n for the government and
the rights of the weaker groups; but the editor, Mr. Berquin, was
deported in 1833 because of utterances which were considered inimical
to the policies of the colonial government. Since 1833, there had been
no paper to champion the rights of the Negroes.

After the publication of the answers to the contributor of _Le
Mauricien_, certain influential members of the Negro population, among
whom was Remy Ollier, called to see Sir Lionel Smith, G.C.B., Baronet
and Governor of the island of Mauritius. It is said that they were
warmly received, and that he was astonished to learn that the Negroes,
a majority of whom were "the equals of the whites by their stature, by
their hearts and their intelligence," had no paper "to make known
their wishes and their complaints." He advised his hearers to start a
paper, and he promised to support their reasonable demands. But, dying
in 1842, Sir Lionel Smith was unable to give any assistance to the new
publication.

Through the assistance of Mr. Edward Baker, the printer, the paper _Le
Sentinelle de Maurice_ was started. The prospectus, written in French
and in English appeared March 21, 1843, and on Saturday, April 8, the
first number of the paper came from the press. It was a weekly
publication with Ollier and Baker as the editors. The former wrote
articles in French and the latter in English, the articles of each
being admirably written. Each one in his own sphere spoke with great
vehemence and elevation of mind for the cause of "liberty and
justice." The paper was read with avidity by the middle and lower
classes, and the Negroes soon regarded Ollier as their champion.

The first and most important fight which Ollier felt called upon to
enter was the nomination by the Governor of members to the Legislative
Council in June, 1843. Ollier noticed that no Negro member was
nominated. The vacant seat was given to a white representative, Mr.
Forster. Ollier observed "that although a white man whose heart is
right and whose intentions are pure can represent the population of
color," yet he considered the appointment "as an act that was unjust,
impolitic, undemocratic and unconstitutional." He added in explanation
that the act was unjust "because all the children of the
mother-country, the white colonists especially, were already
represented in the Council, except the men of color, whose number is
twice that of other populations of the country; their destiny more
il