Plumer, declared that if any arti- thing the counsel had stated was fices had been pracised for raising a popular clamour against the slavetrade, they were wholly unknown to them. Lord Howick knew, he said, that there had been a most laudable and persevering attention on the part of the honourable gentleman: (Mr. W.) with whom the measure originated. This attention, however, had never been used to mislead any one, but merely to make the matter generally understood. After a short conversation between Mr. Plumer, lord Howick, Mr. Hibbert, lord H. Petty, Mr. H. Addington, Mr. I. H. Browne, lord Temple, Mr. Tierney, and Mr. Babington, a motion for the second reading of the bill on Friday se'nnight was put and carried. On that day, February 20, lord Howick having moved the order of the day, counsel were heard against the bill, in the following order; Mr. Dallas for the merchants and planters of Jamaica; Mr. Alexander for the merchants of London, trading to Africa; Mr. Clarke for the mayor, corporation, and merchants, of Liverpool; and Mr. Scarlett for the merchants and planters of Trinidad. The learned counsel for Jamaica, London, and Liverpool, at the close of their respective speeches, requested that evidence might be called in, and general Gascoyne made successive motions to that effect, which were negatived with out a division. The propriety of hearing evidence was urged by Mr. Fuller, Mr. Hibbert, sir C. Pole, and Mr. Howarth. On the motion for calling in evidence being made for the first time, that is, after the conclusion of Mr. Dallas's pleadings, lord Howick said, that not any new to the house, except one point, the relative situation of St. Domingo and Jamaica, and this was a matter of mere opinion. If, after so many years of inquiry, the house should still go on to investigate this subject, they would never come to a decision. Mr. Wilberforce, too, was convinced, that the house would not see any reason for further evidence, when they considered that for the last three years, both down stairs, and in committees, every spe cies of evidence had been brought and considered, that could possibly elucidate the question. Mr. Scarlett was then heard for the Island of Trinidad. He also concluded with a request that evidence should be adduced. After having retired, he was again called in on the motion of lord Howick, to state the points on which he wished that evidence should be ex amined. They were, in substance, the loss that would be sustained by certain persons who had been induced by the British government to become settlers. After Mr. S. had again withdrawn, Mr. Wilberforce remarked, that the present was not the proper time for hearing such evidence. If the question of compensation should be brought before the house at a subsequent period, that would be the opportunity for receiving it. A motion by Mr. Howarth that the counsel should be called in, and directed to proceed with his evidence, was opposed by lord Howick. The learned counsel, he observed, had stated two points, which he wished to establish by evidence. The first was, that no more ground could be cleared in the Island of Trinidad without a fresh importation of I 2 slaves; slaves; the second, that great loss would be sustained, from the abolition of the slave-trade by the settlers. The first was a self-evident proposition, and would lead merely to a question of policy. The second would be a question of future consideration. Those who demanded compensation, might hereafter submit their case to the house, who were never backward in listening to the claims of justice. General Gascoyne could not forbear expressing his satisfaction that the principle of indemnity seemed to be acknow. ledged by the noble lord. Lord H. Lord H. said that he had only stated a gene ral principle. Sir P. Francis was not willing to allow the possibility of a case in which the public ought to make compensation to an individual for any losses that might arise from the abolition of such iniquitous practices. Mr. Roscoe declared, that, in his opinion, the house, after performing the great duty of abolishing the slave-trade, was bound to consider the situations of those who should suffer from the annihilation of a system, which, though it disgraced the land, had been so long sanctioned by the legislature. Mr. R. Thornton thought that few cases would be found entitled to compensation. Those engaged in commer. cial concerns, were necessarily exposed to risks, and sufficient warn. ing had long been given to those who were engaged in the abominable traffic. Mr. S. Stanhope conceived that it wolud be convenient if the principle on which compensation would be allowed, were stated to the house before the passing of the present bill. The motion was then negatived without a division. After which, lord Howick moved the commitment of the bill, and the debate on that motion was adjourned till Monday, February 23-When, pursuant to this adjournment, Mr. Manning sta. ted that in the event of the bill for the abolition of the slave-trade passing into a law, he should move for the appointment of a committee to consider of the propriety of granting compensation to certain classes of persons whose interests would be affected by it: he wished to ask his majesty's ministers, whether they were authorized to accede to such a proceeding? The compensation he had in view, was much more limited than might be supposed. The first class he thought entitled to this, were those who had purchased land under commissions, granted by his majesty for the sale of them. A second class, were those who had purchased lands on the faith of parliament, previous to the first agitation of this question. A third class, consisted of those who had suffered in their properties, by insurrections of the negroes, or by wars or inva. sions on the part of the enemy. He did not propose that any compensa. tion should be granted, except in cases where the claims should be approved of by commissioners appointed for the purpose. There were other classes of persons, whose cases, though deserving attention, he did not then think it necessary to allude to.- Lord H. admitted the candid manner in which the honourable gentleman had stated his views of the limited amount of compensations. But it was contrary to the practice of parliament, to declare, before-hand, what might be the amount of compensation, to be granted for possible losses, by proposed political regulations. This was all he could say on the subject, as he was not authorized to consent to to the proposition of the honoura-portation of fresh negroes, which ble gentleman. would ultimately lead to a total abo. lition. Mr. Hiley Addington could not assent to the bill but upon one principle, namely that of the modification proposed by Mr. Bathurst, for postponing to a more distant ¡eriod, the final abolition, and for a gradual progress in the measure. Mr. Wilberforce replied to the principal arguments that had been urged against the bill, and referred to Mr. Park's book to shew the evils that the slave-trade created in Africa. another recent publication that had drawn considerable attention, namely Mr. Malthus's Essay on Population. He adverted also to It had been con The order for the adjournment of the debate on the question for going into a committee on the Slave-trade Abolition bill being read, lord Howick rose and said, that though the question had been so often agitated, that every honourable member must be acquainted with its details, yet he could not reconcile it to himself to bring forward a measure of such vast importance in that new parlia ment, without stating those facts and that evidence on which alone this question ought to rest. His lordship then entered into a copious recapitulation of those facts, and contended, from a review of the whole of these, and of the various topics tended that in that essay Mr. insisted on in the discussions of the Malthus had favoured the slavequestion, that the abolition of the trade. But Mr. Malthus had called slave-trade was founded not only in upon him that day, and expressed justice, but on the true principles his surprise to have learned, that in of sound and liberal policy.-Lord some of the publications of the day, Howick was followed on the same he was regarded as a favourer of the side of the question by Mr. Roscoe, slave-trade.* He declared that his Mr. Lushington, Mr. Fawkes, lord meaning had been misunderstood, Mahon, lord Milton, the solicitor- and that he had just prepared a general, sir John Doyle, Mr. Man- short appendix to his work in order ning and lord Percy. On the other to explain his ideas on the subject. side, there appeared general Gas. Mr. Wilberforce concluded with coyne, and Mr. Hibbert. Mr. an elegant eulogium on the display Bathurst, though he approved of a of both moral sentiments and talents gradual, was not prepared to go to which the house had that night witthe length of an immediate abolition, nessed, on the side of humanity and He recommended a tax on the im- justice, particularly on the part of -- * If Mr. Malthus be not a favourer of the slave-trade, his book at least, beyond all doubt, tends to favour it. In that book at least, though not perhaps in his heart, he is the best advocate for the slave-trade that has yet appeared. He considers the rapid progress of population as a most formidable evil. There is nothing he dreads so much as its excess. Neither disease, nor death, nor any natural cause, he thinks, Is a sufficient barrier against the progress of this evil. It is not, he says, to be counteracted but by other evils: war, murder, famine, pestilence, and vice, and misery, in a thousand forms.--The voice of Nature as well as of Divine Revelation says, "Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth," But according to Mr. Malthus, obedience to this law of natural instinct, and political institution,would be inevitable destruction. the younger members; whose lofty and liberal sentiments, recommendad and enforced by the elevation of their rank, and purity of their form, must tend to produce the happiest effects on all classes of the community. Such an indication of mind and feeling, would shew to the people, that their legis ators, and espe. cially the higher orders of their youths, were forward to assert the rights of the weak, against the strong; to vindicate the cause of the oppressed; and, that where a practice was found to prevail incon. sistent with humanity and justice, no consideration of profit could re. concile them to its continuation. Mr. Wilberforce himself, every one acknowledged and felt, was, above all others, entitled to the highest degree of praise for his unwearied exertions, and the ability and pru. dence he had displayed in bringing the great measure before the house, to a successful issue; for it was now evident that it would not meet with any effectual opposition. He was complimented on the occasion by different speakers, particularly by the solicitor-general. When he looked at the man now at the head of the French monarchy, surrounded as he was with all the pomp of pow. er, and all the pride of victory, dis. tributing kingdoms to his family, and principalities to his followers, seeming, when he sat upon his throne, to have reached the pinnacle of earthly happiness; and when he followed that man into his closet, or to his bed, and considered the pangs with which his solitude must be tortured, and his repose hanished by the recollection of the blood he had spilled; and when he compared with those pangs of remorse, the feelings that must accompany his honourable friend (Mr. W.) to his home, after the vote of the night should have confirmed the object of his humane and unceasing la hours; when he should retire into the bosom of his happy and delighted family; when he should lay himself down on his bed, reflecting on the innumerable voices that would be raised in every quarter of the world to bless him: how much more pure and perfect felicity must he enjoy in the consciousness of having preserved so many nations of his fellow creatures, than the man with whom he had compared him, on the throne to which he had waded through op. pression and slaughter? The question being loudly called for, the house divided.-Ayes 283, noes 16. The house then resolved itself into a committee pro formá, and at half-past four adjourned, to Friday 27th February: when sir Charles Pole declared himself to be so impressed with the impolicy of the abolition, that he was induced, in every stage, to thwart a bill, ruinous to the colonies and the commerce of the country. He strenuously recommended a prolonga tion of the time when the bill should begin to operate, and a total change of the preamble of the bill. Mr. Hughan concluded a long speech, his first in parliament, by entering his solemn protest against the adoption of a measure fraught with ruin to the colonies, and to the empire. Mr. Anthony Browne, having taken a view of the internal situation of Africa, radically barba rous, and the dangers to be appre. hended from the abolition of the slave-trade, and that too, on the ground of its being both unjust and inhuman, concluded with putting the question to the honourable members members of the house, if it could be the policy of the British legislature to encounter all those fearful hazards from a doubtful chance of benefit to the native African, who was in a situation not to be benefited by its exertions, a situation of solitary and hereditary slavery? Mr. Fuller contended, that the abolition of the slave-trade would make the condition of the slaves in the WestIndies worse; though he admitted that it was necessary, in the.r present condition, to keep them to their work by moderate discip ine. The abolition of the slave.trade was also opposed by Mr. Windham, who, with all the reverence he felt for the principles of justice and hu manity, had not courage to come to the decision which the advocates of that measure proposed, contem. plating as he did, the effects which it threatened; and, at no very distant period too, no less than the ruin of their country. As those gentlemen who supported the bill were anxious to wash their hands of the guilt The bill, on the other hand, was defended by Mr. Courtenay, sir Ralph Milbanke, Mr. Montague, Mr. Jacob, Mr. Herbert of Kerry, Mr. Jacob, Mr. Whitbread, and lord Howick. Mr. Bathurst recommended, as he had done before, a gradual decrease. Mr. Courtenay at the conclusion of his speech, made an elegant, as well as merited, eu. logium on Mr. Wilberforce, the original mover of the question. Mr. Whitbread, after recapitula. ting the facts and arguments, on the strength of which he had uniformly given his support to the bill, related a very affecting anecdote, which had Sometimes considered as synonymous with reason, sometimes with truth or justice, and sometimes with a moral sense, or conscience; but on whatever it be founded, something of universal obligation, which all are obliged to consult, and to whose decisions all men ought, and generally profess themselves ready to submit. The stings of conscience amounting sometimes to remorse, are in some cases as quick and painful as thrusts of a bayonet. But it will be allowed that in general, conscience is but gentle in her admonitions, and that, in every case, she waves the authority of a civil magistrate, and leaves the point entirely to our own decision. Men may clude the authority of conscience for a time, by abstract speculations concerning its nature. Her voice may be drowned in the noise of controversy. For conscience never disputes, she barely signifies her will; too delicate to insist, much less to debate and contend. Yet still moral obligation admits of no compromise. Immorality is always the same, though not always punished. But Mr. Windham seems to think that the authority of moral obligation might, in this instance be easily evaded. Mr. W. is a candid and most inges nious man. He has a liberal way of thinking, and a very distinguishing head. It would have been very gratifying to curiosity, if he had explained, or if he did, if the reporter of the debate had stated his explanation, how morality has a commanding authority in one case and not in another.-Perhaps what he meant was, that the humanity of the ineasure in question was dubious: and here indeed there were not wanting many arguments pro and con.-It cannot well be supposed that Mr, W. meant to affirm that morality was not very authoritative or overbearing when not armed by positive law, I 4 |