St. Lucia, as part of the British Empire, was subject to British justice. An early article on the treatment of the population of the Caribbean island of St. Lucia by their English governor shows how this power was dispensed. The one consolation for the St. Lucians was that it didn’t last long; Bunbury was recalled and by 1839 he was causing havoc in New South Wales.
‘But the most extraordinary proceedings are those at St. Lucia. The inhabitants of this small island are French, in habits, feeling, and language. Col. Thomas Bunbury has for some time been their provisional Governor ; his fitness for the post may be estimated by one of his recent acts. The St. Lucia Gazette of Feb. 23d contains a proclamation, ordering the language used in the courts of justice in the island to be changed from French to English. This monstrous enactment, under which justice is to be administered to a people in an unknown tongue, is couched in the most insulting and contemptuous terms. Colonel Bunbury says, the British Government, in the hope that the advocates would conform themselves to the wishes of the Government, and learn the language of the mother country, had “conceded the use of the French language in their written and verbal pleadings;” but now, having ascertained that those advocates refuse to appear in court, with a view to dictate to the Government the appointment of a Judge of their own choice, he has resolved, in order to “reduce a spirit in these said advocates, so utterly repugnant to that exercised by him,” to order and appoint that, from the 1st of March, “the English language shall be the sole language to be used in the future written pleadings of the said court, and by the advocates of the said court ; and that the French language is alone to be used by the Chief Justice in his addresses and charges to French assessors, empannelled in said court, and by the sworn interpreter of said court : and as a fit and just punishment for the offences so set forth, and by the said advocates so committed,” he prohibits them from practising “in said court as aforesaid.” It is difficult to imagine anything more arbitrary than this. According to Governor Bunbury’s own showing, the only sin of the advocates was refusal to enter the Governor’s Court, which certainly they might do or not as they pleased ; and for this offence, the entire people are punished by a decree amounting substantially to a denial of justice.
This is not all : it appears that Governor Bunbury, towards the end of last year, thought fit to suspend Chief Justice Reddie, and one of the Puisne Judges, Lafitte, for declining to act with another Puisne Judge provisionally appointed by the Governor to try only certain causes ; which arrangement, the old Judges maintained, amounted to a denial of justice to the parties whose causes were put out of court. The result was, the appointment of three new Judges, Englishmen ; and we conjecture that it is before this court that the advocates refuse to plead. Be that as it may, it is certain that among suitors as well as advocates, great anger and excitement prevails ; and there is, at any rate, prima facie evidence of gross misconduct on the part of the Governor.’
Stamford Mercury, 20th April, 1838.