It is this strident cry of freedom from human bondage and how much freedom was dear to the slave population that should come as a stark reminder today. The descendants of slaves are said to be better off than they would have been in Africa. The claim for reparation and compensation is hollow compared to the freedom and oppotunity they enjoy. Breathing the air of freedom after a spell of tyrannical rule made the people of Uganda realise how significant it is. That?s why they celebrate ?Idi Amin Dada Downfall Day? as a national public holiday!

Anand MOHEEPUTH